# Charities: Govt rhetoric on welfare leading to inciting attacks on disabled people..



## treelover (Jul 24, 2011)

'Welfare to Work policy 'casts the disabled as cheats'

Flagship initiative threatens safety of the disabled by suggesting that they are scroungers, say charities

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jul/24/welfare-policy-incites-hatred-disabled.



The Observer is reporting that a report for an alliance of over 50 charities has claimed that the constant drip of leaks, smears, and misinformation by the Govt, Chris Grayling(actually personally named and blamed in the report) and then the natioanl media is leading to verbal and sometimes physical attacks on disabled people.One woman has said how she now ''thought hard about going out at night''. While a CEO of a disability charity has noted a recent survey carried out by Scope found ''more than a third (37%) of people said attitudes towards them had got worse over the past year.''

Jaspal Dhani, chief executive of the United Kingdom Disabled People's Council, said: "The language portrays disabled people as scroungers, as lazy – a drain who are not playing their part and making a contribution

I have been hearing about this anecdotally from people i know with disabilities, some are wary of sitting outside, doing the gardening or going for a walk as they fear being asked ''why they are not at work'', others have noted workmen making ''nasty/unpleasant comments'' when they have come round to do some repairs, etc. N/L started this process and of course it has been expanded by the C/D's, sometimes the media has looked like certain papers of the 1930's, etc.

If this was any other 'community' there would be uproar, but not this group...


----------



## treelover (Jul 24, 2011)

from CiF

' I took her in her wheelchair as she cant walk more than half a dozen steps before she falls to the floor completely exhausted.... she has severe fibromyalgia, a very nasty dibilitating condition, whilst we were out, not only did i see people staring at her, judging her, i actually heard people discussing her in the cafe where i took her for a cuppa, they actually said 'scroungers like that' about her. I was furious, if they had to suffer one single day of her pain they would not say things like that. '


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 24, 2011)

treelover said:


> ' I took her in her wheelchair as she cant walk more than half a dozen steps before she falls to the floor completely exhausted.... she has severe fibromyalgia, a very nasty dibilitating condition, whilst we were out, not only did i see people staring at her, judging her, i actually heard people discussing her in the cafe where i took her for a cuppa, they actually said 'scroungers like that' about her. I was furious, if they had to suffer one single day of her pain they would not say things like that. '


 
That genuinely brings tears to my eyes. I think I'm less angry at the government (and the previous one) for being so evil than I am at the people who are stupid enough to believe all this bilge about scroungers and parasites. Have we abandoned the idea of society completely or what? Is there any level off bullshit people won't swallow if it gives them somebody to hate?


----------



## _angel_ (Jul 24, 2011)

To be fair, there have always been some people like that, even before the drip drip drip of all disabled people are workshy.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jul 24, 2011)

This is nothing new, as treelover rightly points out it was happening under Labour too. I occasionally volunteer for an independent benefits advice centre that does advocacy and campaigning work too, used to volunteer full time but don't have the time anymore, and the stories disabled people tell of being shouted at in the street for scrounging etc. make my piss boil.

We had the local Blairite cunt MP, [name removed to avoid possible trouble] come over to talk to us in a workshop we were doing and I pulled him on the bus adverts (you know, shop a scrounger), pointing out that benefit fraud isn't in fact a problem, accounting as it does for far less than 1% of the total spend, which is a very good rate, that it was dwarfed by the figure for unclaimed benefits and that it was negligible when compared to tax avoidance/evasion. I asked why there were no shop a tax cheat bus ads, since this was clearly a far bigger problem. I asked him to apologise (this was after Labour had lost the election). His response? He thought they were a good idea. There was a "public perception" that benefit fraud was a problem so they wanted to be seen to be doing something. I wanted to knock the cunt out. Apart from the fact I'm not convinced that many people do fall for it, they should have been educating people, letting them know it wasn't the problem Murdoch and co want us to believe it is, they certainly shouldn't be pandering to peoples' prejudices. 

And @the OP: People are in uproar. I don't know if that was a thinly veiled dig at "the left" but if it was it's miles off target. I'm involved with the SP in Sheffield - one of our members is working on setting up a claimants union and it's a top priority for us. Even when I was in the SWP in another town, for all the SWP's faults they campaigned on this issue - there's only a very small branch in that town and almost half the activists gave up at least a day a week at the centre. Just because we don't boast about it on internet message boards or hold set piece demos waving lollypops around doesn't mean we aren't doing anything.

But I agree - the liberal left, as usual, would rather concentrate on more fashionable causes. This shouldn't surprise anyone, it's what they do.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 24, 2011)

SpookyFrank said:


> That genuinely brings tears to my eyes. I think I'm less angry at the government (and the previous one) for being so evil than I am at the people who are stupid enough to believe all this bilge about scroungers and parasites. Have we abandoned the idea of society completely or what? Is there any level off bullshit people won't swallow if it gives them somebody to hate?


 
Not really.

You're always going to have a percentage of people who buy into hate of various sorts because they *need* to do so. It stops them looking inward and hating themselves.


----------



## audiotech (Jul 24, 2011)

More on ATOS from, I assume to be the 'liberal left', SpineyNorman, refers to?



> Neil Coyle, director of Disability Alliance, said the government was paying the company to do the test, and was then footing the bill for reviewing flawed assessments. "It's like paying for a childminder to babysit, and then going home three times in an evening to make sure they are doing their job," he said.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jul/24/atos-faces-critical-report-by-mps


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Jul 24, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> It stops them looking inward and hating themselves.



Aye.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Jul 24, 2011)

An internet friend of mine went to an Atos Recruitment evening. She recorded the event. The answers to questions by those attending the event by the Atos representative were shocking. The speaker actually parodied a disabled person walking and said they didn't care about underlying illnesses. Atos were there to judge ability not disability. 

A despicable business.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Jul 24, 2011)

Oh and Atos IT has it's finger in the pie of almost every government department from desktop maintenance to the prison system to complete department IT infrastructure. The £300.000.000 from the DWP is a drop in the ocean compared to what the government pays them for all the other services it provides. I'm sure each and every one of us is on an Atos database somewhere.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jul 25, 2011)

audiotech said:


> More on ATOS from, I assume to be the 'liberal left', SpineyNorman, refers to?
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jul/24/atos-faces-critical-report-by-mps


 
No, by the liberal left I meant... err... the liberal left. It's unlikely that an organisation called the disability alliance would neglect disabled claimants and instead focus on fashionable causes, wouldn't you say? That's the second time in a couple of days you've made a weird, off target criticism of one of my posts, why? Is there a problem? Or am I missing something here?

By liberal left I mean the so called "left" in the Lib Dems, the Labour party, student politicos, etc. I certainly don't mean civil society organisations like the one in your post - in fact I mentioned that I'd volunteered for one such group.


----------



## audiotech (Jul 25, 2011)

The Lib-Dem MP quoted? Glenda Jackson MP? Labour MP, Tom Greatrex? The Guardian reader quoted? The Guardian itself? Critical of ATOS. These not the "liberal left"?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jul 26, 2011)

And they're representative of the liberal left in general are they? Pull the other one. Actions speak louder than words as they say. Besides, ATOS aren't the problem, they're just a symptom. A symptom of the disease all these people support. You try talking to a Labour or Lib Dem MP about this - see where it gets you. I dearly wish they were onside with this, we need all the allies we can get. But I've been campaigning on this for years now and despite constant calls for help we've received no support whatsoever from these sorts. It's one thing to wring your hands in the Guardian and another to actually get them dirty. 

It was a Lib Dem MP that threw us out of our premises. It was a Labour MP who tried to justify the bus ad campaign in the disgusting way detailed above. That's the 'help' we've had from the liberal left. The proper left, on the other hand, has raised money, campaigned and given time to us, despite the fact that they're probably outnumbered by more than 10 to 1 by liberals.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 26, 2011)

SpineyNorman said:


> And they're representative of the liberal left in general are they? Pull the other one. Actions speak louder than words as they say. Besides, ATOS aren't the problem, they're just a symptom. A symptom of the disease all these people support.



The disease being the idea that welfare needs fundamental reform. The warning should sound for the public in the word "fundamental", but it doesn't, because they've been softened up with 15 years of "scrounger" rhetoric.



> You try talking to a Labour or Lib Dem MP about this - see where it gets you. I dearly wish they were onside with this, we need all the allies we can get. But I've been campaigning on this for years now and despite constant calls for help we've received no support whatsoever from these sorts. It's one thing to wring your hands in the Guardian and another to actually get them dirty.



Yup. Even though I left the Labour party after they re-wrote Clause 4, I still wrote to my local MP, but I knew the whole welfare issue would just grow and grow after I wrote to him regarding the Benefits Integrity Project (remember that?) asking for details of the analysis used to justify the project, but he couldn't. He wouldn't state whether or not such an analysis had been done, but given your experience of the "being seen to be doing something" culture, it's fair to say that there probably wasn't one, and that the freshly-elected Labour party also wanted to "be seen to be doing something".



> It was a Lib Dem MP that threw us out of our premises. It was a Labour MP who tried to justify the bus ad campaign in the disgusting way detailed above. That's the 'help' we've had from the liberal left. The proper left, on the other hand, has raised money, campaigned and given time to us, despite the fact that they're probably outnumbered by more than 10 to 1 by liberals.


 
Quite. The liberal left died a death when they allowed themselves to be used to drive neo-liberal political and economic policies. Once you've crossed that Rubicon, there's no going back - you're part of the problem, not the solution.


----------



## audiotech (Jul 27, 2011)

@ Spinney Norman. Sorry to hear you've had problems. My Labour MP assisted me in a dispute I had with the DWP. Very likely other constituent Labour MP's presently will be doing similar to assist their constituents.


----------



## two sheds (Jul 27, 2011)

Saw the headlines of the Daily Mail and Express today along the lines of "3 out of 4 benefits claimants actually fit for work". I usually feel like pulling the papers out all over the floor but I'd probably get done for criminal damage and get 4 years inside. 

Someone ought to do fake Daily Mail front pages that you could just print out and lay over the top of the stack saying something like '3 out of 4 Daily Mail readers actually paedos'.


----------



## Urbanblues (Jul 27, 2011)

As early as 1998 I wrote to Alistair Darling asking him why, despite the Benefits Integrity Project's abject failure to weed out the legions of disabled benefits' cheats infesting the economy, he, and his government, were in tacit agreement with the scum press and shite-end of TV documentary makers in their hounding of disabled people.

Darling's response, or that from his researcher, brushed me off with some freedom of the press guff; and, the media, especially the print side, carried on with their propaganda to the point where disabled people are today roundly demonised within society.

Fast forward to 2011. Disability hate crime and harassment is rife. The Scum and Daily Hate have made disabled bashing an accepted form of sport. Chris Grayling when challenged on the misrepresentation of benefits' fraud and the tie-in with disabled people blurts out "I do not control the editorial approach of the tabloids, and sometimes stories run in ways that completely bemuse me and are certainly beyond any expectations." 

No Pontius, off course you or indeed any government minister should not interfere with the freedom of the press. No, but you should protest in the strongest terms when the press take your figures and conflate them and through processes of aggregation use them as propaganda against people, the overwhelming majority of whom have done no wrong other than being disabled.

One of the duties of a free press is to hold the government of the day to account; to inform the public of what those who governing us are doing. They should keep the public informed, in an objective and accessible way, of the news as it happens, not as they choose to fashion it.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jul 27, 2011)

In what I think is an unprecedented move, the Chair of the Commons Work and Pensions, Dame Anne Begg MP, has today written to the Minister for Employment, Chris Grayling.

Mrs Begg expresses serious concerns at the most recent misrepresentation of DWP statistics on benefit claimants in some sections of the media yesterday and today.

She calls into question the timing of the release of official statistics that _“coincide”_ with the release of the Work and Pensions Committee report on the WCA.

She highlights the Daily Mail and the Daily Express, as being _“particularly egregious example of the way they can be misused. The headline in today’s Daily Mail was “The shirking classes: just 1 in 14 incapacity benefit claimants is unfit to work”_.”

Finally, Mrs Begg goes onto seek assurances that Mr Grayling will _“be contacting newspaper editors again to urge them to ensure that the reports they carry about ESA claims are factually correct and that they avoid pejorative terms such as “shirkers” and “scroungers” which are irresponsible and inaccurate.”_

Link to the letter

I look forward to Mr Grayling’s response with interest….


----------



## Urbanblues (Jul 27, 2011)

two sheds said:


> Someone ought to do fake Daily Mail front pages that you could just print out and lay over the top of the stack saying something like '3 out of 4 Daily Mail readers actually paedos'.


 
Except, it would excite the average Hate reader's curiosity; and, he'd feel compelled to buy a copy just to see who the other paedos are!


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jul 27, 2011)

I'd love 5 minutes alone in a room with the cunt who wrote that headline


----------



## ericjarvis (Jul 27, 2011)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> I look forward to Mr Grayling’s response with interest….


 
Since Grayling has directly lied about the figures in press releases and public statements I am expecting him to simply bullshit whilst assuming that the media won't question whatever total bollocks he comes out with.

This is not a case of the press misrepresenting what politicians tell them. It is about CORRUPT and DISHONEST politicians creating work for companies that donate large sums of money to their parties by creating a public demand for new initiatives against "benefit fraud". It's lucrative for the companies involved. It's lucrative for the political parties. And the politicians don't give a toss about integrity or honesty, concepts they assume don't apply to them other than as something they can use to demand people withdraw criticism.

So. Basically I can look forward to Grayling's response, if any, with nothing but despair.


----------



## two sheds (Jul 27, 2011)

SpineyNorman said:


> I'd love 5 minutes alone in a room with the cunt who wrote that headline


 
Yes, the thought came to me that they need something like a couple of broken legs to start understanding what it's like.


----------



## _angel_ (Jul 27, 2011)

I've got a friend who works as an assistant OT who sees all her patients routinely being turned down for their DLA, yet she still has got the idea, from somewhere, that there are tons of people "playing the system". Not sure where she's getting the information from - unless it is media - and what is weird is she sees the opposite happening on a daily basis in her work.


----------



## Urbanblues (Jul 27, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> Since Grayling has directly lied about the figures in press releases and public statements I am expecting him to simply bullshit whilst assuming that the media won't question whatever total bollocks he comes out with.
> 
> *This is not a case of the press misrepresenting what politicians tell them.* It is about CORRUPT and DISHONEST politicians creating work for companies that donate large sums of money to their parties by creating a public demand for new initiatives against "benefit fraud". It's lucrative for the companies involved. It's lucrative for the political parties. And the politicians don't give a toss about integrity or honesty, concepts they assume don't apply to them other than as something they can use to demand people withdraw criticism.
> 
> So. Basically I can look forward to Grayling's response, if any, with nothing but despair.


 
It is also about the press accepting the government line. It is about the press taking and manipulating figures in order to serve their own interests. And, it's about symbiotic relationships between the government and their contractors.


----------



## treelover (Jul 27, 2011)

Anne Begg is a fairweather friend of disabled claimants: when she was Disabilities Minister she fully endorsed and pushed forward Purnell's ESA reforms, they just don't like the brutal language as they know it will at some point induce a backlash against the reforms, Milliband has compared benefit cheats to City sharks and wants to reform DLA..


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jul 27, 2011)

treelover said:


> Anne Begg is a fairweather friend of disabled claimants: when she was Disabilities Minister she fully endorsed and pushed forward Purnell's ESA reforms, they just don't like the brutal language as they know it will at some point induce a backlash against the reforms, Milliband has compared benefit cheats to City sharks and wants to reform DLA..


You're completely confused. Dame Anne Begg isn't Anne McGuire - the former is a wheelchair user who, I would say, is eminently capable of understanding issues of disability and is more than qualified to be angry about media portayals; the latter was Minister for Disablity under Labour before Jonathon Shaw took over (and what a complete fucking joke he was). 

Further, Anne McGuire may have a degree of culpability but compared to Maria Miller, she was priceless in standing up for disabled people about certain key principles in terms of independent living and so on.


----------



## dynamicbaddog (Jul 27, 2011)

treelover said:


> Anne Begg is a fairweather friend of disabled claimants: when she was Disabilities Minister she fully endorsed and pushed forward Purnell's ESA reforms, they just don't like the brutal language as they know it will at some point induce a backlash against the reforms, Milliband has compared benefit cheats to City sharks and wants to reform DLA..



Purnell is on Newsnight this evening, talking about _alternatives _to the welfare state.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 27, 2011)

two sheds said:


> Yes, the thought came to me that they need something like a couple of broken legs to start understanding what it's like.


 
As I said to a mate, when he suggested breaking James Purnell's legs back when Purnell was shitting on people with disabilities:

"Why would I break 'em? Breaking 'em means he gets to go back to 'normal life'. Chop the fuckers off!".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 27, 2011)

dynamicbaddog said:


> Purnell is on Newsnight this evening, talking about _alternatives _to the welfare state.


 
Bad cess to the shitcunt!


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jul 27, 2011)

audiotech said:


> @ Spinney Norman. Sorry to hear you've had problems. My Labour MP assisted me in a dispute I had with the DWP. Very likely other constituent Labour MP's presently will be doing similar to assist their constituents.


 
I don't want to turn this into a bunfight, but why didn't these Labour MPs do anything about this when their party was in government?

Although I think, while I'm slagging off Labour, I should point out that there are some half decent Labour councilors in the area. When the Tory county council, backed by Lib Dems, cut all the funding to the centre (£30k a year, for which they got a full time manager, part time admin worker and a team of about 20 volunteers, all taking on work the jobcentre and DWP advisors couldn't or wouldn't do - so much for the big society) a few local Labour councillors managed to find some funds to help the enable the centre to stay open. Unfortunately I can't see any of them getting anywhere near a parliamentary seat.

Sorry to dwell on this but the whole thing makes my piss boil.


----------



## roctrevezel (Jul 27, 2011)

SpineyNorman said:


> I don't want to turn this into a bunfight, but why didn't these Labour MPs do anything about this when their party was in government?
> 
> .


 
A clue, (one of the attendees not listed because he was of no importance back then was David Miliband.) 
http://www.lwbooks.co.uk/journals/articles/rutherford07.html
_New Labour, the market state, and the end of welfare
Jonathan Rutherford

Jonathan Rutherford looks at the connections between government and the insurance business in their joint project to reduce eligibility for sickness benefits.

