• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Dawg, slow down for a minute.

    In your first comment, you say the extra armrests are there to keep “some homeless” (not even a homeless PERSON) off the bench for disabled individuals. You’re saying that benches should have these installed because seating disabled people is more important than letting “some homeless” use it for a night’s rest.

    When others point out that a bench with armrests at the ends and no dividers could be used by both groups, you say “bUt YoU hAvE tO SiT oN tHe hOmELeSs” as if 2 people can’t use a bench at the same time. It’s a bench, not a chair, that’s the whole point. What are you even arguing here, that if homeless people are allowed to use benches that they’ll all be occupied, and they all will refuse to move, and we’ll have to sit on the unhoused? Absolutely preposterous.

    And then, when all this is pointed out to you, you say the rest of us have “degenerative” genes and can’t hold 2 thoughts at the same time. Really? That’s straight up far right rhetoric, bringing up the inferior genes shit.

    Yes, unhoused people should absolutely have a place to go, but we don’t need to build our cities to be hostile towards them.

    TLDR: Go the fuck outside, get some help, go for a walk, call your mom, hell, even go talk to a homeless person, touch grass. I’m done with Lemmy for today, you should be too.

    • @Crampon
      link
      -28 months ago

      You are the one believing removing arm rests will solve the homless’ issue.

      You can actually have the arm rests there while still housing the homeless.

      Go re-elect your fascist president with your insane “leftist” views. You are fueling the whole machine with that cognitive dissonance.