storage | debates

helping others to help yourself


for some people, there are certain limits that cannot be overcome without the help of others. A support network of friends, family or even strangers can be very critical. This post however is not about the genuine and kindhearted people. There is a different kind of “helper” breed out there, who appear as good, but their motives are the opposite. I have tried to illustrate the most common types and how to avoid them. The list will probably grow over time, in case you have any suggestions, leave them in the comment section.

the “look-at-me-type”

the *look-at-me

these are helper types who appear to do anything for you, only to be praised for it. The more positive attention they get, the better. They love to give long speeches about their good deeds, and how firmly they stand up for your rights. But once the praise stops, they will drop you like a hot potato, because all they care about is to make themselves look good. It’s fairly easy to spot them. You can usually find them on social gatherings like conferences and family reunions. When you encounter them for the first time and the first thing they talk about is how many people/charities they have “helped”, instead of focusing on your situation, you might want to back off.

the “my-way-or-highway ” type 

these types love to “help” others, but not out of the same motives as you may think. They don’t necessarily brag about their charitable work and appear very supportive, especially when you find yourself in a vulnerable situation. Sooner or later however, they will start to give you instructions on how you should do things in your life. That way they they can take control over you and your behavior, which is what they enjoy the most. It’s disguised as “advice” but in reality, they dismiss your point of view, as you are expected to obey. If you dare not to, they eventually they will threaten to, or withdraw help from you altogether. They aren’t as easy to spot in the beginning, which is what makes them dangerous because they appear so supportive and are oftentimes your friends or relatives. They know your weaknesses and can easily use them against you. As soon as you start getting unsolicited advice, watch their reaction when you reject it. If they will start to convince you otherwise or even guilt trip you, run, roll jump or whatever you can to get away.

the “jobsworth” type

these types don’t use emotions to get their way, their tools of choice are laws, rules and regulations. Their natural habitats are mainly offices. More often than not, it’s accompanied by another set of patterns in which they see you and you’re expected to act within those constraints. These “helpers” don’t focus as much on you or the outcome. All they care about is to follow their protocol to the letter. Any disruptions or deviation is unacceptable, no matter what. If you don’t play along, you’re dismissed, plain and simple, unless there is a bigger fish to override them.

the “pity-party” type 

this type of “helper” one is another special animal. Their motivator is pity. They see you as miserable and unhappy, so they feel the urge to “help” you. There’s nothing wrong with helping people in need, but these “helper” types don’t have an interest in actually solving the problem. To the contrary, they have to keep you miserable and unhappy, because that’s what they thrive on. Many of them still do charity work. The most common thing you’ll notice is that they always ask you how they can help you, not what do you need. Unless you don’t mind being an eternal victim or a charity case, you might wanna reconsider your involvement.

the “tit-for-tat” type

these types are often classmates or coworkers, they actually hate “helping” others, but they do it anyway if there’s something that they can get out of it. It may be money, goods, or anything else to their advantage. Either way, anything these “helpers” do for you is conditional. In case their desires aren’t fulfilled, they will throw each little thing they’ve done for you right in your face. Whatever you did for them at this point is irrelevant. That’s your alarm sign. If you refuse to supply them with what they want, they will eventually drop you and move on to find their next victim.

the “Samaritan-in-suit” type 

it’s one of the worst of its kind. Types like these are workplace related and are mostly in leadership positions of companies or institutions. They appear to do charitable work and praise themselves for giving opportunities for those who they deem disadvantaged. In reality however, they are the ones taking advantage of the disadvantaged. You can easily end up working in shitty and underpaid jobs with no possibility of improvement. Weakness and/or the apparent lack of better opportunities is what these “helpers” pick up on, so you become defenseless. If instead of standing your ground, you are expected to be grateful for what you’re given, just GTFO there.

no one shared their insights yet

is it all the “white, straight dude’s” fault?


someone posted a meme on Linkedin the other day, saying that having a team of “straight white males” in a creative team is a disgrace. It was accompanied by a headline on how it’s not enough to say that “It doesn’t matter who does the creative, as long as they’re good.” The following article then goes on about the fact that the creative industry lacks female leaders trying to push the usual narrative of valuing people based on gender and [insert minority here]. I have included my comment on the article below, but first, lets have a little reality check, shall we?

there are few female leaders

yes, it’s true. But not for the reasons most might think, much less some feminists want us to believe. Holding a position of power/leadership requires certain personality type and a whole range of skills. Not only that, but it also requires availability and constant presence. In order to do that, there are a lot of sacrifices to be made, and each person must carefully consider this. It’s no accident that the divorce rates among managers are extremely high, compared to the rest, so career path is not for everyone, regardless of gender. With that being said, many end up burned out over the years and have no choice but to change their path once they recover. Women are often very unaware or ignorant of these downsides, as they are brainwashed to believe that they can “have it all”. The reality is much harsher than they think, which is why they too end up burned out, depressed and broken. The women (and men) who actually managed to succeed deserve my full respect, assuming they are decent human beings and don’t abuse their power. Despite of all this, a lot of women refuse to put themselves in a leadership position because it either doesn’t interest them, or they have enough self-awareness to evaluate their strengths and weaknesses. So, sorry to burst your little bubble here, but it’s not men or society stopping them.