© Soundings 2007
In November 2001 a conference assembled at Woodstock, near Oxford. Its subject was 'Malingering and Illness Deception'. The topic was a familiar one to the insurance industry, but it was now becoming a major political issue as New Labour committed itself to reducing the 2.6 million who were claiming Incapacity Benefit (IB). Amongst the 39 participants was Malcolm Wicks, then Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Work, and Mansel Aylward, his Chief Medical Officer at the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP). Fraud - which amounts to less than 0.4 per cent of IB claims - was not the issue. The experts and academics present were the theorists and ideologues of welfare to work. *What linked many of them together, including Aylward, was their association with the giant US income protection company UnumProvident, represented at the conference by John LoCascio*. The goal was the transformation of the welfare system. The cultural meaning of illness would be redefined; growing numbers of claimants would be declared capable of work and 'motivated' into jobs. A new work ethic would transform IB recipients into entrepreneurs helping themselves out of poverty and into self-reliance. Five years later these goals would take a tangible form in New Labour's 2006 Welfare Reform Bill. _


----------



## treelover (Jul 27, 2011)

Suprised Purnell hasn't been pied...


----------



## treelover (Jul 27, 2011)

'A clue, (one of the attendees not listed because he was of no importance back then was David Miliband.) '


wow, didn't know that...


----------



## audiotech (Jul 27, 2011)

I share your anger about the majority of Labour MP's in government doing little. Those who 'rebel' are few and far between and have little voice against the executive when they do, an executive that's all powerful in today's Parliamentary system. I was pointing out that sometimes you'll find a different response from MP's representing their constituents.


----------



## treelover (Jul 27, 2011)

'Is Labour abolishing illness?

Alison Ravetz

Published 01 May 2008
52 comments

The new rules on incapacity benefit stake everything on a major gamble: that a large proportion of claimants are, in fact, well enough to work

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2008/05/work-benefit-claimants-reform



Purnell really is the new Keith Joseph, he sees things in a purely academic way and has no concern for the consequences, with his new ideas of contributions or 'deserts' as D/Milliband calls it(now it is all very clear) he said disabled people will be protected as they can't work, but his welfare reforms mean that through the Work Capability Assessment many people will be 'reconfigured as 'fit to work' and thus put onto these programmes as illness is abolished*. Then again, was there anything new apart for robbing Peter to pay Paul(taking way bus passes etc)

btw, he has the ear of Ed Milliband and the former banker Liam Bryne, expect to see these proposals become LP policy.

thee above article from 2008 highlights this


----------



## dynamicbaddog (Jul 28, 2011)

two sheds said:


> Saw the headlines of the Daily Mail and Express today along the lines of "3 out of 4 benefits claimants actually fit for work". I usually feel like pulling the papers out all over the floor but I'd probably get done for criminal damage and get 4 years inside.
> 
> Someone ought to do fake Daily Mail front pages that you could just print out and lay over the top of the stack saying something like '3 out of 4 Daily Mail readers actually paedos'.



good article here exposing the real facts behind those headlines
http://www.leftfootforward.org/2011/07/government-spin-war-on-disabled-continues/



> _the articles confuse applicants ( to which these statistics refer) and pre-existing claimants ( that the newspapers seek to slam). Furthermore, Richard Exell over at the TUC has got down among the data, to show that the 75 per cent figure is pure spin.
> 
> _


----------



## treelover (Jul 28, 2011)

hopefully when the new Press Watchdog is in place, these smears and misinformation can be effectively challenged.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jul 28, 2011)

You are being sarcastic, right?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 28, 2011)

SpineyNorman said:


> You are being sarcastic, right?


 
He must be, because there's fuck-all chance of a press watchdog depriving a sector of the media of the ability to shit on those least able to defend themselves.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Jul 28, 2011)

Incredibly, even Daily Mail readers are starting to catch on to the fact that the reform of DLA is joke.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...enefits-wasted-lives-millions-claim-them.html

Just read some of the comments marked as most popular.



> The tests are not "too tough"- they are largely irrelevant questions which have been declared "not fit for purpose" by a government appointed committee and they ignore doctors & senior medical consultant reports! They are mickey mouse tick box questionnaires that bear no relevance whatsoever to a claimant's true health status - particularly so for the chronically sick and disabled. Their only aim is to downgrade the amount of money a sick and disabled person receives by moving them onto a lower benefit. Come on Daily Mail - how about some decent, genuine reporting about the ATOS bonus paid "assessors" scam & the true cost of the appeals. Let's hear the other side of the story - instead of your standard government press release every day.
> 
> - Baxter, Amtphill



Of course, they manage to sneak immigration into a lot of the comments, but that is to be expected.



> What a noble aspiration, lets get people working. FIRST CREATE THE JOBS, AND STOP GIVING THEM TO FOREIGNERS
> 
> - ron styles, yorkshire



Here are some of the lowest rated.



> Having read comments from readers everytime this subject crops up, I get the impression that most Daily Mail readers are on Incapacity Benefit (or whatever its called now). They seem to have convinced themselves that they can not work in any capacity, although they find no problem with reading and writing daily comments on this site.
> 
> - nelly, uk





> Everybody has known for a long time that these benefits are the lazy scroungers charter. The left wing looney liberals should visit many of the countries I have lived and worked in where the logic is simole - don't work, no money, no food, starve, then die. Simple
> 
> - hard done by private sector worker, bedale


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Aug 14, 2012)

...and furthermore, some statistics about the rise in disability hate crime.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/data...y-hate-crime-increase-reported-incidents-data


----------



## treelover (Aug 14, 2012)

SpineyNorman said:


> No, by the liberal left I meant... err... the liberal left. It's unlikely that an organisation called the disability alliance would neglect disabled claimants and instead focus on fashionable causes, wouldn't you say? That's the second time in a couple of days you've made a weird, off target criticism of one of my posts, why? Is there a problem? Or am I missing something here?
> 
> By liberal left I mean the so called "left" in the Lib Dems, the Labour party, student politicos, etc. I certainly don't mean civil society organisations like the one in your post - in fact I mentioned that I'd volunteered for one such group.


 
Actually during the N/L years, the Disablity Alliance were very close to NL, its CEO left to become a LP Cllr, they also hosted the disability hub at one of the LP conferences, it was sponsored by Serco, the new organisation  they are part of is funded to 'help' the Remploy workers find work in the private sector!


----------



## treelover (Aug 14, 2012)

roctrevezel said:


> A clue, (one of the attendees not listed because he was of no importance back then was David Miliband.)
> http://www.lwbooks.co.uk/journals/articles/rutherford07.html
> _New Labour, the market state, and the end of welfare_
> _Jonathan Rutherford_
> ...


 

Good grief, missed that last time the thread was live, I had noticed he took a lot of interest in benefits, so he was at the infamous and seminal meeting...

Its now Wannsee, but it has had a very baleful influence on millions of lives..


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Aug 14, 2012)

Sorry, it's just this was the most appropriate thread to post the hate crime stats.


----------



## shagnasty (Aug 14, 2012)

Most peoples disabilities are not obvious ,so people are attacked are obviously more visible, by walking sticks etc.that makes it even worse,many people mainly older ones need walking aids.i don,t need a stick but as i get older i am more wobbly on my pins


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Aug 14, 2012)

Those that really bear the brunt are people with learning disabilities.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Those that really bear the brunt are people with learning disabilities.


MH conditions as well I'd imagine.


----------



## treelover (Aug 14, 2012)

Have just finished an analysis of BBC coverage for a bit of research on prejudice. The findings suggest to me that the BBC (the great public service broadcaster) must take a good share of the blame for disabled people becoming objects of hatred and violence.
Here are just a couple findings:
- All 20 randomly selected BBC News website items about disability and benefits were about people cheating on their benefits and none provided any critique of government welfare policies.
- There was no indication in any of the items that disability benefit fraud is very low. The items might well have given the impression that cheating on disability benefits is the norm.

From CIF, RupertBH

concurs with all my experience...


----------



## treelover (Aug 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Sorry, it's just this was the most appropriate thread to post the hate crime stats.


 
eh, nowt to be sorry for, imp info...


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Those that really bear the brunt are people with learning disabilities.


 
"Mate crime" and such?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Aug 14, 2012)

Well, I was more thinking of what I've seen on the street, public transport etc but several people I know have been targeted for money etc


----------



## William of Walworth (Aug 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> ...and furthermore, some statistics about the rise in disability hate crime.
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/data...y-hate-crime-increase-reported-incidents-data


 
Depressedly, very depressedly actually, I'm not surprised by this 

Anyone here ever worked with people SOME** of whom really, really *hate* people on benefits?

**(a minority, but at times nastily vocal)

This kind of mood music, combined with some people just being small minded, resentful, hateful arseholes, leaves anecdotes of people 'scamming' disability benefits, as if it's a piece of piss to do this, all too infrequently challenged. Not even by myself because it's pretty hard not to lose your calm when confrinted by bigots, hard not to lose the rag and be counterproductive because of that ....

And the SW Evening Post's reportage of such things, focussing on areas/localities that people know well, has a receptive and gullible audience/believership amongst SOME around here.

'SOME' capitalised because :

(a) it *is* only minority -- but a highly loudmouthed, very twattish one -- and they *do* influence those around them, even when most don't actively join in

and also

(b) because in another thead I've recently been accused of being bigotted against my area, or even (by suggestion) the Welsh myself, for expressing frustration against this kinda thick as pigshit, smallminded, backward vileness.

Which I'm very sure happens country/UKwide, but I post as I find, and I'm finding far more of this around here than I used to before I moved into the area.

BUT I am very much NOT saying that 'all' SA-area dwellers think like this, or that all that do are Welsh/SA-area natives anyway.

*More relevantly though* -- how the hell do you even _start_ to challenge or question people who are _determined_ to think that benefit claimants are scammers and that the disabled are frauds?


People just *want* to believe it .... my current pessimism knows few bounds about this ...


----------



## William of Walworth (Aug 15, 2012)

Thought occurred that posting today's obituary of Alf Morris by Andrew Roth might be appropriate here.

A determined voice/campaigner for the sick and disabled, back in the days when Labour still
 had some good'uns, actually achieving stuff!


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 12, 2012)

Just read this....



> Disability hate crime and three wishes for our Paralympic legacy
> 
> By Katharine Quarmby
> http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2012...e-and-three-wishes-for-our-paralympic-legacy/


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 12, 2012)

What i dont understand is why people would want to attack somebody in a wheelchair. I mean what the fuck? Really? I suppose some people are just cunts and bullies but even so. How can the default assumption about people in wheelchairs now be that they are faking it or has there always been that prejudice and they are just findin an extra "reason" for it? 

Has there always been a proportion of disability hate crime or has this got drastically worse in the last few years?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 12, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> Has there always been a proportion of disability hate crime or has this got drastically worse in the last few years?


It's always been around, but much worse lately.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 12, 2012)

What the fuck?

Are the people committing these crimes young teenagers or are they older?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 13, 2012)

All ages, although the ganging up in jeering groups is usually teenagers.


----------



## ericjarvis (Sep 13, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> What i dont understand is why people would want to attack somebody in a wheelchair. I mean what the fuck? Really? I suppose some people are just cunts and bullies but even so. How can the default assumption about people in wheelchairs now be that they are faking it or has there always been that prejudice and they are just findin an extra "reason" for it?


 
I think we've just become a nation of bullies.



frogwoman said:


> Has there always been a proportion of disability hate crime or has this got drastically worse in the last few years?


 
Yes and yes.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 13, 2012)

I just can't understand why though  I know kids are cruel to one another when at school and I was bullied at school at times because of behaving "weirdly" but for a grown adult to physically attack somebody in a wheelchair or who is blind? What the fuck? I mean seriously? I don't understand it. I know that a lot of racism etc happens because people feel "threatened" but what is threatening about somebody in a wheelchair?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 13, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> How can the default assumption about people in wheelchairs now be that they are faking it


When my husband was last verbally abused for not really being blind there was a) an assumption that he must be fraudulently claiming benefits whereas he works and b) he clearly was too independent to really be blind. Interestingly since he got a Guide Dog the only attack he's suffered on the street was a woman setting her Staff to attack the Guide dog and finding it hilarious, rather than a direct attack on him.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 13, 2012)

But surely if somebody is carrying a cane for being blind or is in some disability aid thing how can people look at that and think "nah they must be faking it" do people actually think people choose to be in wheelchairs by choice? who the fuck would choose to be pushed around in a wheelchair? How can anyone believe this shit?

who the fuck would fake being disabled? Do people actually think this is real??


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 13, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> But surely if somebody is carrying a cane for being blind or is in some disability aid thing how can people look at that and think "nah they must be faking it"


To be honest, the media view of having a disability (esp. fictional portrayal) is that of being utterly incapable and requiring help 24/7 so seeing someone who is moving about with skill & confidence confounds prejudice and so obviously, they must be fake.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 13, 2012)

but it's so obvious, a healthy person would not be pushed around in a wheelchair ffs. i've been in the position where I needed help to go to the toilet etc, thank fuck it was only for a couple of days, but do people honestly think somebody would fake losing the use of their legs say or having to carry a stick just so that they could get some money! i've been in the position where I could not walk and can quite honestly say i would never want to go through that again, let alone fake not being able to walk and having people help me to the toilet despite the fact that I could walk, I found it so humiliating and disgusting. How can people be so thick? I do not fucking understand unless they are just cunts and are using the scrounger/faking it thing as an excuse.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 13, 2012)

Do old people fake having Parkinsons or whatever? I mean jesus! that's the level of stupidity we're looking at here, I cannot believe how anyone could think this is real. I know you get some stupid people in the world but fucking hell!

Btw Im not doubting what you're saying I just find it so hard to get my head around anyone being so stupid.


----------



## treelover (Sep 13, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> But surely if somebody is carrying a cane for being blind or is in some disability aid thing how can people look at that and think "nah they must be faking it" do people actually think people choose to be in wheelchairs by choice? who the fuck would choose to be pushed around in a wheelchair? How can anyone believe this shit?
> 
> who the fuck would fake being disabled? Do people actually think this is real??


 
Little Britain may provide some of the answer..


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 13, 2012)

treelover said:


> 'Welfare to Work policy 'casts the disabled as cheats'
> 
> Flagship initiative threatens safety of the disabled by suggesting that they are scroungers, say charities
> 
> ...


 
You gotta be pretty fucked up to launch physical attacks on disabled people, out of the blue.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 13, 2012)

treelover said:


> Little Britain may provide some of the answer..


 
Fuckin _hated  _that programme, me. Never mind attacking disabled people, Little Britain made me want to attack fat, testosterone- defficient baldies.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 13, 2012)

..


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 13, 2012)

treelover said:


> Little Britain may provide some of the answer..


It was happening long, long before Little Britain.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 13, 2012)

yeah, I've been diagnosed with various mental health problems as well. When applying to jobs I always put that there's nothing wrong with me even though there is.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 13, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> What i dont understand is why people would want to attack somebody in a wheelchair. I mean what the fuck? Really? I suppose some people are just cunts and bullies but even so. How can the default assumption about people in wheelchairs now be that they are faking it or has there always been that prejudice and they are just findin an extra "reason" for it?


 
Some people prefer scapegoats whom they believe can't fight back.



> Has there always been a proportion of disability hate crime or has this got drastically worse in the last few years?


 
It's always happened, but the scale has changed. It's much more prevalent now that it was 10 or even 5 years ago.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 13, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> I just can't understand why though  I know kids are cruel to one another when at school and I was bullied at school at times because of behaving "weirdly" but for a grown adult to physically attack somebody in a wheelchair or who is blind? What the fuck? I mean seriously? I don't understand it. I know that a lot of racism etc happens because people feel "threatened" but what is threatening about somebody in a wheelchair?


 
People have had at least 5 years of fairly overt indoctrination via the broadcast and print media, telling them that claimants are frauds and scroungers, and people with disabilities are the worst of the worst, pretending to be ill to get extra money.
No amount of reality can erase that messge from some of the minds it's been placed in, so people with disabilities are going to bear the brunt of such physical attacks on claimants for years to come.

I'd advise anyone who uses a walking stick to weight the bottom end, and practice swinging it through an arc at knee level.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 13, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Some people prefer scapegoats whom they believe can't fight back.
> 
> 
> 
> It's always happened, but the scale has changed. It's much more prevalent now that it was 10 or even 5 years ago.


 
It's the whole mindset of somebody looking at person in a wheelchair and thinking that they are faking it, not only is it abhorrent but to me it's completely incomprehensible , I mean what the fuck? Who looks at somebody in a wheelchair and thinks that? What's next, looking at a car-crash victim and thinking that they faked it in order to skive off work? I cannot get my head around this type of "thinking" at all.

nobody can actually believe this surely? it's more likely that they're just looking for any old excuse to be a cunt?


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 13, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> People have had at least 5 years of fairly overt indoctrination via the broadcast and print media, telling them that claimants are frauds and scroungers, and people with disabilities are the worst of the worst, pretending to be ill to get extra money.
> No amount of reality can erase that messge from some of the minds it's been placed in, so people with disabilities are going to bear the brunt of such physical attacks on claimants for years to come.
> 
> I'd advise anyone who uses a walking stick to weight the bottom end, and practice swinging it through an arc at knee level.


 
would a grown adult really attack somebody in a wheelchair because of what it said in a newspaper though? are they just bullies/sadists looking for a target?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 13, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> But surely if somebody is carrying a cane for being blind or is in some disability aid thing how can people look at that and think "nah they must be faking it" do people actually think people choose to be in wheelchairs by choice? who the fuck would choose to be pushed around in a wheelchair? How can anyone believe this shit?
> 
> who the fuck would fake being disabled? Do people actually think this is real??


 
They do.

My paternal grandad died in '94, at the age of 82. from the age of 55-onward he was blind, so he learned to get around places he knew by learning the combinations of distance and directions to get from one place to another. Being able to do so competently and only carrying his cane in places he wasn't used to meant that he'd occasionally get people saying "you can't be blind", at which point he'd take his shades off and peel back his eyelids showing empty sockets (he didn't get on with glass eyes, they made his sockets itch, apparently!  ). Great trick though, because it would totally gross out the no-mark who'd questioned his blindness.


