I think their point is a good one: that there is a reason that things got this way and it’s easy to underestimate the costs associated with beauty.
I wouldn’t read it as a “beef with beauty”.
I wouldn’t read it as a “beef with beauty”.
I'm pretty pragmatic in general. I get the argument in the abstract. But having been on both sides, I know which is better.
But more to the point, the parent used a very bad example to make their point.