the world is a scary place

tough shit, I know. Yet it seems that if some women don’t achieve their goal or drop out, their initial reaction is to blame [insert scapegoat here]. They have a hard time accepting that sometimes things don’t always work out the way they want, or that their career choice maybe was a mistake. Life on its own is tough already, and it’s even tougher when you’re a leader. If you don’t have the skills to get this job done, this is not for you. Yet, feminists and other inclusion/diversity activists try to forcibly push women and other minority groups into certain (male dominated) fields, regardless if they are actually suitable for it or not.

before pointing fingers at others, clean your own backyard first…

… and most importantly, get the hell out of your politically poisoned utopian bubble and see how your agenda is doing the exact opposite of what was intended. Which brings me right into my comment I mentioned above:

I have a disability, I’m a non-straight female immigrant, all that makes me on top of the “oppression” ladder according to those people (most white, able bodied and well off btw) who claim to represent me and my rights, by blaming white straight dudes for everything that goes wrong in my world. Well, guess what? I don’t want nor need anyone to speak for me, I can do that myself, thank you very much!

I am not the victim that you would like to want me to be. I actually achieved something that most deemed impossible. Despite, or maybe even because of my visual impairment, I became a designer. You heard me. And no, I was not a charity case, I could draw better than people who graduated from my college and I was already good at it at an age while y’all were still crapping in your diapers. I worked hard for my career and I am proud of it. Not because of the fact that I am almost blind, but because my work is good and that’s what I want to be judged for. But thanks to some misguided activists, I have to deal with constantly being reduced to the very thing that neither defines me nor my work. I value others for what they do, not for who they are.

no one shared their insights yet

all that glitters is not gold


you’ve have come a long way, one would think. Inclusion is the idea that all people with disabilities should be integrated into society, from the kid in the classroom, to the adult in the workforce. It sounds great, doesn’t it? To make sure everyone got the memo , most western countries decided to create some laws in order to do what’s best. Schools are required to accept children with all disabilities and quotas ensure the integration of adults in the labor market. Anyone who would dare to question this narrative must be a bigot, right?

take a deep breath, get a cup of your favorite beverage and step aside from your little bubble. What you’re about to read might not be what you would like to hear, after you’ve been advocating the good cause throughout your career. But don’t worry, I know you mean well. So who am I to tell you all this? Well, I’m the one who technically would be on the receiving end. The one for whom you want to make the world a better place. According to many of you, I’d even be quite high on the “oppression” ladder as a non-straight, migrant female with a visual impairment. So there. Having lived in a few places I had the “luxury” to experience the whole spectrum of laws and regulations (or the lack thereof) first hand. For the record, I’m not looking for sympathy, I managed to make my way outside of the “system”, but that can’t be applied to everyone and it’s a different story for another article. And before you dismiss my observations as “anecdotal”, just look up the unemployment rates of people with disabilities in your country. If things were great, there would be no need for institutions raising awareness for inclusion and you would have chosen a different career path.

what could possibly go wrong?

employing people with disabilities can be tricky. Most employers have no idea what to make of all this, most of them have never met anyone who is disabled, some might or might not have a distant family member, but that’s about it. They don’t know what people with disabilities are capable of. Add a few misconceptions to the mix and there you have one reason why employers are so reluctant, and frankly, they can’t be blamed for it. Inclusion advocates then pushed for laws and quotas, to ensure that companies can’t weasel their way out so easily. So being forced to hire a certain percentage of [insert minority group here], candidates will be given the opportunity to work, employers do their duty and everyone is happy, right? Not quite.

Germany for example has protection laws make it harder for employers to fire disabled staff, the well-meant initiative turns out to be a nightmare for the disabled people themselves. As a result, companies find loopholes and tricks to go around the laws. Many rather pay the “penalty fee” rather than hire a person with a disability, others word their rejection letters carefully enough so no discrimination can be proven. Most people with disabilities end up in sheltered workshops with no chances to get into the regular work market. Those who are lucky enough to get a job often end up as “quota fillers” doing underpaid work and perform tasks way below their qualifications. Not many have the courage to speak up or complain, as they see this as the only alternative to being stuck forever on welfare. Since companies can’t get rid of them easily, many get bullied out of their jobs and end up devastated and discouraged.