----------



## dennisr (Sep 13, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> yeah, I've been diagnosed with various mental health problems as well. When applying to jobs I always put that there's nothing wrong with me even though there is.


 
mental health issues are the hardest ones for people to understand, imho - folk just don't get it -  "pull yourself to together", "stop being so selfish", "other folk have real problems". I've seen close up how hard it can be for (ex) partner trying to move on from / deal with ongoing serious depression problems. I sometimes, to my shame, found it hard to put up with myself.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 13, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> he didn't get on with glass eyes


Neither do I! When clearing my M-I-L's place after she died I found a beautiful little box amongst her petticoats in a chest of drawers...imagining a little brooch perhaps, I opened it...her late husband's glass eye...bit of a shock, that.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 13, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> would a grown adult really attack somebody in a wheelchair because of what it said in a newspaper though? are they just bullies/sadists looking for a target?


 
It's not just "what it said in a newspaper" though, is it? It's near-relentless, this barrage of disablism in the last 5 years or so. It's in papers, it's the subject of radio phone-ins and TV docos, and it's constantly reinforced by one-sided shite like "Saints or Sinners", where the coverage is deliberately skewed so that more benefit cheats than "saints" are shown in each episode.
You've also got issues like the coverage about Remploy, where the emphasis is continually made about subsidy while missing the point that Remploy has been and could be self-sustaining if the management hadn't redefined the capabilities of the workforce downward and let decent contracts slip in order to facilitate a run-down of the Remploy operation.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 13, 2012)

Yeah. You could be right, sorry. It's just that I gave the human race a bit more credit than that. I'm not doubting any of what you're saying. I just find it completely incomprehensible why anyone would choose to behave in that way.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 13, 2012)

...a further report on the rise of disability hate crime...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19589602


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 13, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> but it's so obvious, a healthy person would not be pushed around in a wheelchair ffs. i've been in the position where I needed help to go to the toilet etc, thank fuck it was only for a couple of days, but do people honestly think somebody would fake losing the use of their legs say or having to carry a stick just so that they could get some money! i've been in the position where I could not walk and can quite honestly say i would never want to go through that again, let alone fake not being able to walk and having people help me to the toilet despite the fact that I could walk, I found it so humiliating and disgusting. How can people be so thick? I do not fucking understand unless they are just cunts and are using the scrounger/faking it thing as an excuse.


 
Using a wheelchair or a stick/sticks/crutches has an impact on your health anyway, so anyone supposedly "faking" in the medium to long term is merely buying themselves joint problems down the line, as well as connective tissue and muscle problems almost straight away.


----------



## Blagsta (Sep 13, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> I just can't understand why though  I know kids are cruel to one another when at school and I was bullied at school at times because of behaving "weirdly" but for a grown adult to physically attack somebody in a wheelchair or who is blind? What the fuck? I mean seriously? I don't understand it. I know that a lot of racism etc happens because people feel "threatened" but what is threatening about somebody in a wheelchair?



It reminds people of their own vulnerabilities.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 13, 2012)

treelover said:


> Little Britain may provide some of the answer..


 
Little Britian is shit and unfunny, but it didn't create a problem, it just picked up on a perception and ran with it.
Wouldn't expect anything different from something written by a couple of quintessentially middle-class tossers.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 13, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> would a grown adult really attack somebody in a wheelchair because of what it said in a newspaper though? are they just bullies/sadists looking for a target?


 
They do it because a politically-motivated narrative ("disabled people are scroungers") has been allowed to be disseminated long enough and intensely enough that the narrative has become naturalised (i.e. taken up as "commonsense") by some people, and not just the archetypal "ignorant thickoes" that the media like to attribute such actions to, but by people who should know much better.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 13, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Neither do I! When clearing my M-I-L's place after she died I found a beautiful little box amongst her petticoats in a chest of drawers...imagining a little brooch perhaps, I opened it...her late husband's glass eye...bit of a shock, that.


 
They're quite beautiful, in a weird way, although I can see as how having a disembodied orb staring up at you from a box could be disconcerting.


----------



## _angel_ (Sep 13, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's not just "what it said in a newspaper" though, is it? It's near-relentless, this barrage of disablism in the last 5 years or so. It's in papers, it's the subject of radio phone-ins and TV docos, and it's constantly reinforced by one-sided shite like "Saints or Sinners", where the coverage is deliberately skewed so that more benefit cheats than "saints" are shown in each episode.
> You've also got issues like the coverage about Remploy, where the emphasis is continually made about subsidy while missing the point that Remploy has been and could be self-sustaining if the management hadn't redefined the capabilities of the workforce downward and let decent contracts slip in order to facilitate a run-down of the Remploy operation.


The "lefty" BBC who probably genuinely think they are fairminded because they feature one or two "genuine" claimants.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 13, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> Yeah. You could be right, sorry. It's just that I gave the human race a bit more credit than that. I'm not doubting any of what you're saying. I just find it completely incomprehensible why anyone would choose to behave in that way.


 
Because not everyone is either as open-minded or as able to think critically as you are, unfortunately shit like this will happen.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 13, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> The "lefty" BBC who probably genuinely think they are fairminded because they feature one or two "genuine" claimants.


 
Well quite. They sell themseles as neutral while retailing government and establishment propaganda.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 13, 2012)

So are these people the type of people who never grow out of calling people spastics in the playground or whatever or have they been persuaded ideologically that this is a good idea?


----------



## _angel_ (Sep 13, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> would a grown adult really attack somebody in a wheelchair because of what it said in a newspaper though? are they just bullies/sadists looking for a target?


I don't know why, but an office I worked at bitched relentlessly about having to put in a ramp for a wheelchair user, and how much inconvenience she was causing and the implication that she didn't really need to be in the wheelchair and was somehow doing it for effect. There's no end to how small minded some people could be.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 13, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> They're quite beautiful, in a weird way, although I can see as how having a disembodied orb staring up at you from a box could be disconcerting.


Well, it was because it was so unexpected...it is beautiful though and it didn't go to the Charity shop but was brought back in my pocket.


----------



## BigTom (Sep 13, 2012)

BBC reporting on this today:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19589602



> There has been a rise in hate crimes against disabled people, police figures for England, Wales and Northern Ireland show.
> 
> More than 2,000 such offences were recorded in 2011, up a third on 2010. Police said this was partly due to an increased willingness to report crimes.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 13, 2012)

I'm not surprised it's happening though. In hard times a group is always scapegoated whether it be immigrants, Jews or 'Useless Eaters'.


----------



## treelover (Sep 13, 2012)

They have just discussed it on Sky's Paper Review, both the guests inc the Sun's associate editor(ex NOTW) expressing bafflement as to why it is happening, he was on only a couple of weeks ago going on about feckless disability claimants, such self awareness, not...


----------



## Nylock (Sep 14, 2012)

Clearly trying to distance himself so he doesn't look so culpable....


----------



## shagnasty (Sep 14, 2012)

A gruan article says that 1.2% of hate crime is against the disabled ,most are rascist attacks, but many attacks i expect are not reported


----------



## shagnasty (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I'm not surprised it's happening though. In hard times a group is always scapegoated whether it be immigrants, Jews or 'Useless Eaters'.


In nazi germany the jews were blamed for almost everything bad even for the losing of WW1,oh and add in the communists


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

They killed disabled people (including kids) to begin with. No one made a big fuss about the 'useless eaters' and they honed their killing techniques on them first. It started pretty much as soon as Hitler came to power.


----------



## _angel_ (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> They killed disabled people (including kids) to begin with. No one made a big fuss about the 'useless eaters' and they honed their killing techniques on them first. It started pretty much as soon as Hitler came to power.


I thought there actually was a reaction to this, when they did it blatantly.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Not really.
> 
> You're always going to have a percentage of people who buy into hate of various sorts because they *need* to do so. It stops them looking inward and hating themselves.


 


It's a pity, because hating yourself is far more entertaining.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> It's a pity, because hating yourself is far more entertaining.


You first.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 14, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> I thought there actually was a reaction to this, when they did it blatantly.


 
there was. they were forced to stop aktion-T4 in 1940, or at least stop doing it openly


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> You first.


 

Just so much better to look inside at the infinitely fascinating, but ultimately repugnant, self instead of at the relatively uninteresting other.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> there was. they were forced to stop aktion-T4 in 1940, or at least stop doing it openly


The last child to be killed at Hadamar was a four-year boy. Late May 1945. A month after Hitler's death. It never stopped until the Allies got there.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> The last child to be killed at Hadamar was a four-year boy. Late May 1945. A month after Hitler's death. It never stopped until the Allies got there.


Bloody hell!  

Thank you for mentioning that.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Just so much better to look inside at the infinitely fascinating, but ultimately repugnant, self instead of at the relatively uninteresting other.


You think so?  You're welcome to it.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

I heard heart-breaking testimony from a woman who, as the child of alcoholic parents, was about to be killed at Hadamar, but at the last moment one of the nurses saved her. She was only saved because the Nurse didn't this she was disabled enough. As it happens she wasn't disabled at all.


----------



## treelover (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> They killed disabled people (including kids) to begin with. No one made a big fuss about the 'useless eaters' and they honed their killing techniques on them first. It started pretty much as soon as Hitler came to power.


 



> Leading Catholic churchmen, led by Cardinal Michael von Faulhaber of Munich, wrote privately to the government protesting against the policy. In July 1941 the Church broke its silence when a pastoral letter from the bishops was read out in all churches, declaring that it was wrong to kill (except in self-defence or in a morally justified war).[73] This emboldened Catholics to make more outspoken protests. A few weeks after the pastoral letter was read out, the Catholic Bishop of Münster in Westphalia, Clemens August Graf von Galen, publicly denounced the T4 programme in a sermon, and telegrammed his text to Hitler, calling on "the Führer to defend the people against the Gestapo". "It is a terrible, unjust and catastrophic thing when man opposes his will to the will of God", Galen said. "We are talking about men and women, our compatriots, our brothers and sisters. Poor unproductive people if you wish, but does this mean that they have lost their right to live?"[74] R
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_T4


 
That's not completely true, opposition was nowhere near enough to Action T4 but it did happen and at times was robust, this was particularly so with the Catholic Church in Germany, though not the Protestant one...


----------



## _angel_ (Sep 14, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> there was. they were forced to stop aktion-T4 in 1940, or at least stop doing it openly


Yeah I think the only thing was the openess compared to doing it in secret.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

For a long time we wondered whether my husband's uncle was killed because of a disability but it turned out he was slave labour and worked to death. The whole disability thing was something we really looked at, everything we could find, aided by the fact that my husband speaks fluent German. We know more than we ever wished to discover.


----------



## treelover (Sep 14, 2012)

> By August the protests had spread to Bavaria. According to Gitta Sereny, Hitler himself was jeered by an angry crowd at Hof – the only time he was opposed in public during his 12 years of rule.[77][78] Despite his private fury, Hitler knew that he could not afford a confrontation with the Church at a time when Germany was engaged in a life-and-death war, a belief which was reinforced by the advice of Goebbels,


 
Didn't know that, so people could protest and get away with it?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

Well, as I understand it, Gita Sereny got one 'hearsay' report about that.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 14, 2012)

treelover said:


> Didn't know that, so people could protest and get away with it?


 
just on that one issue though. they knew that they couldn't afford to fuck with the churches. other people who tried to protest about other shit got locked up, there were no strikes, etc.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> The last child to be killed at Hadamar was a four-year boy. Late May 1945. A month after Hitler's death. It never stopped until the Allies got there.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> You think so? You're welcome to it.


 

Thank you. However, we'd better stop disrupting the thread and get back to the subject of the forthcoming Nazi holocaust against the disabled of the UK (engineered by the government at the behest of Little Britain.)


----------



## treelover (Sep 14, 2012)

Shouldn't forget Freud and the DWP call disabled claimants, 'stock'


----------



## treelover (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Thank you. However, we'd better stop disrupting the thread and get back to the subject of the forthcoming Nazi holocaust against the disabled of the UK (engineered by the government at the behest of Little Britain.)


 
Crass and silly post, though of course people are indeed losing their lives, ending them...


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

treelover said:


> Crass and silly post, though of course people are indeed losing their lives, ending them...


 

Maybe-but I see no evidence of an ongoing, low-level street war against people in wheelchairs or with mental health problems.


----------



## _angel_ (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Maybe-but I see no evidence of an ongoing, low-level street war against people in wheelchairs or with mental health problems.


Maybe because you're not in that position yourself. Seriously this is like when blokes reckon women don't get harassed/ attacked as much as they do etc.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> Maybe because you're not in that position yourself. Seriously this is like when blokes reckon women don't get harassed/ attacked as much as they do etc.


 

I know disabled people though-I'll have to get round to asking them if people are spitting on them in the street or verbally abusing them wherever they go, as I'm in a very busy city centre almost every day, where there are the usual percentage of the disabled, and have never once stumbled across an incident of this kind.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

"the disabled"  Just one big amorphous group of "other"


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> "the disabled"  Just one big amorphous group of "other"


 

It's how they're termed in the thread title. It's posts on a messageboard, not a PhD thesis. Climb down.


----------



## xenon (Sep 14, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> So are these people the type of people who never grow out of calling people spastics in the playground or whatever or have they been persuaded ideologically that this is a good idea?



IME as well as the media narative VP talks about. The sort of person liable to abuse a disabled person in the street, are cowardly and is often quite frankly, either a semi verbally capable drunk fuckup or a moronic kid with their mates. 
Unfortunately there will always be week minded peple who see someone they perceive as weeker than them, as a target,they can use  to momentarily eliviate their own insecurities.

Obviously though, this poisonness anti bennefit propergander creates an atmosphere where abusive behaviour towards claiments, the poor, disabled, etc, is seemingly, if not overtly described as justified, not liable to severe senture.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I know disabled people though-I'll have to get round to asking them if people are spitting on them in the street or verbally abusing them wherever they go, as I'm in a very busy city centre almost every day, where there are the usual percentage of the disabled, and have never once stumbled across an incident of this kind.


 
When I was at the Olympic Park the other week, I heard a suited city gent type complaining that the mobility scooters shouldn't be allowed in the Park.

Hardly spitting or verbally abusing but considering where he was....


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> When I was at the Olympic Park the other week, I heard a suited city gent type complaining that the mobility scooters shouldn't be allowed in the Park.
> 
> Hardly spitting or verbally abusing but considering where he was....


 

Hardly Hitler though, is it?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

In the Independent today

http://www.independent.co.uk/hei-fi...by-a-third-8139004.html?origin=internalSearch


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Sep 14, 2012)

Is there evidence that one could reasonably cite showing that the government has been inciting hatred against disabled people?

For example, is there solid evidence linking such stories in the press to a PR agency known to work for the relevant departments?

I don't doubt that the government are encouraging such hatred, but it would be nice to be able to _prove_ it ...


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Is there evidence that one could reasonably cite showing that the government has been inciting hatred against disabled people?
> 
> For example, is there solid evidence linking such stories in the press to a PR agency known to work for the relevant departments?
> 
> I don't doubt that the government are encouraging such hatred, but it would be nice to be able to _prove_ it ...


 
Giving false figures to the papers?


----------



## treelover (Sep 14, 2012)

Its not about deliberately leaking stories about disabled people, perce, its disabled claimants, and all govt's have been doing it for years..

but the effect/consequences are the same..


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> So are these people the type of people who never grow out of calling people spastics in the playground or whatever or have they been persuaded ideologically that this is a good idea?


 
I think it's more subtle than being ideologically-persuaded. I think it's of a piece (although a recent-ish addition to) with the whole "work ethic" _schtick_ we're indoctrinated into, especially (but not exclusively) if you were educated post-Thatcher. You're given a drip-drip-drip of how work is good, idleness is bad - in fact even enforced idleness is bad - and if the the *act* of idleness is bad, how much worse must the people carrying out the act be? Leaven that with the sort of individualism Thatcherism preached and preaches, and you've an effective recipe for the poor and the lame to get fucked over by people, high or low, who viscerally feel they have a perfect right to chastise disabled people for soaking up their taxes.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 14, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> I think it's more subtle than being ideologically-persuaded. I think it's of a piece (although a recent-ish addition to) with the whole "work ethic" _schtick_ we're indoctrinated into, especially (but not exclusively) if you were educated post-Thatcher. You're given a drip-drip-drip of how work is good, idleness is bad - in fact even enforced idleness is bad - and if the the *act* of idleness is bad, how much worse must the people carrying out the act be? Leaven that with the sort of individualism Thatcherism preached and preaches, and you've an effective recipe for the poor and the lame to get fucked over by people, high or low, who viscerally feel they have a perfect right to chastise disabled people for soaking up their taxes.


 


Am i right in thinking that disability hate crime has always been a problem though?

what form did it used to take before the scrounger thing?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> Am i right in thinking that disability hate crime has always been a problem though?
> 
> what form did it used to take before the scrounger thing?


 
Usually verbals, but that's bad enough even if you're able to look after yourself, and the usual "blood in the water" rules apply: Show fear and they abusers will circle like sharks.
The spitting and physical assault stuff, that's not new, but does seem to be far more prevalent than even in the "unenlightened" '70s and '80s.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 14, 2012)

so what kind of things do they say, do you get people expressing views like that disabled people should be sterilised and the like? what motivations did they have (or say they had) before? i am sorry to seem so naive but i almost cannot believe that this happens, it is so awful and incomprehensible.


----------



## _angel_ (Sep 14, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> I think it's more subtle than being ideologically-persuaded. I think it's of a piece (although a recent-ish addition to) with the whole "work ethic" _schtick_ we're indoctrinated into, especially (but not exclusively) if you were educated post-Thatcher. You're given a drip-drip-drip of how work is good, idleness is bad - in fact even enforced idleness is bad - and if the the *act* of idleness is bad, how much worse must the people carrying out the act be? Leaven that with the sort of individualism Thatcherism preached and preaches, and you've an effective recipe for the poor and the lame to get fucked over by people, high or low, who viscerally feel they have a perfect right to chastise disabled people for soaking up their taxes.


"economic wellbeing" is now taught in schools and they have it everywhere, even special schools and respite centres. I mean, what the fuck?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

On the news right now that more guide dogs are being attacked than at any other time


----------



## BigTom (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> It's how they're termed in the thread title. It's posts on a messageboard, not a PhD thesis. Climb down.


 
No it's not. In the titled the term used is "disabled people" not "the disabled"


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

BigTom said:


> No it's not. In the titled the term used is "disabled people" not "the disabled"


 


So what? Get a grip.


----------



## BigTom (Sep 14, 2012)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Is there evidence that one could reasonably cite showing that the government has been inciting hatred against disabled people?
> 
> For example, is there solid evidence linking such stories in the press to a PR agency known to work for the relevant departments?
> 
> I don't doubt that the government are encouraging such hatred, but it would be nice to be able to _prove_ it ...


