On this point, we’ll have to agree to disagree.
Optimistic Skeptic

I never know what people when they say that they’re “free” to do something. It’s very ambiguous. Legally? Okay, sure. But does that make it kind and ethical?

You’re not just attacking her ideas. You are attacking her.

Attacking her ideas would be to argue that, say, it’s okay for a company to pay minimum wage. Or that minimum wage is livable.

(Also, if a whole mob of people descend on someone for an idea, even if they truly stayed on target, it’s certainly feel pretty bad to them.)

You’re saying though that SHE isn’t quite poor enough because she spends too frivolously. That’s attacking her, not just some abstract idea. It’s sure going to feel personal to her.

I also don’t understand this defense of “If you’re afraid of what others have to say about you, don’t put yourself out there.” But, first, it’s already out. She can’t just take it back. She can’t unchoose this. Second, it’s just a bad argument. If I don’t want to get robbed, I shouldn’t walk down the street with my wallet in my hand. Good advice — absolutely. But, you’re still a thief if you steal it. You still shouldn’t steal it.

Again, I’m advocating for empathy here. Even if you don’t empathize over her financial situation, you can empathize over the fact that she has an entire internet mob descending on her. That’s got to suck.

Is tearing someone apart and ruining their life really justified? All for what? Because she [allegedly — you don’t know how she came across some of the things she did] had bad spending habits and complained about making minimum wage?

Do you also think that what happened to Justine Sacco was justified?


Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated Gayle Laakmann McDowell’s story.