The Netherlands has a different approach, the government (in this case the Dutch Employee Insurance Agency) bait companies with benefits by subsidizing jobs if a disabled person is hired. However, that comes at a price: The employee gets paid minimum wage, regardless of qualification. Any additional income they might make is going to be seized, which means that people get stuck in their positions with no chance to get promoted, much less paid what they’re worth. That is certainly not what inclusion would look like.

dream vs. reality

as of 2015, the UN has passed a treaty called “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” which is intended to protect the rights of people with disabilities and attempting full quality under the law. EU countries are now required to achieve this goal. As good as it sounds, there’s still lots of work to be done. The fact alone that such treaty was necessary shows that all too well and is a sad reminder on how misconceptions and myths dominate the representation of people with disabilities, not to mention the media, charity organizations and even misguided behavior of disabled people themselves.

opportunities instead of “safe spaces”

one way to solve this problem is create awareness of what people with disabilities are capable of and how they can help themselves to get their job done, instead of pointing out the weaknesses and expecting others to solve problems for them. Forget quotas, people should be given equal opportunities, instead of equal outcome. At the end of the day, a company needs a skilled worker, not a [insert minority group here]. If the person can get the job done right, they should be hired and fired in case it’s not the right fit, l just like anyone else. If people with disabilities want to be part of society, they also have to deal with being treated like everyone else. This requires a huge amount of self-reflection and responsibility – which is something institutions should help with instead of creating “safe spaces”. People don’t need a “comfort zone” in their situations, they need solutions to change their situation in order to have a better life and be a productive member of society. Everyone is different and has different needs and capabilities and laws and “one-size-fits-all” approaches do more harm than good.

on a personal note…

while living in Thailand (before the political situation went downhill), I had lots of opportunities and freedoms, even though there are no protection laws for people with disabilities, or anybody else for that matter. Nonetheless, I have met people who believed in my skills and who were always there to help if I needed it. No laws and regulations were needed. That should tell you something.

no one shared their insights yet

there is much more to it than meets your eye…


whenever it comes to the topic of hiring individuals with disabilities, we pretty much stumble upon the same myths, distorted realities and misconceptions on both sides of the fence for years, if not decades. There are plenty of causes and institutions trying to fight the stereotypes, yet it seems that changes are coming too slowly. Why is that? I’ll try to examine it in this article. I will be focussing on visual impairment, but it may be applied to other disabilities as well.  keep on reading… »

no one shared their insights yet

the design subversion


art and design are one of many ways to express one’s own views, emotions and perceptions, as well as conveying a message to others. In the professional sector of art and design, conveying messages can vary from advertising a product, over illustrative comedy or satire, to campaigning a serious charity or cause. All of this can be diverse, thought-provoking and sometimes controversial. Some might or might not agree with one art piece or another, but the ability to choose the narrative that suits you is a luxury we have from freedom of speech. It’s one of the most advanced achievements of modern society and should be cherished dearly.

however, many politically motivated groups on both sides have a problem with free speech, especially when their views are to be criticized and challenged. So much so, that people would refrain to questionable methods in order to avoid any confrontation. Design and advertising for example have been portrayed by feminist groups as discriminatory for many years. I have explored the issue a bit further in.

this leads to one question: Why? The answer is simple: To push a political agenda on society in order to control it. There were many attempts to achieve this over the years. Since tastes are different and some might like alternative options to their lifestyles/goods, this is not about choice. The goal behind this is far more sinister: The purpose is to shift and destroy biological/psychological/societal differences between people and vilify them by imposing their version of how a society should function.

to get a taste of this, you can look at the latest attempt of political indoctrination in the gaming industry. In 2014, a couple of ideologically-motivated media outlets have tried to portray geek/gamer culture as sexist and unwelcoming towards women. Despite of this not being true torial.html , mainstream media has fallen for these false claims and continued on to vilify the geek/gaming culture. What no one expected is that male and female gamers alike decided to fight back. That is how the hashtag #GamerGate on twitter came about. But instead of being heard out, they were put in the same category as trolls. Despite the fact that trolls is an internet phenomena on its own, it was misused as a tool to dismiss their opposing voices. As if that wasn’t enough, other methods were used as well, such as:

  • disabling users from commenting
  • getting users blocked or suspended by abusing the report feature on social media.
  • filing complaints in order to get people fired from their real life jobs or otherwise denounce them and destroy their professional careers.

this however didn’t stop geeks and gamers from speaking out. This is also crucial for game companies, developers and designers. If some political groups would have gotten their way, any type of artistic expressive freedom will be brutally violated and undermined through policing and content control. Designers and artists will have to fear their work being labeled as [insert *ist/*phobic here] which will impact their future work and career, worst case even destroy their lives and their families’. As a result, many will comply, especially when have to put food on the table. Let this sink in for a second. Is this a society people would want to live in?

while it’s legitimate to have different views, it is not acceptable when any political ideology is trying to take over society and impose it on people’s lives. We’ve seen this fail miserably throughout history and the present and we surely don’t need any of this in the future. It’s ok to criticise and question, but it’s also it’s ok to disagree. People can decide for themselves how they think, but at the same time, they have a responsibility to deal with their views being challenged, yet still have a chance to respond accordingly. This is what freedom of speech and expression is all about and it should stay that way.

no one shared their insights yet