 
You don't need to look far in articles for quotes from ministers or government sources, for example this from IDS recently on hardship payments & unemployed people:



> Hardship payments should be just that — payments you receive when you are in a temporary, difficult financial situation.
> 
> “We don’t expect them to be used to fund life’s extras such as nights out, holidays or subscription TV.


 
I know that's not about disabled people but it is one that sprung to mind and does the same thing to a different group of people. Look at articles about disbaled people and you will find ministers constantly talking about the amount of fraud (even though it's tiny) and going on about how many people are scamming the system etc..


----------



## BigTom (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> So what? Get a grip.


 
Just pointing out your error, the thread being titled very differently from the term you used. No desire to derail this thread with arguments about the importance of the language we use and how it makes other people feel, since you obviously don't care.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

BigTom said:


> Just pointing out your error, the thread being titled very differently from the term you used. No desire to derail this thread with arguments about the importance of the language we use and how it makes other people feel, since you obviously don't care.


 


I do not care about this prissy concern with words, no. As if insisting on politically correct language ever changed anything. (And before anybody starts, 'perceptions' may change but conditions usually continue to deteriorate, maybe because people started to mistake pseudo-politics for politics.)


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

Lletsa - just fuck off.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> On the news right now that more guide dogs are being attacked than at any other time


Yup  It's happened to my husband's dog. It was deliberate, not an out of control dog. Luckily no injury thanks to intervention by others.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Wilf said:


> Lletsa - just fuck off.


 

Simmer down; control your temper.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Simmer down; control your temper.


 ... and the reason you can fuck off is that you choose to enter this discussion by pissing about on semantics and the precise calibration of words and extents. There are real attacks taking place on disabled people - political, economic and physical.  Amid all that, choosing to enter the thread in the way you have is telling.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

'twas ever thus. He's a professional miserablist with no clear agenda other than being irksome.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> 'twas ever thus. He's a professional miserablist with no clear agenda other than being irksome.


 Yep, Lletsa's above the fray grandeur is really just another form of teenage sneering.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Yup  It's happened to my husband's dog. It was deliberate, not an out of control dog. Luckily no injury thanks to intervention by others.


 
Yeah, my first thought was remembering your husband's dog


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Yeah, my first thought was remembering your husband's dog


When he got his first dog, the trainer told him about someone else in Brixton whose Guide Dog was semi-disembowelled. The dog survived but the owner was so traumatised she hardly goes out any more.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> When he got his first dog, the trainer told him about someone else in Brixton whose Guide Dog was semi-disembowelled. The dog survived but the owner was so traumatised she hardly goes out any more.


 
FFS


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)




----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> So what? Get a grip.


 
"So what"?
I'll treat your question as a serious one, just so that you hopefully won't repeat your error when talking with a disabled person who's in a bad mood and get chinned.

Disabled people/people with disabilities etc = fine. The phrases mentions them as people who have some form of impairment.
The disabled = not fine. Reduces people to the fact of their impairment.

You might say "well it's only words", but words can affect attitudes, and referring to "the disabled"? Well, it's not very nice. Would you refer to a friend with demntia as "the demented"?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

Guide Dogs for the Blind are campaigning hard for attacks on Guide Dogs to be treated as an attack on the Guide Dog owner.




			
				GDBA said:
			
		

> "Introducing tougher sentencing guidelines for owners of dangerous dogs is a step in the right direction but doesn't go far enough. We would like to see tougher sentences for dog owners whose dogs attack guide dogs and other assistance dogs, with these attacks treated as an attack on a person.
> "Guide dog owners are uniquely disadvantaged. As they cannot see, they cannot anticipate an attack on their dog or easily avoid these incidents. The impact of an attack on a guide dog by another is devastating. Guide dog owners rely on their dogs to get out and about. If a dog is injured or has to be retrained, they have to rely on friends and family to do the everyday things that the rest of us take for granted. If a dog has to retire following an attack it is distressing for the guide dog owner, who then has to wait to train with another dog.
> "There are examples across the world where courts have taken the view that an attack on a guide dog is an attack on a person. Guide Dogs would like to see sentencing taking into account the full impact of an attack on an assistance dogs and treat it as an attack on the person."


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I do not care about this prissy concern with words, no. As if insisting on politically correct language ever changed anything. (And before anybody starts, 'perceptions' may change but conditions usually continue to deteriorate, maybe because people started to mistake pseudo-politics for politics.)


 
Twat, it's nothing to do with old-style identity politics or "political correctness", it's everything to do with how people are represented, and how that can affect them in either a good or bad way.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

Wilf said:


> ... and the reason you can fuck off is that you choose to enter this discussion by pissing about on semantics and the precise calibration of words and extents. There are real attacks taking place on disabled people - political, economic and physical. Amid all that, choosing to enter the thread in the way you have is telling.


 
But they're obviously not too bad or all of his friends with disablities would have told him about it!


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Wilf said:


> ... and the reason you can fuck off is that you choose to enter this discussion by pissing about on semantics and the precise calibration of words and extents. There are real attacks taking place on disabled people - political, economic and physical. Amid all that, choosing to enter the thread in the way you have is telling.


 

Telling my arse-it's a thread on a messageboard, full of the usual windbags. It isn't real.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> It isn't real.


It was real when my friend got punched in the face because she wouldn't let a random drunk push her wheelchair. It was real when a friend with learning disabilities was kicked and punched, it was real when a woman set her Staff on my husband's Guide-Dog and laughed, it's real that you're a talentless sneering cunt. The latter isn't a disability hate-crime though, just an observation on a major character defect.


----------



## spirals (Sep 14, 2012)

I've been abused in the street for being disabled. It was two months ago. It's a horrible experience and I'm still on edge when outside now because of it.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Telling my arse-it's a thread on a messageboard, full of the usual windbags. It isn't real.


I was going to reply but Mrs M does it much better.

Edit: actually, no, I'll allow myself a question Lletsa:  why do you think people are posting on this thread, why do you think they are angry?  Do you think they are just playing games or might just be involved in campaigning and/or have some personal experience of abuse? What do you think?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

It's shit, isn't spirals?


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> "So what"?
> I'll treat your question as a serious one, just so that you hopefully won't repeat your error when talking with a disabled person who's in a bad mood and get chinned.
> 
> Disabled people/people with disabilities etc = fine. The phrases mentions them as people who have some form of impairment.
> ...


 

Have you any evidence that most people with disabilities care how they are described?

Most of my friends seem to have dementia these days.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> It was real when my friend got punched in the face because she wouldn't let a random drunk push her wheelchair. It was real when a friend with learning disabilities was kicked and punched, it was real when a woman set her Staff on my husband's Guide-Dog and laughed, it's real that you're a talentless sneering cunt. The latter isn't a disability hate-crime though, just an observation on a major character defect.


 

Those things may or may not have happened-but what isn't real is the idea that the windbaggery on here actually matters.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Have you any evidence that most people with disabilities care how they are described?


Wogs, slags, arse bandits, windae lickers... yeah, all good stuff, nobody cares...


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> *Those things may or may not have happened*-but what isn't real is the idea that the windbaggery on here actually matters.


Nasty, very nasty.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Those things may or may not have happened-but what isn't real is the idea that the windbaggery on here actually matters.


 
Can't you fuck off to another thread and annoy people


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Wilf said:


> Nasty, very nasty.


 
Not in the least bit nasty-it's a messageboard.  Christ, the self-important pomposity of some of you.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Wilf said:


> Wogs, slags, arse bandits, windae lickers... yeah, all good stuff, nobody cares...


 

Who's arguing in favour of insulting language? Not me.

Is there any evidence that the lives of those who some once (and some still do) refer to in those terms has improved in material terms because fewer do it now?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Not in the least bit nasty-it's a messageboard. Christ, the self-important pomposity of some of you.


 It's nasty because you are implying Mrs M might be lying (there can be no other interpretation - she's referring to things that happened to her husband and 2 friends, people she is directly linked to).  If you are, just come out and say it.


----------



## xenon (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Yup  It's happened to my husband's dog. It was deliberate, not an out of control dog. Luckily no injury thanks to intervention by others.



Unfuckingbelieable.  Well, unfortunately it's not. scumb bastards.

My friend's guide dog was attacked by an out of control dog, it's circa 13 YO handler couldn't look after. Had form for it too we found out after. Dog had done something similar in another area. Luckily again, a guy stopped and got out of his car and physically pulled the dog away before too much damage done. Not deliberate but a lot of that goes on too I'd imagine. Fairplay to the guy who interviened, the attacking dog was a Rotweiler. So at least it's nice to see there are mostly still decent peple about.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Have you any evidence that most people with disabilities care how they are described?
> 
> Most of my friends seem to have dementia these days.


I care how people describe me. I want to be described by what I can do, not what I can't. I don't want people calling me a cripple on my bad days because I can't walk properly.

Is that evidence good enough for you?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> *Who's arguing in favour of insulting language? Not me*.
> 
> Is there any evidence that the lives of those who some once (and some still do) refer to in those terms has improved in material terms because fewer do it now?


 Your view, as expressed on this thread, seems to be is that it doesn't matter if people are abused and that it makes no difference to their lives.  My evidence for that?  Your words.


----------



## spirals (Sep 14, 2012)

I care how I am described, I care how my husband and step son (both with degenerative diseases) are described. That good enough?


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> I care how people describe me. I want to be described by what I can do, not what I can't. I don't want people calling me a cripple on my bad days because I can't walk properly.
> 
> Is that evidence good enough for you?


 

Unless you're the official spokeswoman for most people with disabilities, then no, not really.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Those things may or may not have happened-but what isn't real is the idea that the windbaggery on here actually matters.


Mrs M said they did happen - are you implying she's a liar? 

The only windbaggery I see on this thread is yours, to be honest.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> I care how people describe me. I want to be described by what I can do, not what I can't. I don't want people calling me a cripple on my bad days because I can't walk properly.
> 
> Is that evidence good enough for you?


 100% true for me as well. My health problems mean I go from sometimes not being to walk at all to walking reasonable distances. I'm in work and have a car so my (lack of) poverty mean I'm not in the same position as many other disabled people. However, when I'm walking with a stick I do get abuse from time to time and it's not nice. That's also, Lletsa, why I'm so pissed off at your juvenile games.


----------



## xenon (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Not in the least bit nasty-it's a messageboard.  Christ, the self-important pomposity of some of you.



"May or may not have happened." That's a pretty offensive thing to say to someone who's relaying real world incidents of disabled people being attacked.

None of this "windbaggery" matters. . If you think discussion, sharing experiences, ideas have no useful purpose, you're lost.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Unless you're the official spokeswoman for most people with disabilities, then no, not really.


Right. You asked for evidence if it mattered how disabled people were described. I said it did, and you say 'you're not the official spokeswoman, so your evidence doesn't count'.

Lets face it, you don't think anyone with a disability actually has valid opinions, do you?


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Unless you're the official spokeswoman for most people with disabilities, then no, not really.


You nasty cunt! Fuck off!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Have you any evidence that most people with disabilities care how they are described?


 
Besides the fact that it's visibly formed the backbone of activism by disabled people for more than 30 years, you mean?



> Most of my friends seem to have dementia these days.


 
Liar.

You don't have any friends.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> I care how people describe me. I want to be described by what I can do, not what I can't. I don't want people calling me a cripple on my bad days because I can't walk properly.
> 
> Is that evidence good enough for you?


 
LLETSA has an odd relationship with evidence. He demands it from others, but believes he's personally exempt from supplying it to back up what he claims.

In other words, he's a shit-stirrer.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Maybe-but I see no evidence of an ongoing, low-level street war against people in wheelchairs or with mental health problems.


Really?  Perhaps you're not listening hard enough, or looking in the right places.  

It's not always that visible, it can be more subtle:  Blocking a wheelchair which was trying to reach the bus, or having a row with a disabled adult beginning your rant with "people like you shouldn't... [be allowed out, have children, go on holiday, use public transport]"

As for your claim that politically correct labels allow people to fool themselves that everything's okay now, yes it might do that.  But using the wrong language encourages people to internalise barriers which have been created and sustained by society.  Change the label and you gradually change the mindset.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Not in the least bit nasty-it's a messageboard. Christ, the self-important pomposity of some of you.


Sweetie, this may be a game to you, but it's not to people who live with the situation every day.  Go and play on other threads, if play you must.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Wilf said:


> It's nasty because you are implying Mrs M might be lying (there can be no other interpretation - she's referring to things that happened to her husband and 2 friends, people she is directly linked to). If you are, just come out and say it.


 

As I said, it's a messageboard. I don't know the poster or if anything she says is true or not. End of story.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 14, 2012)

fucks sake it's like listening to a 12 year old arguing about bedtime


----------



## spirals (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> It's shit, isn't spirals?


It's horrible. I used to be able to shrug that sort of stuff off but I cried for hours after it. I still feel really sick and on edge if I'm out and about now. It was the unexpectedness of it all. You just don't expect to be shouted and sworn at because you walk with sticks


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Lets face it, you don't think anyone with a disability actually has valid opinions, do you?


 

God give me fucking strength.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> As I said, it's a messageboard. *I don't know the poster or if anything she says is true or not*. End of story.


 Jesus.   You've seen numerous posts from Mrs M on here, have you had a nagging doubt all along that she's a liar?  90% of posts might not be 'true' in the sense of not being instantly verifiable - but you chose _this_ issue, you chose to imply that _Mrs M specifically_ might be lying about the experiences of friends and loved ones.  Might be an idea to show a bit of class and apologise.


----------



## audiotech (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> God give me fucking strength.


 
Appealing to god, with the use of a profanity, in order to dig yourself out of the gutter you've put yourself in won't help.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 14, 2012)

Wilf said:


> Jesus.  You've seen numerous posts from Mrs M on here, have you had a nagging doubt all along that she's a liar? 90% of posts might not be 'true' in the sense of not being instantly verifiable - but you chose _this_ issue, you chose to imply that _Mrs M specifically_ might be lying about the experiences of friends and loved ones. Might be an idea to show a bit of class and apologise.


 

not going to happen. He's pissed himself in to a corner here,picking the wrong thread to do the routine, but apologise? don't hold your breath


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> Really? Perhaps you're not listening hard enough, or looking in the right places.
> 
> It's not always that visible, it can be more subtle: Blocking a wheelchair which was trying to reach the bus, or having a row with a disabled adult beginning your rant with "people like you shouldn't... [be allowed out, have children, go on holiday, use public transport]"



Exactly.  That comment about the suited twat in the Olympic Park making comments about mobility scooters was probably directed at us as there weren't any more in the immediate vicinity and he said it right on passing us


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> LLETSA has an odd relationship with evidence. He demands it from others, but believes he's personally exempt from supplying it to back up what he claims.
> 
> In other words, he's a shit-stirrer.


 


I have put forward opinions, pure and simple. So has everybody else.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> not going to happen. He's pissed himself in to a corner here,picking the wrong thread to do the routine, but apologise? don't hold your breath


 
Doubt it.  He started before on one of the  other threads didn't he


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I have put forward opinions, pure and simple. So has everybody else.


 
Difference is everyone else has listened to opinions and stories and believed them, unlike you


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I have put forward opinions, pure and simple. So has everybody else.


If I chose to practise sidekicks to above hip height in a public place and just one of them hit your groin hard, would you believe my claim that you doubled up because you were prissy or oversensitive?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> not going to happen. He's pissed himself in to a corner here,picking the wrong thread to do the routine, but apologise? don't hold your breath


 Suspect you're right. He's like a bewigged French aristocrat walking through urban waving his lace hanky and complaining about the smell.  Gets caught smearing shit on a wall and still holds his hands up to show how clean they are.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Wilf said:


> Wogs, slags, arse bandits, windae lickers... yeah, all good stuff, nobody cares...


 

It's a long way from merely saying in passing 'the disabled' and calling somebody a wog. You excitable bunch of twits.


----------



## xenon (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> As I said, it's a messageboard. I don't know the poster or if anything she says is true or not. End of story.




What. This isn't disinterested sinasism you know. It's a withdrawn and pathetic. 

Besides, generally the aproach in threads where someone is talking about serious real life experiences is to take what they say at face value unless, you have strong reason to doubt them. That way, if it  transpires they've lied, it's them that look the cunt, not you.


----------



## audiotech (Sep 14, 2012)




----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> God give me fucking strength.


Why should She bother when you refuse to do yourself any favours?


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> God give me fucking strength.


Give _you_ strength? Give me and other people with disabilities the fortitude to withstand the shit you say, more like.

Why did you come on this thread?


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

xenon said:


> This isn't disinterested sinasism


 

Sinasism has always been my problem, I'm afraid.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> It's a long way from merely saying in passing 'the disabled' and calling somebody a wog. You excitable bunch of twits.


Twits????? How old are you, 96??????

No-one's being excitable, but you're being offensive. Would you call someone excitable if they complained about being called 'the gays' or 'the pakis'?


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Sep 14, 2012)

The thread reminds me of this cunt.


----------



## _angel_ (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Give _you_ strength? Give me and other people with disabilities the fortitude to withstand the shit you say, more like.
> 
> Why did you come on this thread?


To wind everyone up, it's fair to see it's working.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> Really? Perhaps you're not listening hard enough, or looking in the right places.
> 
> It's not always that visible, it can be more subtle: Blocking a wheelchair which was trying to reach the bus, or having a row with a disabled adult beginning your rant with "people like you shouldn't... [be allowed out, have children, go on holiday, use public transport]"
> 
> As for your claim that politically correct labels allow people to fool themselves that everything's okay now, yes it might do that. But using the wrong language encourages people to internalise barriers which have been created and sustained by society. Change the label and you gradually change the mindset.


 


I can honestly say that when I'm out and about, I see more people assisting those with disabilities (is that an acceptable term?) than I do abusing them-which, as I've said, I've never personally witnessed.

Anyway, thinking about it, I suppose I could be classed as disabled technically-I've been completely deaf in one ear for about ten years now and having raging tinnitus and occasional dizziness. In noisy envirronments I have to maneouvre myself into a position where people talking to me are on my hearing side. I never talk about it though.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 14, 2012)

Captain Hurrah said:


> The thread reminds me of this cunt.


Ah fuck.. I'd forgotten about that.


----------



## _angel_ (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I can honestly say that when I'm out and about, I see more people assisting those with disabilities (is that an acceptable term?) than I do abusing them-which, as I've said, I've never personally witnessed.
> 
> Anyway, thinking about it, I suppose I could be classed as disabled technically-I've been completely deaf in one ear for about ten years now and having raging tinnitus and occasional dizziness. In noisy envirronments I have to maneouvre myself into a position where people talking to me are on my hearing side. I never talk about it though.


