What's the ugly part? The article talks about successful and unsuccessful GoFundMe campaigns. Is the ugly part that some deplorables got millions from other deplorables?
I deem the title click bait.
I deem the title click bait.
> What’s wrong with you also influences whether you score big with medical crowdfunding, according to the University of Washington at Bothell medical anthropologist Nora Kenworthy and the media scholar Lauren Berliner, who have been studying the subject since 2013. Successful campaigns tend to focus on onetime fixes (a new prosthetic, say) rather than chronic, complicated diagnoses like Laila’s. Terminal cases and geriatric care are also tough to fundraise for, as are stigmatized conditions such as HIV and addiction- or obesity-related problems...
> ...As Laila’s GoFundMe sputtered out, Richard grew to resent the people raising tens of thousands for sick pets. At his lowest moments, he wondered whether the campaign would have been more successful if Laila had been a cat.
> Richard’s bitter feelings reminded me of something Berliner had observed when we spoke: “There’s a lot of secrecy and shame around the ones that don’t receive funding. If it’s a way to perform need, how must it feel to put yourself out there and not receive anything in return?”
That society and human nature seems to pay more attention to quick fixes and happy surface story is "ugly", though that's something that has long been a facet of society well before GoFundMe.
You did what you had to do given the realities, but I'm sorry and ashamed that as a society we put you in that position.
I feel like the "White Savior Inferiority Complex" quote might explain a bit.
Hey, downvoters, it was a genuine question, if I've missed something, please let me know. The term deplorable is rather odd, and I can only recall it being used in in recent pop culture by Hillary Clinton wrt Trump supporters.