Should underemployment be considered as a lifestyle choice?

Post Reply New Topic

Look at bullying, assault and murder though, which are more evenly spread over the genders. I would say these are just a socially-sanctioned, more individualistic form of war. Plus you seem to be overlooking the fact that women are allowed into armies these days - not all women want to stay at home raising babies and cooking. Also there aren't so many women fighting as they've only been allowed to join armies relatively recently. I think both genders have a strong capacity for aggression and violence if given the opportunity.

Stop what? That the attitude that the disabled shouldn't work so they give into it by not working?

I think if they want to work they would or try to get a job. If they are unable to work, why would they want to work? That makes no sense. I want to work full time and the other part of me doesn't because I know of what could happen and I am also afraid of what can happen so it's both and both for me. I get mixed feelings about lot of stuff.

...but still dominated by men.
Interpersonal acts of violence are nothing like the pre-meditated, terroristic destruction of entire regions for impersonal, large-scale goals such as resource acquisition that war typically entails. One would have to get incredibly poetic with the meaning of "war" for "individualistic form of war" to even be meaningful.


No, I didn't overlook it. That fact is clearly subsumed under my statement concerning who "causes, funds, enjoys, organizes, participates in, and benefits the most from war."


What?



I don't know if you are trying to (fallaciously) refute my point or broaden the discussion, but there is nothing supporting your perspective in either case. Even if you generalize to all types of aggression and violence, that proves my point even better, because, in that case, you don't have the qualifier that women were only recently allowed to participate (as with war). It is illogical to consider a class of behaviors that are and have been since time immemorial so overwhelmingly dominated by one group of people to be evidence that the behaviors are a general human trait. This was my point all along.

I am 28, and have had jobs since I was 16. That is 12 years and approximately 60 jobs. I cannot maintain employment. It always leads to meltdowns.

Do you have an axe to grind against men generally?

It's well known that women are trained by societal expectations and expected to act in a different manner to men. As they have gained more rights, their behaviour is becoming more similar to that of men. We are generally physically weaker than men so this is generally why we are less violent ie we are more vulnerable. Plus women's societal role is as care givers as they are mainly the ones who raise children and most buy into this.

It's fairly obvious to me that bullying and murder are war on the micro level - it's just a more individualised inter-personal form of it. That's logical.

Both genders benefit from a war if it prevents a country being occupied by another country and I'd say women have had the better deal for a long time to be quite honest via not being expected to or forced to go to war as men have at different times in the past. Not all men enjoy fighting either - in the First World War if you tried to run away if you couldn't take any more you were shot. Many men were conscientious objectors ie they refused to fight.

Also, if having wars isn't basic human nature why haven't we stopped having them by now?

I'd say some men and some women are by nature aggressive and enjoy fighting - it's not their gender that determines this, it's their basic personality and the extent to which they submit to society's gender conditioning.

Enough humans of both genders are sufficiently aggressive/violent or are impressed by and easily lead by those that are, that wars will always occur (in my opinion).

Last edited by nessa238 on 11 Nov 2012, 6:13 am, edited 5 times in total.

I'm not sure why exactly they said that. Many disabled people can and do work. I want to work; but the lack of support (they called me a liar and told me that my hyperacusis and Autism can't be that bad due to just being diagnosed - almost had a meltdown on Thursday due to sensory overload) and the refusal to listen to me has meant I've had to change to ESA. I gave them a copy of my fit note. They then had the nerve to phone me 4 weeks later and tell me I have an appointment with them tomorrow. The fit note said 1 month that is - 2nd July - 2nd August. They took that as 2nd July - 30th July.



I get mixed feelings too. I want to work and need to. I have had a job before. It was dull; but it worked for me - in the sense that it was quiet and I had minimal interaction with people. I was allowed to listen to my music (they knew this and didn't care as long as I was working) too.

Voluntary work can help a lot with increasing confidence levels. I've done voluntary work on a number of occasions as a safe way of getting myself used to being back in a workplace.

I am currently doing voluntary work. I need a new challenge though.

Do you look in your local paper for jobs each week or online?

What vocational qualifications do you have?

I have never felt poor in my life or have money troubles, regardless of how much I actually made. Happiness is mostly an attitude. I was living on $600 a month in my early 20s. If you don't want things you don't feel like you need things. I do think aspies are much more likely to be content with bare necessities. Our needs are simple, and not socializing much save a lot of money.

I came from a very poor place, though and didn't own a single toy as a kid. So maybe it's easy for me to say that.

*Oh and of course it can be a lifestyle choice. It's not just people with autism do that. I personally know quite a few people who have been semi-retired since their 30s, as they want to enjoy slow paced life and don't need a lot of money.

No. It's going to be impossible for me to do 99% of jobs anyway.

What does your voluntary work involve?

I'm very non-materialistic too. Possession-wise I only need my house, food, cat, something to read, internet, radio and TV to be content.

And who says they are taking public benefits because they don't want to work but can? just because someone can hold a part time and make a small wage does not mean they can nessisarily make a living with it. So I see no real issue with someone being on SSI and having part time work.......maybe they can't handle more work. In any case that is up to the Social Security deparmant not you wether or not one should be on benefits.

And what is wrong with wanting to have time to focus on 'fun' stuff people act like wanting to have enjoyment in life is some huge sin....I don't agree with the notion that if one can hardly make ends meet its wrong of them to want either SSI to supplement the income or other assistance so they can also have time for fun. Working to the extent you are too burn out to do anything else other than sleep and work is not something that should be expected of people..........and why just so you don't have to 'almost vomit' about people wanting financial help so they can make ends meet and have 'fun' or spend free time focusing on special interests? Well vomit away then no one is stopping you.

So what if you did? there is nothing wrong with SSI, except the few people who abuse it which potentially makes it harder for some who actually need it to get it due to limited resources or whatever.

and yeah I guess there is no honor in helping ones fellow humans make ends meet where they can't due to a disability, that is just so dishonorable compared to killing people for your country of course.