You probably wouldn't witness any harassment because the harassers would want to get their victims on their own, like all bullies do.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I can honestly say that when I'm out and about, I see more people assisting those with disabilities (is that an acceptable term?) than I do abusing them-which, as I've said, I've never personally witnessed.
> 
> Anyway, thinking about it, I suppose I could be classed as disabled technically-I've been completely deaf in one ear for about ten years now and having raging tinnitus and occasional dizziness. In noisy envirronments I have to maneouvre myself into a position where people talking to me are on my hearing side. I never talk about it though.


So because we do talk about disabilities, we're not as strong as you? And 'technically classed as disabled'??? What the hell are on you about? You either have a disability or you don't. You can't be 'technically disabled' anymore than you can be 'technically gay'.

Every post you're making is offensive.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I can honestly say that when I'm out and about, I see more people assisting those with disabilities (is that an acceptable term?) than I do abusing them-which, as I've said, I've never personally witnessed.
> 
> Anyway, thinking about it, I suppose I could be classed as disabled technically-I've been completely deaf in one ear for about ten years now and having raging tinnitus and occasional dizziness. In noisy envirronments I have to maneouvre myself into a position where people talking to me are on my hearing side. I never talk about it though.


"Disabled people" will do nicely but so (sometimes) will "people with disabilities".

BTW partial hearing loss + tinnitus (or any level of hearing impairment) isn't "disabled technically", it's "disabled" end of. And you should mention it (at least in passing), because otherwise people might not realise that background noise, looking away, or putting hands in front of their mouths while talking makes it a lot more difficult for you to work out what they're saying. Which can lead to them assuming that you're stupid, absentminded, rude, or lazy.

Let people think you're those things when you choose to be them, not by accident.


----------



## _angel_ (Sep 14, 2012)

I've always had problems in hearing people talk in a room of background noises. I actually swear this is why I did so shit on my language "listening" exams, you know the ones where they deliberately put a load of background noise on for "authenticity".


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I can honestly say that when I'm out and about, I see more people assisting those with disabilities (is that an acceptable term?) than I do abusing them-which, as I've said, I've never personally witnessed.
> 
> Anyway, thinking about it, I suppose I could be classed as disabled technically-I've been completely deaf in one ear for about ten years now and having raging tinnitus and occasional dizziness. In noisy envirronments I have to maneouvre myself into a position where people talking to me are on my hearing side. I never talk about it though.


 
Do many people get picked on for being half deaf then?


----------



## xenon (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Sinasism has always been my problem, I'm afraid.



Yeah but you're seemingly unable to recognise a lot of what you class as just message board piffle, is real. This isn't a joke or boast thread. Waving it all away as unimportant, meaningless, just makes you look like a bitter withdrawn socially disfunctionate teenager. (i know we're all a bit like that at times... OK me, but still.) Your world weary sinic shtick can't absolve you from being part of society. Of having your words being interpreted and reacted to.


----------



## xenon (Sep 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Do many people get picked on for being half deaf then?



TBF some probably do, yeah. Some arseholes will use anything deviating from apparent standard, to mock someone.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

xenon said:


> TBH some probably do, yeah. Some arseholes will use anything deviating from apparent standard, to mock someone.


 
Well I'm half deaf in one ear but nobody's ever picked on me.  I do get the normal "are you fucking deaf or something?" and when I reply yes, I get the oh-so-funny "what?" as if I've never heard that before, but twatface is just clutching at straws to try to cover his arse


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

Does anyone remember the end of Tod Brownings "Freaks"?


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Does anyone remember the end of Tod Brownings "Freaks"?


No......what happened?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Does anyone remember the end of Tod Brownings "Freaks"?


 
That's that circus thing isn't it?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

Report on guide dogs attacked on BBC now


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> So because we do talk about disabilities, we're not as strong as you? And 'technically classed as disabled'??? What the hell are on you about? You either have a disability or you don't. You can't be 'technically disabled' anymore than you can be 'technically gay'.
> 
> Every post you're making is offensive.


 


Greebo said:


> "Disabled people" will do nicely but so (sometimes) will "people with disabilities".
> 
> BTW partial hearing loss + tinnitus (or any level of hearing impairment) isn't "disabled technically", it's "disabled" end of. And you should mention it (at least in passing), because otherwise people might not realise that background noise, looking away, or putting hands in front of their mouths while talking makes it a lot more difficult for you to work out what they're saying. Which can lead to them assuming that you're stupid, absentminded, rude, or lazy.
> 
> Let people think you're those things when you choose to be them, not by accident.


 

I don't care if I'm offensive. What kind of a world would it be if there was nothing to be offended about? It would be unbearable.

I don't think of myself as disabled, that's all I meant, despite my hearing loss being a considerable inconvenience sometimes. Maybe it'd be different if I couldn't walk properly or summat. People thought I was absent-minded, rude and lazy before my partial hearing loss, so I don't know any different.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> People thought I was absent-minded, *rude* and lazy before my partial hearing loss, so I don't know any different.


 
Well they were correct on at least one count


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> No......what happened?


I won't spoil the ending.


Minnie_the_Minx said:


> That's that circus thing isn't it?


Yes, that's the one.
It's a really great film, although of its time (1932). It's more liked by people with disabilities, was banned for ages. I can only find the full film subtitled into Spanish.



The Hilton twins are in it. They were born in Brighton and sold to a freak show by the midwife who (iirc) told their Mum they were stillborn.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I don't care if I'm offensive. What kind of a world would it be if there was nothing to be offended about? It would be unbearable.
> 
> I don't think of myself as disabled, that's all I meant, despite my hearing loss being a considerable inconvenience sometimes. Maybe it'd be different if I couldn't walk properly or summat. People thought I was absent-minded, rude and lazy before my partial hearing loss, so I don't know any different.


You don't care if you're offensive? You offending people deliberately because you think the world's better for it?

You really don't give a shit about anything or anybody else but yourself.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I won't spoil the ending.
> 
> Yes, that's the one.
> It's a really great film, although of its time (1932). It's more liked by people with disabilities, was banned for ages. I can only find the full film subtitled into Spanish.
> ...




My friend lent it to me a few years ago.  Can't remember any Spanish subtitles though but I may just have ignored them.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Sep 14, 2012)

Captain Hurrah said:


> The thread reminds me of this cunt.


 
I can honestly say I hope that man got the shit kicked out of him in prison. Maybe I'm being too optimistic though.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Well I'm half deaf in one ear but nobody's ever picked on me. I do get the normal "are you fucking deaf or something?" and when I reply yes, I get the oh-so-funny "what?" as if I've never heard that before, but twatface is just clutching at straws to try to cover his arse


 

You're half-deaf with a right to be half-deaf (being of sound disposition) whereas I'm just clutching at straws.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> You're half-deaf with a right to be half-deaf (being of sound disposition) whereas I'm just clutching at straws.


 
I didn't exactly say that or rather, you've just decided to misinterpret it


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> twatface is just clutching at straws to try to cover his arse


An image I wish I hadn't conjured up.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> An image I wish I hadn't conjured up.


 
Sorry


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> You don't care if you're offensive? You offending people deliberately because you think the world's better for it?
> 
> You really don't give a shit about anything or anybody else but yourself.


 

The thing about today's society is that there are loads of people going round looking for stuff to be offended by. This isn't the attitude that won us the war. It's getting like America.

There's nothing I've said in this thread that's seriously offensive to anybody, for instance.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> The thing about today's society is that there are loads of people going round looking for stuff to be offended by. This isn't the attitude that won us the war. It's getting like America.
> 
> There's nothing I've said in this thread that's seriously offensive to anybody, for instance.


 
The fact that you're doubting some of the stories on here is offensive enough


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> There's nothing I've said in this thread that's seriously offensive to anybody, for instance.


Suppose *selective* amnesia isn't classed as a disability.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> The thing about today's society is that there are loads of people going round looking for stuff to be offended by. This isn't the attitude that won us the war. It's getting like America.
> 
> There's nothing I've said in this thread that's seriously offensive to anybody, for instance.


Who made you arbiter of what is and isn't offensive? Your posts have been deliberately offensive - you've implied those who have shared anecdotes of attacks have lied about them happening, you asked for evidence that people care about how they are described, yet when offered such evidence from people with disabilities you claimed it wasn't evidence, and your posts are thinly disguised bigotry towards those with disabilities.

You don't get to decide if I'm offended by something, I do. 

I don't look for stuff that offends me, I AM offended by the content of your posts.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

Wilf said:


> Suppose *selective* amnesia isn't classed as a disability.


Not under DWP/Atos guidelines


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> The fact that you're doubting some of the stories on here is offensive enough


 


Do you think you might need a hobby? Or is this your hobby-searching for and finding offence?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Who made you arbiter of what is and isn't offensive? Your posts have been deliberately offensive - you've implied those who have shared anecdotes of attacks have lied about them happening, you asked for evidence that people care about how they are described, yet when offered such evidence from people with disabilities you claimed it wasn't evidence, and your posts are thinly disguised bigotry towards those with disabilities.
> 
> You don't get to decide if I'm offended by something, I do.
> 
> I don't look for stuff that offends me, I AM offended by the content of your posts.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Do you think you might need a hobby? Or is this your hobby-searching for and finding offence?


 
Have you asked everyone on this thread?  It seems to me there's a few people on here that find you offensive


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> Sweetie, this may be a game to you, but it's not to people who live with the situation every day. Go and play on other threads, if play you must.


 
Or with the traffic.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Do you think you might need a hobby? Or is this your hobby-searching for and finding offence?


 Go on Lletsa, come straight out with it: do you think the people on this thread who have been posting about abuse they have received or their family and friends have received are lying?  If the answer is no, you might want to apologise. If your answer is 'yes', I'd still rather you say it directly.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

smokedout said:


> fucks sake it's like listening to a 12 year old arguing about bedtime


 
Nah, far less entertaining, and the arguments aren't as firmly based in logic as those a kid makes about bed-time.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

He's a disability-denier - like with those who deny the holocaust, he denies that disability-related attacks happen because he's never seen them.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I have put forward opinions, pure and simple. So has everybody else.


 
You also demanded evidence. Demanding evidence isn't expressing an opinion. Pure and simple.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Twits????? How old are you, 96??????
> 
> No-one's being excitable, but you're being offensive. Would you call someone excitable if they complained about being called 'the gays' or 'the pakis'?


 
Of course he would, if it allowed him to fell better than the people he was denigrating.


----------



## toggle (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> The thing about today's society is that there are loads of people going round looking for stuff to be offended by. This isn't the attitude that won us the war. It's getting like America.
> 
> There's nothing I've said in this thread that's seriously offensive to anybody, for instance.


 
so ti's all everyone else's fault that you're being a complete twat? cause you're not ac tually being a twat, they are at fault for thinking you are one.

impressive self delusion. complete lack of personal responsibility, complete lack of empathy.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> You also demanded evidence. Demanding evidence isn't expressing an opinion. Pure and simple.


 
I asked for evidence and received anecdote and opinion. Doesn't matter though.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I asked for evidence and received anecdote and opinion. Doesn't matter though.


 
What would you like as evidence then, Mrs M's husband's dog?  For people to walk around with a videocam permanently in their hands to catch such occasions?  Is that the only way you'll believe people have had experiences?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> *The thing about today's society is that there are loads of people going round looking for stuff to be offended by*. This isn't the attitude that won us the war. It's getting like America.
> 
> There's nothing I've said in this thread that's seriously offensive to anybody, for instance.


 
Wondered how long it'd be before you vomited out that sort of bollocks.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Of course he would, if it allowed him to fell better than the people he was denigrating.


 

We've already done this one. Saying 'the disabled' isn't the same as labelling people Pakis. The latter is deliberately offensive; the former a label of convenience. End of story.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Who made you arbiter of what is and isn't offensive? Your posts have been deliberately offensive - you've implied those who have shared anecdotes of attacks have lied about them happening, you asked for evidence that people care about how they are described, yet when offered such evidence from people with disabilities you claimed it wasn't evidence, and your posts are thinly disguised bigotry towards those with disabilities.
> 
> You don't get to decide if I'm offended by something, I do.
> 
> I don't look for stuff that offends me, I AM offended by the content of your posts.


 
The only person who searches threads for stuff to react to is probably LLETSA himself.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I asked for evidence and received anecdote and opinion. Doesn't matter though.


If you don't like the qualitative approach, here's some numbers:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19589602

Ah, go on, I'll indulge myself with a few 'anecdotes':
http://www.disabilitynow.org.uk/the-hate-crime-dossier


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> We've already done this one. Saying 'the disabled' isn't the same as labelling people Pakis. The latter is deliberately offensive; the former a label of convenience. End of story.


 
Ooh, LLETSA shifts the goalposts again!
It's not about intent, it's about effect.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

Wilf said:


> If you don't like the qualitative approach, here's some numbers:
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19589602


 
Cue "but that's just a BBC report, my friends that have disabilities haven't had this happen to them, so it can't be that bad!".


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

toggle said:


> so ti's all everyone else's fault that you're being a complete twat? cause you're not ac tually being a twat, they are at fault for thinking you are one.
> 
> impressive self delusion. complete lack of personal responsibility, complete lack of empathy.


 

I hope it's a phone you're posting from.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Cue "but that's just a BBC report, my friends that have disabilities haven't had this happen to them, so it can't be that bad!".


 They must all be watching ITV.


----------



## toggle (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I hope it's a phone you're posting from.


 
cause of course, ti's too much to expect a substantive response from a twat


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Ooh, LLETSA shifts the goalposts again!
> It's not about intent, it's about effect.


 

Fine. I bow to your more valid opinion seeing as you're one of the spokemen for people with disabilities.


----------



## toggle (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Fine. I bow to your more valid opinion seeing as you're one of the spokemen for people with disabilities.


 
whewras you have appointed yourslef spokesperson for people who want to be offensive twats to disabled people, i would presume.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

toggle said:


> whewras you have appointed yourslef spokesperson for people who want to be offensive twats to disabled people, i would presume.


And arbiter of what is/isn't offensive as well, don't forget.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> We've already done this one. Saying 'the disabled' isn't the same as labelling people Pakis. The latter is deliberately offensive; the former a label of convenience. End of story.


A label of convenience? I'll have to remember that one.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

toggle said:


> whewras you have appointed yourslef spokesperson for people who want to be offensive twats to disabled people, i would presume.


 
Anybody who is genuinely offended by anything I've said here really ought to take a holiday in Cambodia. Or summat.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I hope it's a phone you're posting from.


What's your excuse for consistently spelling cynicism incorrectly then, sweetie?


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Anybody who is genuinely offended by anything I've said here really ought to take a holiday in Cambodia. Or summat.


I am genuinely offended by your comments so I chose the 'or summat' option and reported your posts to the mods.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Anybody who is genuinely offended by anything I've said here really ought to take a holiday in Cambodia. Or summat.


I've always wondered what the human equivalent of Ouroboros would look like.  Why don't you get a hotel room with, oh I dunno phildwyer, and show us?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Anybody who is genuinely offended by anything I've said here really ought to take a holiday in Cambodia. Or summat.


 Even now, I'd appreciate a straight answer as to whether you believe people who have posted about their experiences on this thread.


----------



## toggle (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Anybody who is genuinely offended by anything I've said here really ought to take a holiday in Cambodia. Or summat.


 
cause obviously the only allowable offense is what you state it is?

little bit of info for you dearie, what people do and don't find offensive is up to them, you don't actually get to tell people how to think and what to feel.

nor do you get to state that something isn't offensive solely by comparison to a worse behavior. kicking the crap out of someone for being blask is still racism, even if it's a tad less unpleasent than the middle passage.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> A label of convenience? I'll have to remember that one.


 


Obviously, when I put it like that I had concentration camps in mind.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Obviously, when I put it like that I had concentration camps in mind.


You're not even remotely funny.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> I've always wondered what the human equivalent of Ouroboros would look like. Why don't you get a hotel room with, oh I dunno phildwyer, and show us?


Not sure I'd wish that phildwyer, to be honest...


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Wilf said:


> Even now, I'd appreciate a straight answer as to whether you believe people who have posted about their experiences on this thread.


 


I neither believe nor disbelieve them for the simple reason, as I said, that this is just a messageboard. And what's more-I'm under no obligation to believe anything, or use approved language and terminology.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I don't care if I'm offensive. What kind of a world would it be if there was nothing to be offended about? It would be unbearable.


Maybe it would, some of the time, but that doesn't excuse what you've done here.


LLETSA said:


> I don't think of myself as disabled, that's all I meant, despite my hearing loss being a considerable inconvenience sometimes. Maybe it'd be different if I couldn't walk properly or summat. People thought I was absent-minded, rude and lazy before my partial hearing loss, so I don't know any different.


Sweetie, it makes little difference what you call yourself, under the 3rd Reich, you'd still be deemed disabled enough to be forcibly sterilised and/or vivisected, and/or gassed.

And it's one thing to be called rude etc when you're deliberately behaving like that, it's another thing when it's due to a clash of perception.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Not sure I'd wish that phildwyer, to be honest...


Fair enough, maybe LLETSA should get himself cloned instead, and then do the deed.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I neither believe nor disbelieve them for the simple reason, as I said, that this is just a messageboard. And what's more-I'm under no obligation to believe anything, or use approved language and terminology.


This is not just a messageboard, it's a community.


----------



## toggle (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I neither believe nor disbelieve them for the simple reason, as I said, that this is just a messageboard. And what's more-I'm under no obligation to believe anything, or use approved language and terminology.


 
you're under no obligation to be here either. do you have a fetish for being told to fuck off?


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

toggle said:


> you're under no obligation to be here either. do you have a fetish for being told to fuck off?


I suspect that in real life he's actually very lonely and stressed right now.  Getting a reaction, any reaction, is better than isolation.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> I suspect that in real life he's actually very lonely and stressed right now. Getting a reaction, any reaction, is better than isolation.


I'm sorry but that's no excuse for the posts he's making.


----------



## toggle (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> I suspect that in real life he's actually very lonely and stressed right now. Getting a reaction, any reaction, is better than isolation.


 
unfortunately for him, i'm under no obligation to consider being an arsehole as a disability and make allowances for that.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> I'm sorry but that's no excuse for the posts he's making.


I didn't say that it is.  Particularly when he persists with this.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> I'm sorry but that's no excuse for the posts he's making.


 
We should offer him tea and sympathy


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> This is not just a messageboard, it's a community.


 Applauds - and that's just it.  I don't have even the slightest doubt that those who have posted about their own experiences are speaking the truth.  Not because I know them in real life, but I know them well enough on here to be certain they wouldn't make something up on such a topic.

Lletsa, I'm not somebody who normally joins a 'pursuit' and for what it's worth my own experiences of disability abuse are so minimal that this isn't a grudge thing for me. However when you know about Atos and what this government are doing, you've seen the figures I linked to above - and, to be honest, you _know_ the people on this thread are sincere - you should maybe stop this. Not sure whether an apology would benefit you or anyone else at this point, but I am still pissed off that you can even suggest you 'have no opinion' as to whether people are lying. And _*please*_ don't hide behind the 'it's a bulletin board' thing.


----------



## toggle (Sep 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> We should offer him tea and sympathy


 
I think i may have lady astor's recipie for tea floating about here somewhere.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> I suspect that in real life he's actually very lonely and stressed right now. Getting a reaction, any reaction, is better than isolation.


 

We're getting it all today: deliberate offence taking over nothing, paranoia, smug self-righteousness, and now cod-psychology.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

toggle said:


> I think i may have lady astor's recipie for tea floating about here somewhere.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> We should offer him tea and sympathy


Laxative tea - to get rid of the shit he's apparently so full of.


----------



## toggle (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> We're getting it all today: deliberate offence taking over nothing, paranoia, smug self-righteousness, and now cod-psychology.


 
more like: a supreme example of applied twattishness.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> We're getting it all today: deliberate offence taking over nothing, paranoia, smug self-righteousness, and now cod-psychology.


Which you, sweetie, choose to counter with the royal "we".  Could do better.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> Laxative tea - to get rid of the shit he's apparently so full of.


 
Could just cork him


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Could just cork him


What, and risk collateral damage when he explodes?


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Wilf said:


> Applauds - and that's just it. I don't have even the slightest doubt that those who have posted about their own experiences are speaking the truth. Not because I know them in real life, but I know them well enough on here to be certain they wouldn't make something up on such a topic.
> 
> Lletsa, I'm not somebody who normally joins a 'pursuit' and for what it's worth my own experiences of disability abuse are so minimal that this isn't a grudge thing for me. However when you know about Atos and what this government are doing, you've seen the figures I linked to above - and, to be honest, you _know_ the people on this thread are sincere - you should maybe stop this. Not sure whether an apology would benefit you or anyone else at this point, but I am still pissed off that you can even suggest you 'have no opinion' as to whether people are lying. And _*please*_ don't hide behind the 'it's a bulletin board' thing.


 
I do have an opinion: they might be or they might not. I'm not bothered either way.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I do have an opinion: they might be or they might not. I'm not bothered either way.


 In that case, I'm back to where I came in on this - fuck off.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> What, and risk collateral damage when he explodes?


 
Oh good point 

laxative it is then


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I do have an opinion: they might be or they might not. I'm not bothered either way.


 
So if you're not bothered, wtf are you doing on this thread other than to come here and wind people up?


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> So if you're not bothered, wtf are you doing on this thread other than to come here and wind people up?


 

The first points I made were valid ones and uncontroversial. Others chose to seek offence in them and found it. That's all there is to it.

I suppose I've become kind of addicted over the years to being followed round the messageboards by a gaggle of quacking, self-righteous windbags.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I suppose I've become kind of addicted over the years to being followed round the messageboards by a gaggle of quacking, self-righteous windbags.


 
Sounds like you get off on it


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> I've always wondered what the human equivalent of Ouroboros would look like. Why don't you get a hotel room with, oh I dunno phildwyer, and show us?


 
FFS, I'm fair ready to spew, now!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

toggle said:


> cause obviously the only allowable offense is what you state it is?
> 
> little bit of info for you dearie, what people do and don't find offensive is up to them, you don't actually get to tell people how to think and what to feel.
> 
> nor do you get to state that something isn't offensive solely by comparison to a worse behavior. kicking the crap out of someone for being blask is still racism, even if it's a tad less unpleasent than the middle passage.


 
TBF he probably thinks "the middle passage" is his perineal fistula.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> The first points I made were valid ones and uncontroversial. Others chose to seek offence in them and found it. That's all there is to it.
> 
> I suppose I've become kind of addicted over the years to being followed round the messageboards by a gaggle of quacking, self-righteous windbags.


No one on this thread is following you. If you've been trolling for years then you deserve all you get. You are free to FUCK OFF out of this thread..


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Sounds like you get off on it


 
Got it in one. It allows him to feel superior.


----------



## Meltingpot (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> The first points I made were valid ones and uncontroversial. Others chose to seek offence in them and found it. That's all there is to it.


 
No it isn't, because you've been consistently belittling people's attempts to relate their own life experiences to the title of the thread. Anyone who thinks disabled people are being attacked more frequently because of govt. rhetoric = a self-righteous windbag, according to you. And you can't honestly see why people are getting upset with you?


----------



## co-op (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I suppose I've become kind of addicted over the years to being followed round the messageboards by a gaggle of quacking, self-righteous windbags.


 
= you've turned into a middle-aged curmudgeon.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> The first points I made were valid ones and uncontroversial. Others chose to seek offence in them and found it. That's all there is to it.
> 
> I suppose I've become kind of addicted over the years to being followed round the messageboards by a gaggle of quacking, self-righteous windbags.


No, that isn't all there is to it.  You tried to be humourously provocative but did a series of pratfalls instead.  Sweetie, you're dangerously close to dropping your mask.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> Which you, sweetie, choose to counter with the royal "we". Could do better.


 
At least he doesn't talk about himself in the third person. Even a cod-psychologist would see issues in doing that!


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

Meltingpot said:


> No it isn't, because you've been consistently belittling people's attempts to relate their own life experiences to the title of the thread. Anyone who thinks disabled people are being attacked more frequently because of govt. rhetoric = a self-righteous windbag, according to you. And you can't honestly see why people are getting upset with you?


 Spot on.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

Shall we get back to the subject, or let him win by continuing the derail?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> Shall we get back to the subject, or let him win by continuing the derail?


 I consider it a 'case study' rather than a derail.   But yes, I agree.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Maybe-but I see no evidence of an ongoing, low-level street war against people in wheelchairs or with mental health problems.


This is the first point you made that you consider valid, made yesterday evening.

Despite reports being posted from reputable sources, you stand by your claim that you made valid points and that people saw offence where there was none and overreacted.

Really? You deny disability hate-crime is happening yet you don't see that as offensive?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

Wilf, you weren't around for the Deaf lesbians thread (about ten years ago...long gone I think, from the days when we had to delete loads of threads or the boards just completely ground to a halt)...this is pale in comparison. Actually, that's one thing that's changed for the better on these boards. The vast majority of posters have become a bit more conscious about disability.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> This is the first point you made that you consider valid, made yesterday evening.
> 
> Despite reports being posted from reputable sources, you stand by your claim that you made valid points and that people saw offence where there was none and overreacted.
> 
> Really? You deny disability hate-crime is happening yet you don't see that as offensive?


Well, he clearly hasn't taken on board the Government's own statistics that shows a big rise in attacks, so frankly, unless he was beaten to a bloody pulp on the grounds that he's deaf in one ear, I don't think he'll ever take it on board. Maybe he'd still be in denial even as he slipped into a coma....


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

Strathclyde police are still running their poster campaign about disability hate crime, which is good, making people aware that it is a crime.

I am fortunate, like Wilf I had minimal problems with hate crime myself, but that doesn't mean I'm not angry on behalf of those who can't defend themselves.


----------



## shagnasty (Sep 14, 2012)

i should imagine you have to accept other peoples experiences even though you don't witness it yourself.it is having faith in peoples honesty


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> This is the first point you made that you consider valid, made yesterday evening.
> 
> Despite reports being posted from reputable sources, you stand by your claim that you made valid points and that people saw offence where there was none and overreacted.
> 
> Really? You deny disability hate-crime is happening yet you don't see that as offensive?


 

I haven't denied it-I said I haven't seen it.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

shagnasty said:


> i should imagine you have to accept other peoples experiences even though you don't witness it yourself.it is having faith in peoples honesty


He is not prepared to accept any source I don't think
http://www.disabilitynow.org.uk/the-hate-crime-dossier
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19589602
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ed-people-soar-to-a-record-level-7858841.html
http://www.disabilityhatecrime.org....-crimes-against-britains-disabled-on-the-rise
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...st-disabled-people-acpo-police_n_1880733.html


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I haven't denied it-I said I haven't seen it.


 
and implied you don't believe the stories put forward on this thread


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

shagnasty said:


> i should imagine you have to accept other peoples experiences even though you don't witness it yourself.it is having faith in peoples honesty


It's like not believing every single major event if you weren't there.

For example, I didn't see the Olympians' parade in Glasgow this evening so it probably didn't happen, right?


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I haven't denied it-I said I haven't seen it.


Lovely backpedalling there, _sweetie._


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I haven't denied it-I said I haven't seen it.


 Mr Gradgrind - 'You are extremely deficient in your facts. Your acquaintance with figures is very limited. You are altogether backward, and below the mark.'
Sissy - 'I am sorry, sir,'


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Strathclyde police are still running their poster campaign about disability hate crime, which is good, making people aware that it is a crime.
> 
> I am fortunate, like Wilf I had minimal problems with hate crime myself, but that doesn't mean I'm not angry on behalf of those who can't defend themselves.


 


I hope these people know you're angry on their behalf.


----------



## toggle (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Well, he clearly hasn't taken on board the Government's own statistics that shows a big rise in attacks, so frankly, unless he was beaten to a bloody pulp on the grounds that he's deaf in one ear, I don't think he'll ever take it on board. Maybe he'd still be in denial even as he slipped into a coma....


 
thankfully we now live in an area that seems to have a very low rate of this kind of behavior. not saying everyone in cornwall is nice, but there seem to be a lot fewer arseholes about.if i had to actually witness something to beleive in it, i probably wouldn't believe it either, cause it isn't happening to the same degree in this community.

but there are too many reports now for any reasonable person to remain in denial. we must therefore conclude that anyone attempting to deny this is unreasonable


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I hope these people know you're angry on their behalf.


They know.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Lovely backpedalling there, _sweetie._


 


Backpedalling how? All along I've said I've personally seen no evidence of widespread violence and abuse towards those with disabilities (hope this is an acceptable term that will not prove injurious to anybody's self-esteem.) Of course, I do accept that, in today's world, statistics and poster campaigns, and the words of pressure groups etc etc have completely abolishedthe need for any personal experience at all, which is probably why so many people see no need to do anything but stare into a computer screen or iphone: all human life is there.

What really seems to be the 'offence' here, though, is somebody having the audacity to cast mild doubt on the authenticity of messageboard anecdote.

Not of it actually matters, however. The world will be the same in the morning.


----------



## toggle (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Backpedalling how? All along I've said I've personally seen no evidence of widespread violence and abuse towards those with disabilities (hope this is an acceptable term that will not prove injurious to anybody's self-esteem.) Of course, I do accept that, in today's world, statistics and poster campaigns, and the words of pressure groups etc etc have completely abolishedthe need for any personal experience at all, which is probably why so many people see no need to do anything but stare into a computer screen or iphone: all human life is there.
> 
> What really seems to be the 'offence' here, though, is somebody having the audacity to cast mild doubt on the authenticity of messageboard anecdote.


 
there is far more evidence than messageboard anecdote. the anecdote is simply a community of people discussing their own expereinces that relate to the sources given in the thread.


Mrs Magpie said:


> http://www.disabilitynow.org.uk/the-hate-crime-dossier
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19589602
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ed-people-soar-to-a-record-level-7858841.html
> http://www.disabilityhatecrime.org....-crimes-against-britains-disabled-on-the-rise
> http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...st-disabled-people-acpo-police_n_1880733.html


 
like these. looked at any of them?



> Not of it actually matters, however. The world will be the same in the morning.


 
yep, disabled people will still be getting battered for being disabled and you will still be a twat.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> No, that isn't all there is to it. You tried to be humourously provocative but did a series of pratfalls instead. Sweetie, you're dangerously close to dropping your mask.


 

I like the way Greebo thinks she/he is patronising me by calling me sweetie all the time.

That's the thing about you lot-you're all so damned original nobody could possibly keep up.


----------



## toggle (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I like the way Greebo thinks she/he is patronising me by calling me sweetie all the time.
> 
> That's the thing about you lot-you're all so damned original nobody could possibly keep up.


 
you couldn't keep up with a snail


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> What really seems to be the 'offence' here, though, is somebody having the audacity to cast mild doubt on the authenticity of messageboard anecdote.
> .


 A low key, understated way of (still) saying 'I don't believe your 'anecdotes' '. Hope the ambulance service don't exercise the same 'mild doubts' about your need for paramedics if you ever have need to call them.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

I've got bored of reading the nonsense Lletsa's spouting so I think I'm just going to put him on ignore.

Just have to remember how to do it


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Not of it actually matters, however. The world will be the same in the morning.


Au contraire.  Tomorrow the world will be slightly different, and the day after that it will have changed slightly again.  And so on.  Change may not be immediately noticeable, but you've still got a choice in which direction it goes.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I hope these people know you're angry on their behalf.


If more people did get angry on their behalf, helped make a stand against the havoc Atos and the DWP are wreaking and generally looked out for those who are vulnerable, then perhaps there would be less disability-hate crime.

Oh wait, there's actually none because you've never seen it. Silly me.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

toggle said:


> there is far more evidence than messageboard anecdote. the anecdote is simply a community of people discussing their own expereinces that relate to the sources given in the thread.
> 
> 
> like these. looked at any of them?
> ...


 


How many times do I have to say that I haven't necessarily denied that it might be going on?


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I like the way Greebo thinks she/he is patronising me by calling me sweetie all the time.
> 
> That's the thing about you lot-you're all so damned original nobody could possibly keep up.


No, sweetie, not patronising.  Far worse.  If you don't get it, you probably never will.  BTW your attempt at stonewalling was pisspoor.  And your mask is slipping again.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> How many times do I have to say that I haven't necessarily denied that it might be going on?


It _might_ be going on?? Seriously??

I guess the only way you will believe it's happening is if it happens directly to you.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> How many times do I have to say that I haven't necessarily denied that it might be going on?


 Apart from the people who have told you it has happened to them - _you've denied their own direct experiences_ (sorry, 'mild doubts' that's it isn't it?).


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> If more people did get angry on their behalf, helped make a stand against the havoc Atos and the DWP are wreaking and generally looked out for those who are vulnerable, then perhaps there would be less disability-hate crime.
> 
> Oh wait, there's actually none because you've never seen it. Silly me.


 


It might make even more difference if all you self-styled angries spent as much time doing exactly that as you do on indulging in shrill, self-righteous quacking on here.

Society's most vulnerable are lucky in having your type to defend them, what with nobody else being willing to do it.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I've got bored of reading the nonsense Lletsa's spouting so I think I'm just going to put him on ignore.
> 
> Just have to remember how to do it


Click on where his avatar is and then click "ignore" in the top right corner of the box which pops up.


----------



## shagnasty (Sep 14, 2012)

Does there seem to be an increase in people using mobility scooters ,is it because they get mobility allowance like for cars.but that's  under threat from the reform of DLA .A girl i know as one shes about sixty now i can remember her from school,which proves we all grow older and get less mobile


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> Click on where his avatar is and then click "ignore" in the top right corner of the box which pops up.


 
Already done


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> It might make even more difference if all you self-styled angries spent as much time doing exactly that as you do on indulging in shrill, self-righteous quacking on here.
> 
> Society's most vulnerable are lucky in having your type to defend them, what with nobody else being willing to do it.


You don't know anything about me or what I do to support others, so you can stuff your pathetic attempt at an insult up your judgemental, disability-hate-crime-denying arse.


----------



## toggle (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> How many times do I have to say that I haven't necessarily denied that it might be going on?


 
lets try this in a manner even you might be able to respond to.

have you read any of these links.

yes or no.



Mrs Magpie said:


> http://www.disabilitynow.org.uk/the-hate-crime-dossier
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19589602
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ed-people-soar-to-a-record-level-7858841.html
> http://www.disabilityhatecrime.org....-crimes-against-britains-disabled-on-the-rise
> http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...st-disabled-people-acpo-police_n_1880733.html


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

shagnasty said:


> Does there seem to be an increase in people using mobility scooters ,is it because they get mobility allowance like for cars.but that's under threat from the reform of DLA .A girl i know as one shes about sixty now i can remember her from school,which proves we all grow older and get less mobile


 
I don't know.  Funnily enough, I saw a shop selling them the other day.  Had no idea how much they cost, but they seemed to be around the £750-£1000 mark (although I'm not sure if they were new or secondhand)

I saw one at the Olympic Park that friend took a shine to.  Looked really small and lightweight.  Probably wasn't though


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Wilf said:


> Apart from the people who have told you it has happened to them - _you've denied their own direct experiences_ (sorry, 'mild doubts' that's it isn't it?).


 

So? Get over it (as they say.)

Stop being so fucking totalitarian. All of you. I feel like Winston Smith here.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> So? Get over it (as they say.)
> 
> Stop being so fucking totalitarian. All of you. I feel like Winston Smith here.


On Ignore too.


----------



## toggle (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> So? Get over it (as they say.)
> 
> Stop being so fucking totalitarian. All of you. I feel like Winston Smith here.


 
so the solution to abuse against disabled people is that they should 'get over it?'


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> So? Get over it (as they say.)  <snip>I feel like Winston Smith here.


If you wanted a metaphorical drink with the proles, you could have chosen a different thread.  Go and find Julia.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

toggle said:


> lets try this in a manner even you might be able to respond to.
> 
> have you read any of these links.
> 
> yes or no.


 

No, and what's more-I'm not going to.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Sep 14, 2012)

Can't you all just start a new thread?


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

toggle said:


> so the solution to abuse against disabled people is that they should 'get over it?'


 

Will somebody take this idiot away?


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> Can't you all just start a new thread?


 

If the  shrill self-righteous quackers could accept that, right or wrong, alternative viewpoints do exist and resist ganging up, then the thread would never have been de-railed. In their world, chasing somebody around a messageboard seems to equate to political action.

An important blow for those with disabilities has been struck here today. Downing Street is watching.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> No, and what's more-I'm not going to.


 Just bear in mind this started with you saying you were unaware of street level abuse of the disabled - and carried on with you implying those who spoke about their own experiences might be making it up. When you are given your prized 'evidence' you ..... refuse to read it.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 14, 2012)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> Can't you all just start a new thread?


Because of one twat..?


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> Click on where his avatar is and then click "ignore" in the top right corner of the box which pops up.


 
All of you, please, put me on ignore.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

Frankie Jack said:


> Because of one twat..?


 
Exactly, and what's to stop him posting on a new thread


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Sep 14, 2012)

10/10 thread.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Sep 14, 2012)

Frankie Jack said:


> Because of one twat..?


 
Because it's fucking boring watching people bicker.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 14, 2012)

Tell the twat to fuck off then. I've done it twice and he's on ignore now..


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> All of you, please, put me on ignore.


No.  You're not being followed around.

Get a bit of self control, or a life.  Or go and find Julia.


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Wilf said:


> Just bear in mind this started with you saying you were unaware of street level abuse of the disabled - and carried on with you implying those who spoke about their own experiences might be making it up. When you are given your prized 'evidence' you ..... refuse to read it.


 

I said I am not personally aware of it, not that it wasn't going on. So you've provided evidence via links. Good. I don't need to read it as I know the kind of things it will say. However, there is only a tenuous connection between what's in those links and personal anecdote from posters on here, which, being on a messageboard, may or may not be true.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Will somebody take this idiot away?


Talking about yourself again, I see.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> I said I am not personally aware of it, not that it wasn't going on. So you've provided evidence via links. Good. I don't need to read it as I know the kind of things it will say. However, there is only a tenuous connection between what's in those links and personal anecdote from posters on here, which, being on a messageboard, may or may not be true.


 That's perfectly true - the experiences of people who might be lying to you on the internet may be only tenuously connected to things you haven't read.

I'M DONE!


----------



## LLETSA (Sep 14, 2012)

Greebo said:


> No. You're not being followed around.
> 
> Get a bit of self control, or a life. Or go and find Julia.


 
A bit of control? You're one of those chasing me around all day, inviting me to respond.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

Oh fuck this for a game of soldiers. You always were an obnoxious twunt LLETSA.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 14, 2012)

I looked back in the mods forum and at his previous activity. A catalogue of complaints about disruption and ridiculous stances on disability, gay issues etc etc etc. He will not be missed.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 14, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I looked back in the mods forum and at his previous activity. A catalogue of complaints about disruption and ridiculous stances on disability, gay issues etc etc etc. He will not be missed.


Permaban..? I've a feeling alkyfrol may be involved.

ETA. No excuse for the asshatery on this thread though


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Sep 14, 2012)

Permanent?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 14, 2012)

Has he been banned?  That means I can unignore him already.  Well that was short-lived


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

Permanent.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Permanent.


Ah well. Back on track again. 

Sadly just today I've seen three reports of court cases of disability crimes. I've saved them to faves as with the fuckwittery going on they'd have been lost in the mele. 

Will post them later.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Permanent.


Fair enough. He's been accusing you and others of lying all day, about deeply unpleasant events - without ever having the bottle to come straight out with it (or maybe, even worse, knowing you weren't lying but still playing games). Doubt you've banned him just for that though - as you say there was previous.  But yes, back to the thread.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

This thread was only a small part of my decision. I don't think there'll be a backlash on this one, somehow.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

It wasn't his first banning.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Sep 15, 2012)

After 8 years on here, I wonder if he will get U75 withdrawal.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

He can do cold turkey on the Daily Mail comments.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 15, 2012)

Attitudes like this make me deeply unhappy. It's not about differing viewpoints - one of the things I like about urban is the debate - it's the complete and utter refusal to believe that this is happening, despite a (sadly) growing body of evidence to the contrary.

Whatever people choose the believe, a sad fact is disability hate-crime IS increasing, and who knows how much goes unreported.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> He can do cold turkey on the Daily Mail comments.


 They're all dashing home from the golf club to get the welcome party ready.  Rod Liddle is rumoured to be doing the after dinner speech.


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Sep 15, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> who knows how much goes unreported.


 
And against isolated people with learning disabilities, exploited and abused by people who pretend to 'care' for them.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

I think it's people with learning disabilities at the most risk. One of the reasons I really like my local pub is the genuine welcome people with learning disabilities get, and woe betide anyone who gives them any kind of hassle. The regulars and bar staff won't tolerate it.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

When they closed for a refurb and there was an little opening party, when one of the learning disabled regulars came in, he was clapped and cheered with genuine warmth.


----------



## ash (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> When they closed for a refurb and there was an little opening party, when one of the learning disabled regulars came in, he was clapped and cheered with genuine warmth.



Mango landing?? Only asking as I have been there with groups from Mencap


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

The Albert.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

Actually his keyworker was a bit suspicious of the pub and came down to check he wasn't being exploited or hassled to buy drinks by the manipulative and was genuinely cheered by how much part of the pub he was and how looked out for, and now the keyworker drinks there too


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> a sad fact is disability hate-crime IS increasing, and who knows how much goes unreported.


I suspect it's as under-reported as rape


----------



## ash (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Actually his keyworker was a bit suspicious of the pub and came down to check he wasn't being exploited or hassled to buy drinks by the manipulative and was genuinely cheered by how much part of the pub he was and how looked out for, and now the keyworker drinks there too



That sounds just as it should be on both sides- I must check out the Albert


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 15, 2012)

These are the conversations twats like Lletsa ruin and miss out on with their fuckwittery..


----------



## shagnasty (Sep 15, 2012)

I wouldn't mind if he come out with an arguement to proof his point.mind it's not good when someone gets banned,but it was his own fault


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

We avoid banning where possible. I've seen boards where the ban hammer is swung for the slightest little thing and it doesn't make for good boards. On the whole I think we get it right. We try our best, anyway.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> We avoid banning where possible. I've seen boards where the ban hammer is swung for the slightest little thing and it doesn't make for good boards. On the whole I think we get it right. We try our best, anyway.


Nae arguements with that Mrs M. I know we sometimes wonder by a banning has been done when we don't know the full facts etc. but even as posters/members we can't see all things at all times any more than you mods can.

ETA. shame there isn't a way to ban asshats from specific threads until their asshatery gets them a permaban. Mebbe there is a xenforo addon for this though..

*should asshatery have two t's?*


----------



## Wilf (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> We avoid banning where possible. I've seen boards where the ban hammer is swung for the slightest little thing and it doesn't make for good boards. On the whole I think we get it right. We try our best, anyway.


 Fear not, a choir of harrumphing colonel's will carry him to his rest!


----------



## xenon (Sep 15, 2012)

LLETSA said:


> Fine. I bow to your more valid opinion seeing as you're one of the spokemen for people with disabilities.



One of them? You know, I thought there was only supposed to be one. Dam All these individual spokes people with their "may or may not be true" experiences.

Seriously, you can't use that same line against more than one person per thread. It lacks... Credibility. And class. But hey.


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Sep 15, 2012)

He won't be able to answer you back.   Got banned.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

Frankie Jack said:


> *shold asshatery have two t's?*


arsehattery I think....


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> arsehattery I think....


Taken on board..


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 15, 2012)

dp


----------



## xenon (Sep 15, 2012)

"All of you, please, put me on ignore."

I see he's banned now. Still he got what he wanted. Despite that. He's not actually the enemy. Just some grumpy willfully ignorant fuckstick.


----------



## ash (Sep 15, 2012)

xenon said:


> "All of you, please, put me on ignore."
> 
> I see he's banned now. Still he got what he wanted. Despite that. He's not actually the enemy. Just some grumpy willfully ignorant fuckstick.



That we could do without


----------



## Wilf (Sep 15, 2012)

xenon said:


> "grumpy willfully ignorant fuckstick.


  If I ever figure out how to set up a tagline, I'm having that.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

I suspect it's too long....


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

...three Ls in wilfully, not four... it might just fit....


----------



## Wilf (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I suspect it's too long....


 gwif and proud


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 15, 2012)

Testing

It fits!  Go on Wilf.


----------



## xenon (Sep 15, 2012)

ash said:


> That we could do without




Yeah. The whole being alufe. So wordly wise and poihting out the obvius trite fac, human nature hasn't changed much routene. It's just rubbish. It's an advication of responsibility. Self signed License to not give a fuck. It's not like I know or any of us particuarlly have a blueprint of how to fix the situation. But to come on and snipe at peple relaying their experiences is just pathetic in the truist sence.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 15, 2012)

xenon said:


> Yeah. The whole being alufe. So wordly wise and poihting out the obvius trite fac, human nature hasn't changed much routene. It's just rubbish. It's an advication of responsibility. Self signed License to not give a fuck. It's not like I know or any of us particuarlly have a blueprint of how to fix the situation. But to come on and snipe at peple relaying their experiences is just pathetic in the truist sence.


Happens though.. quite a lot sadly and there's no reasoning.. Outside Urban it's fucking awful.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 15, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Testing
> 
> It fits! Go on Wilf.


----------



## toggle (Sep 15, 2012)

equationgirl said:


> Attitudes like this make me deeply unhappy. It's not about differing viewpoints - one of the things I like about urban is the debate - it's the complete and utter refusal to believe that this is happening, despite a (sadly) growing body of evidence to the contrary.
> 
> Whatever people choose the believe, a sad fact is disability hate-crime IS increasing, and who knows how much goes unreported.


 
and the complete refusal to accept or consider any evidence to counter his existing POV


----------



## toggle (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I think it's people with learning disabilities at the most risk. One of the reasons I really like my local pub is the genuine welcome people with learning disabilities get, and woe betide anyone who gives them any kind of hassle. The regulars and bar staff won't tolerate it.


 
judging from some of the comments bakunin has made about the treatment he got in one of the 'nicer' areas of plymouth, I think aspies can be at quite a risk as well.


----------



## toggle (Sep 15, 2012)

Frankie Jack said:


> Happens though.. quite a lot sadly and there's no reasoning.. Outside Urban it's fucking awful.


 
which makes it even more important to have a space where peole can relate their expereinces without facing abuse or willfull ignorance, part of what the internet can give is a 'you are not alone' factor, the ability to know what there are people that empathise and share your expereinces, even if you will never actually meet them.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 15, 2012)

Completely agree toggle. Which is why I, and I'm sure others, feel safe sharing and conversing here in Urb. Especially about issues that are important to us.


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

xenon said:


> Yeah. The whole being alufe. So wordly wise and poihting out the obvius trite fac, human nature hasn't changed much routene. It's just rubbish. It's an advication of responsibility. Self signed License to not give a fuck. It's not like I know or any of us particuarlly have a blueprint of how to fix the situation. But to come on and snipe at peple relaying their experiences is just pathetic in the truist sence.



Yep. Poor show, LLETSA. It was only missing a picture of a burning disability aid as lols, like fucking Longdog's treatment of an advice thread re travellers. What is it that brings out the bloody worst in people like this, the ability to exercise power? Fuck's sake.


----------



## BigTom (Sep 15, 2012)

cesare said:


> Yep. Poor show, LLETSA. It was only missing a picture of a burning disability aid as lols, like fucking Longdog's treatment of an advice thread re travellers. What is it that brings out the bloody worst in people like this, the ability to exercise power? Fuck's sake.


 
Anonymity and not knowing the people you are talking to/offending plus the zero possibility of finding your teeth are no longer in your mouth.
This is then wrapped up in a justification of "it's only the internet" like somewhere like this is somehow qualitatively different from chatting about it in a pub, face to face, in terms of how someone reading what you've written will react to it.

The lack of body language doesn't help but that's not what is going on here imo, this isn't a misunderstanding over tone, this is someone being a total dick and being fine about it cos they've given themselves a psychological justification for being an arsehole and don't hav any personal connection to the people it effects.
A lack of empathy or sympathy possibly, something they might be fine with people they know, but an inability to connect a name/avatar on a screen to a real person typing away behind it.


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

BigTom said:


> Anonymity and not knowing the people you are talking to/offending plus the zero possibility of finding your teeth are no longer in your mouth.
> This is then wrapped up in a justification of "it's only the internet" like somewhere like this is somehow qualitatively different from chatting about it in a pub, face to face, in terms of how someone reading what you've written will react to it.
> 
> The lack of body language doesn't help but that's not what is going on here imo, this isn't a misunderstanding over tone, this is someone being a total dick and being fine about it cos they've given themselves a psychological justification for being an arsehole and don't hav any personal connection to the people it effects.
> A lack of empathy or sympathy possibly, something they might be fine with people they know, but an inability to connect a name/avatar on a screen to a real person typing away behind it.



And there's always the justification of "it's only the Internet". Well, yeah. But the Internet is a communication tool, like telephones and letters. Just more up to date. Posting shit like this is the equivalent of sending poison pen letters from the safety of anonymity. And before anyone jumps on me for that analogy, think about it. Before the Internet, that's exactly what used to happen - the Internet just makes it easier to succumb to impulses to cause trouble.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

I think it's a good analogy. The only other one I can come up with is people having a little get-together and talking and someone pushing dogshit through the letterbox and throwing eggs at the windows....or abused in the street...which is where we all came into this thread.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

xenon said:


> Yeah. The whole being alufe. So wordly wise and poihting out the obvius trite fac, human nature hasn't changed much routene. It's just rubbish. It's an advication of responsibility. Self signed License to not give a fuck. It's not like I know or any of us particuarlly have a blueprint of how to fix the situation. But to come on and snipe at peple relaying their experiences is just pathetic in the truist sence.


Good post and I also like it for quite a left-field reason...the spelling is so consistent with speech software saying it correctly. As I type this my husband's computer is chattering away very fast in a US accent.


----------



## _angel_ (Sep 15, 2012)

cesare said:


> And there's always the justification of "it's only the Internet". Well, yeah. But the Internet is a communication tool, like telephones and letters. Just more up to date. Posting shit like this is the equivalent of sending poison pen letters from the safety of anonymity. And before anyone jumps on me for that analogy, think about it. Before the Internet, that's exactly what used to happen - the Internet just makes it easier to succumb to impulses to cause trouble.


Look at all the people in trouble on twitter and facebook for saying stuff that's been deemed offensive. They'd have a field day on here!


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> Look at all the people in trouble on twitter and facebook for saying stuff that's been deemed offensive. They'd have a field day on here!



Yes, I was thinking that when reading the thread about the lad that had been sentenced for his comments about soldiers. I sometimes read posts on here and am like wtf, you'd never get away with that face to face!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 15, 2012)

Wilf said:


>


----------



## ash (Sep 15, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> Look at all the people in trouble on twitter and facebook for saying stuff that's been deemed offensive. They'd have a field day on here!



Maybe Mrs Magpie could put him on a semi- ban and only let him post on threads for proper tits; the Kate Middleton one for example!!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 15, 2012)

ash said:


> Maybe Mrs Magpie could put him on a semi- ban and only let him post on threads for proper tits; the Kate Middleton one for example!!


 
He can't post on that.  It's been binned


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 15, 2012)

shagnasty said:


> Does there seem to be an increase in people using mobility scooters ,is it because they get mobility allowance like for cars.but that's under threat from the reform of DLA .A girl i know as one shes about sixty now i can remember her from school,which proves we all grow older and get less mobile


 
Disability Now did a piece back in the early 2000s about the increase. There were several factors:

1) Greater availability of mobility aids.
2) Poor workplace H & S meaning we still have workplace injury rates way higher than they should be.
3) An ageing population.

The mobility component of DLA isn't much to do with it, insofar as the number of scooters sold vastly outweighs the amount of DLA claims, and the price of scooters has continued to drop, while battery capacity etc has continued to rise.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 15, 2012)

Frankie Jack said:


> Permaban..? I've a feeling alkyfrol may be involved.
> 
> ETA. No excuse for the asshatery on this thread though


 
I doubt alcohol was involved. Urban has long been LLETSA's way of feeling good about himself. Other people kick dogs or steal sweets from children in pushchairs. LLETSA came on Urban and patronised people to get his jollies.
I've absolutely no doubt whatsoever he'll be sockpuppeting shortly, just like he did last time he was banned.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 15, 2012)

Captain Hurrah said:


> Permanent?


 
Like the wave in Kevin Keegan's hair.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 15, 2012)

Captain Hurrah said:


> And against isolated people with learning disabilities, exploited and abused by people who pretend to 'care' for them.


 
That's always been a big problem, unfortunately, not helped by a legal system that (until legislative changes early in the new century) routinely disregarded testimony from people with learning disabilities or mental health problems because of supposed "unreliability".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 15, 2012)

Frankie Jack said:


> Nae arguements with that Mrs M. I know we sometimes wonder by a banning has been done when we don't know the full facts etc. but even as posters/members we can't see all things at all times any more than you mods can.
> 
> ETA. shame there isn't a way to ban asshats from specific threads until their asshatery gets them a permaban. Mebbe there is a xenforo addon for this though..
> 
> *should asshatery have two t's?*


 
Yes, unless you hate asses.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> That's always been a big problem, unfortunately, not helped by a legal system that (until legislative changes early in the new century) routinely disregarded testimony from people with learning disabilities or mental health problems because of supposed "unreliability".


Yup, I found it heartbreaking and fury-inducing that several cases of abuse I knew about from work in the 80s and 90s (including a gang-rape of a woman with Downs) never got to court for precisely that reason.


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> That's always been a big problem, unfortunately, not helped by a legal system that (until legislative changes early in the new century) routinely disregarded testimony from people with learning disabilities or mental health problems because of supposed "unreliability".



There was an interesting snippet on "This Week In Parliament" (I think that's the title) this morning. Conversation amongst various MPs about mental health, society's views/prejudices/increasing awareness together with mention of a Bill which might include changing the current system where people with previous mental health problems aren't allowed to do jury service, for example. I only caught the tail end of it, being very early and me being sleepy, but it sounded quite positive.


----------



## treelover (Sep 15, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Yes, unless you hate asses.


 

I have no problems with temporary bans, i think permabans should be a last resort

has Lletsa been banned?


----------



## treelover (Sep 15, 2012)

cesare said:


> There was an interesting snippet on "This Week In Parliament" (I think that's the title) this morning. Conversation amongst various MPs about mental health, society's views/prejudices/increasing awareness together with mention of a Bill which might include changing the current system where people with previous mental health problems aren't allowed to do jury service, for example. I only caught the tail end of it, being very early and me being sleepy, but it sounded quite positive.


 

bear in mind , like the lympics, any improvement in how MH is perceived will sadly also impact on benefit regimes, etc, eg, 'if they can do that' 'things have moved on', etc..


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

cesare said:


> There was an interesting snippet on "This Week In Parliament" (I think that's the title) this morning. Conversation amongst various MPs about mental health, society's views/prejudices/increasing awareness together with mention of a Bill which might include changing the current system where people with previous mental health problems aren't allowed to do jury service, for example. I only caught the tail end of it, being very early and me being sleepy, but it sounded quite positive.


It's also about the fact that you are barred from being an MP as well as Jury Service. I'm not entirely sure, because like you, I wasn't paying full alert attention. I can't quite understand quite what the criteria would be, or how they'd even know. Barred if previously sectioned?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

treelover said:


> I have no problems with temporary bans, i think permabans should be a last resort
> 
> has Lletsa been banned?


Yes, not because of this thread specifically but because of previous temp bans, re-registering and countless warnings.


----------



## treelover (Sep 15, 2012)

Not sure If I'm allowed to say this, but apart from his pessimism and yesterdays outpourings, haven't seen much other postings from him...


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> It's also about the fact that you are barred from being an MP as well as Jury Service. I'm not entirely sure, because like you, I wasn't paying full alert attention. I can't quite understand quite what the criteria would be, or how they'd even know. Barred if previously sectioned?


 
You can't be an MP if you have had MH problems? Seriously?


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> It's also about the fact that you are barred from being an MP as well as Jury Service. I'm not entirely sure, because like you, I wasn't paying full alert attention. I can't quite understand quite what the criteria would be, or how they'd even know. Barred if previously sectioned?



I'm not sure about the criteria either, although iirc they quoted from a letter from a constituent who had raised it as an issue (jury service/civic duties rather than MPs though). There was also mention of "not being of sound mind" being a bar/grounds for removal from office to company directorships-which gets routinely gets written into every executive service agreement now I come to think of it.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 15, 2012)

He seems to post mainly in politics or football


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

treelover said:


> bear in mind , like the lympics, any improvement in how MH is perceived will sadly also impact on benefit regimes, etc, eg, 'if they can do that' 'things have moved on', etc..



Aye, the double edged sword


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> He seems to post mainly in politics or football



I don't tend to look at the football threads much but yes, politics (where this thread is). I must admit I was surprised because his most recent politics postings have been comparatively quite detailed and sensible rather than scathing/miserablist.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 15, 2012)

treelover said:


> I have no problems with temporary bans, i think permabans should be a last resort
> 
> has Lletsa been banned?


 
Yes, permanently.


----------



## ash (Sep 15, 2012)

cesare said:


> I'm not sure about the criteria either, although iirc they quoted from a letter from a constituent who had raised it as an issue (jury service/civic duties rather than MPs though). There was also mention of "not being of sound mind" being a bar/grounds for removal from office to company directorships-which gets routinely gets written into every executive service agreement now I come to think of it.



Yes-legally you cannot be a director of a company if you have mental health problems which must include small two person limited companies!


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

ash said:


> Yes-legally you cannot be a director of a company if you have mental health problems which must include small two person limited companies!


Does stuff like post-natal depression count? Or OCD? Body Dysmorphia?  Mental health problems is such a vague catch-all term.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

...found a news item on this. Yes, it did bar you from being an MP.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...serve-on-juries-and-be-company-directors.html


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

ash said:


> Yes-legally you cannot be a director of a company if you have mental health problems which must include small two person limited companies!



Thinking about this, I need to do some double checking with the Companies Act 2006 in case the position has been changed/clarified. It tends to be a clause that's always put in service agreements (I'm guilty of doing this without challenging it myself) and is definitely worth another look (for me) with a view to potentially redrafting accepted clauses.


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> ...found a news item on this. Yes, it did bar you from being an MP.
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...serve-on-juries-and-be-company-directors.html



That's the one!


----------



## ash (Sep 15, 2012)

cesare said:


> Thinking about this, I need to do some double checking with the Companies Act 2006 in case the position has been changed/clarified. It tends to be a clause that's always put in service agreements (I'm guilty of doing this without challenging it myself) and is definitely worth another look (for me) with a view to potentially redrafting accepted clauses.



Let me know I haven't read the Companies Act (sadly) but working in mental health services I have always understood this to be the case. I wonder if it's also in the Mental Health Act?


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> ...found a news item on this. Yes, it did bar you from being an MP.
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...serve-on-juries-and-be-company-directors.html


 
My god! That comment section. Telegraph readers are a bunch of ignorant fuckwits.  

/faux surprise


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

ash said:


> Let me know I haven't read the Companies Act (sadly) but working in mental health services I have always underwood this to be the case. I wonder if it's also in the Mental Health Act?



Will do. The Companies Act is huge but online and fairly easy to access so I'll have a look over the next few days. I'm really not familiar with the Mental Health Act but MrsM's link refers to it so I expect it's probably covered there, yes.


----------



## _angel_ (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Yes, not because of this thread specifically but because of previous temp bans, re-registering and countless warnings.


Oh come on where would we be without his miserablistness.


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> My god! That comment section. Telegraph readers are a bunch of ignorant fuckwits.
> 
> /faux surprise



Aye  it's the bloody Torygraph so a middle class version of what you get in the DM.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

First one I found...didn't get to the comment section.


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> First one I found...didn't get to the comment section.



Tis a useful reminder of how much further there is to go than just potential legislation, innit.


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Sep 15, 2012)

cesare said:


> Aye  it's the bloody Torygraph so a middle class version of what you get in the DM.


 
Lower-middle for the DM, middle-middle and upper-middle for the Torygraph. DM'ers are an aspirational bunch, so one day they may 'make it,' and so make their bigotry more 'refined.'


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Sep 15, 2012)

cesare said:


> Aye  it's the bloody Torygraph so a middle class version of what you get in the DM.


 
Very true. I take the piss out of my dad sometimes for buying it. I tell him that if there is one piece of evidence that proves social mobility was easier for his generation, it's that his dad used to buy the News of the World whilst he buys the Telegraph. Weirdly, neither of them are particularly right wing in day-to-day life. Go figure.

eta: I think he just started buying to impress my mum. What a loser.


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

Captain Hurrah said:


> Lower-middle for the DM, middle-middle and upper-middle for the Torygraph. DM'ers are an aspirational bunch, so one day they may 'make it,' and so make their bigotry more 'refined.'


Ah yes, you're right, I hadn't really analysed it to that extent  I kind of think of Longdog's posts = DM, with LLETSA and JHE doing Torygraph.


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> Very true. I take the piss out of my dad sometimes for buying it. I tell him that if there is one piece of evidence that proves social mobility was easier for his generation, it's that his dad used to buy the News of the World whilst he buys the Telegraph. Weirdly, neither of them are particularly right wing in day-to-day life. Go figure.
> 
> eta: I think he just started buying to impress my mum. What a loser.



My dad's moved from Torygraph to Independent as he's grown less enamoured of the Tories over the years  He always bought the NOTW too, "for the sport lol" very tongue in cheek. Mind you, he's had Private Eye since I was a kid too


----------



## _angel_ (Sep 15, 2012)

treelover said:


> I have no problems with temporary bans, i think permabans should be a last resort
> 
> has Lletsa been banned?


Same here. Just make it a temp one imo.


----------



## xenon (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Good post and I also like it for quite a left-field reason...the spelling is so consistent with speech software saying it correctly. As I type this my husband's computer is chattering away very fast in a US accent.



Ha. . I was a bit drunk by then too TBF.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

xenon said:


> Ha. . I was a bit drunk by then too TBF.


Sometimes my husband will put it reading German mode and set it to read English or vice versa...he finds it very amusing. He's easily amused....


----------



## xenon (Sep 15, 2012)

Heh. Maybe all JAWS users mess around with the language settings for lolz. Spannish sounds like, "Languarki," menoo bar. owlt taab."


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 15, 2012)

tbh I saw this banning a mile off. He does the routine a load of times and it can be quite funny AND frustrating during a nonsense thread. But doing the schtick on a serious thread where the iron fist within the velvet glove moderates was due to end only one way. He could have just llowed it and not kept posting but half the routine is a dogged last wordism.

I warned I warned


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 15, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> tbh I saw this banning a mile off. He does the routine a load of times and it can be quite funny AND frustrating during a nonsense thread. But doing the schtick on a serious thread where the iron fist within the velvet glove moderates was due to end only one way. He could have just llowed it and not kept posting but half the routine is a dogged last wordism.
> 
> I warned I warned


 
(((((Cassandra)))))


----------



## ash (Sep 15, 2012)

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2012-2013/0011/2013011.pdf

It is in the companies act about directors and MH not sure about the MHA


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 15, 2012)

froggy

was loking at some stuff about aktion-t4 the other day , i never realised how fucked it was. well i did but i'd never really thought about it

some fucking heartbreaking shit, the scariest things is that it cold happen again, people do have those kind of attitudes, thinking that there's no point to people's existences and the like


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> some fucking heartbreaking shit, the scariest things is that it cold happen again, people do have those kind of attitudes, thinking that there's no point to people's existences and the like


On the one hand there's the naked hatred (born of fear of 'other') and on the other there's the 'it's a kindness really, because obviously their lives are miserable and shit'. We have to be vigilant about both.


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> (((((Cassandra)))))


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 15, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> froggy
> 
> was loking at some stuff about aktion-t4 the other day , i never realised how fucked it was. well i did but i'd never really thought about it
> 
> some fucking heartbreaking shit, the scariest things is that it cold happen again, people do have those kind of attitudes, thinking that there's no point to people's existences and the like


 
People often chunter on about how "XXXXXX could never happen again", but that's just a lack of imagination and foresight on their part, unfortunately, because it's *so fucking easy* for history to repeat, for our "betters" to decide for us that, for example, disabled people are only fit for certain types of employment, or (if they continue to buttfuck the economy) aren't fit for any type of employment or welfare, but should rather be separated from the general population (freeing up some jobs for "normals") in "disabled communities" surrounded by fences to keep nasty people out.
Political behaviour, at heart, is instrumental behaviour, instrumental in that it benefits the politician and his class more than it benefits the electorate, but sold to the electorate as policy that benefits the majority. If they think they can get away with it, they'll try to, especially in a parliament where neoliberalism dominates political thought.

Sorry for being a depressing bastard.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 15, 2012)

cesare said:


>


 
I was imagining Dottie standing on the walls of Troy, wearing a _chiton_.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> On the one hand there's the naked hatred (born of fear of 'other') and on the other there's the 'it's a kindness really, because obviously their lives are miserable and shit'. We have to be vigilant about both.


 
Especially the former dressed as the latter.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> where the iron fist within the velvet glove moderates


I don't know whether to be flattered or not.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I don't know whether to be flattered or not.


----------



## Lock&Light (Sep 15, 2012)

I think he should have said "velvet fist within the iron glove."


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 15, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> People often chunter on about how "XXXXXX could never happen again", but that's just a lack of imagination and foresight on their part, unfortunately, because it's *so fucking easy* for history to repeat, for our "betters" to decide for us that, for example, disabled people are only fit for certain types of employment, or (if they continue to buttfuck the economy) aren't fit for any type of employment or welfare, but should rather be separated from the general population (freeing up some jobs for "normals") in "disabled communities" surrounded by fences to keep nasty people out.
> Political behaviour, at heart, is instrumental behaviour, instrumental in that it benefits the politician and his class more than it benefits the electorate, but sold to the electorate as policy that benefits the majority. If they think they can get away with it, they'll try to, especially in a parliament where neoliberalism dominates political thought.
> 
> Sorry for being a depressing bastard.


 
froggy

the thing that got me about that aktion-T4 is that the economic justifications were clearly at the top of it, it was all like "look how much killing these people is gonna save the state"

obviously the situation now is nowhere near as bad but fucking hell naked economic considerations, or what


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> froggy
> 
> the thing that got me about that aktion-T4 is that the economic justifications were clearly at the top of it, it was all like "look how much killing these people is gonna save the state"
> 
> obviously the situation now is nowhere near as bad but fucking hell naked economic considerations, or what


Well, there was also propaganda dressing it up as a kindness....dreadful film about a husband with a mentally ill wife that was presented as compassionate euthanasia.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> froggy
> 
> the thing that got me about that aktion-T4 is that the economic justifications were clearly at the top of it, it was all like "look how much killing these people is gonna save the state"
> 
> obviously the situation now is nowhere near as bad but fucking hell naked economic considerations, or what


 Just sussed this isn't a post from Dot addressed to froggy


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Well, there was also propaganda dressing it up as a kindness....dreadful film about a husband with a mentally ill wife that was presented as compassionate euthanasia.


 
froggy

yer which is why i am perhaps more sympathetic to pro-life arguments about this matter at times than i should be


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Just sussed this isn't a post from Dot addressed to froggy


 
froggy

yep it's me, i'll log in as me soon, apolgoies


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

No, it's OK, it's just I'm a bit dense today as I'm up to the eyes with painkillers.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Well, there was also propaganda dressing it up as a kindness....dreadful film about a husband with a mentally ill wife that was presented as compassionate euthanasia.


 
froggy

absolutely. there were laods of high-profiles cases which they used to override objections from the churches and the like. essentially conflating the whole idea where somebody has requested to die with just killing them


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

...it might be this film except I thought it was about mental illness not MS, but my German isn't very good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ich_klage_an


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> People often chunter on about how "XXXXXX could never happen again", but that's just a lack of imagination and foresight on their part, unfortunately, because it's *so fucking easy* for history to repeat, for our "betters" to decide for us that, for example, disabled people are only fit for certain types of employment, or (if they continue to buttfuck the economy) aren't fit for any type of employment or welfare, but should rather be separated from the general population (freeing up some jobs for "normals") in "disabled communities" surrounded by fences to keep nasty people out.
> Political behaviour, at heart, is instrumental behaviour, instrumental in that it benefits the politician and his class more than it benefits the electorate, but sold to the electorate as policy that benefits the majority. If they think they can get away with it, they'll try to, especially in a parliament where neoliberalism dominates political thought.
> 
> Sorry for being a depressing bastard.



See also, travellers.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> ...it might be this film except I thought it was about mental illness not MS, but my German isn't very good.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ich_klage_an


 
MS was classed as a psychiatric illness until the 1970s.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 15, 2012)

cesare said:


> See also, travellers.


 
Yep, in fact *any* "out-group".


----------



## cesare (Sep 15, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> Yep, in fact *any* "out-group".



Aye


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 15, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> I was imagining Dottie standing on the walls of Troy, wearing a _chiton_.


 
dot

when i enter combat I fully expect to be equipped with DPMs, a half decent rifle and the respect of my fellow man.


I'm sure I can manage at least two of those


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

Found full film on youtube, it's definitely the same film.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 15, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> I was imagining Dottie standing on the walls of Troy, wearing a _chiton_.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 15, 2012)

ViolentPanda said:


> MS was classed as a psychiatric illness until the 1970s.


In France children with autism are still 'treated' by psychiatrists in mental hospitals and any attempt by parents to remove autism from the classification of mental illness is fiercely opposed by psychiatrists...
eta
dunno about the position with adults with autism, my only knowledge is about children in this respect


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 15, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> In France children with autism are still 'treated' by psychiatrists in mental hospitals and any attempt by parents to remove autism from the classification of mental illness is fiercely opposed by psychiatrists...
> eta
> dunno about the position with adults with autism, my only knowledge is about children in this respect


 
I have a fairly low opinion of psychiatry, given the history of the discipline in apppropriating illnesses and labelling them as psychiatric *prior* to developing their proofs or sometimes even their arguments. Poor academic discipline married to the general arrogance of the medical profession - not a good combination.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 15, 2012)

frogwoman said:


>


 
A tunic, froggie. A tunic!


----------



## ericjarvis (Sep 15, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> froggy
> 
> the thing that got me about that aktion-T4 is that the economic justifications were clearly at the top of it, it was all like "look how much killing these people is gonna save the state"
> 
> obviously the situation now is nowhere near as bad but fucking hell naked economic considerations, or what


 
I see it as worse in one very important way. The scale is far smaller as yet, but the effect of the policy is to kill sick and disabled people without the politicians accepting any reponsibility. At least death camps would be honest.

Simple fact. I can no longer afford to keep enough food in the house to go a fortnight without at least three or four hypos. I'm pretty good at spotting them and have neighbours who will help out in an emergency. Not every diabetic on insulin is as lucky.

Whatever mealy mouthed excuses they make up, the policy of the last two governments has been to kill the sick and disabled in order to save money to pay for huge government contracts (and massive tax evasion) for large donors to political party funds. Morally it's not all that different from gassing us.


----------



## _angel_ (Sep 16, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> In France children with autism are still 'treated' by psychiatrists in mental hospitals and any attempt by parents to remove autism from the classification of mental illness is fiercely opposed by psychiatrists...
> eta
> dunno about the position with adults with autism, my only knowledge is about children in this respect


Hey there's people on here who think it's something that can be willed away and is caused by capitalism. Of course there was never autism in the past. Just imbeciles, fools, and whatever other lovely terms they had. 
And then it all being down to the mothers fault (Freud etc).


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 16, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> And then it all being down to the mothers fault (Freud etc).


It was Leo Kanner....'refrigerator mothers'


----------



## articul8 (Sep 16, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> And then it all being down to the mothers fault (Freud etc).


evidence of Freud saying this?  He certainly recognised that there were forms of psychic disorder that were inherited/biological rather than neurotic.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 16, 2012)

articul8 said:


> evidence of Freud saying this? He certainly recognised that there were forms of psychic disorder that were inherited/biological rather than neurotic.


i think larkin put it well:

They fuck you up, your mum and dad.
  They may not mean to, but they do.
They fill you with the faults they had
  And add some extra, just for you.

But they were fucked up in their turn
  By fools in old-style hats and coats,
Who half the time were soppy-stern
  And half at one another's throats.

Man hands on misery to man.
  It deepens like a coastal shelf.
Get out as early as you can,
  And don't have any kids yourself.


----------



## toggle (Sep 16, 2012)

_angel_ said:


> Hey there's people on here who think it's something that can be willed away and is caused by capitalism.


 
oh ffs.


----------



## Bakunin (Sep 16, 2012)

toggle said:


> judging from some of the comments bakunin has made about the treatment he got in one of the 'nicer' areas of plymouth, I think aspies can be at quite a risk as well.


 
To be fair, the 'nicer' areas of Plymouth are only the ones that aren't as soul-destroyingly shit as the worse parts, the 'nicer' areas also having a lower level of being infested by cunts. With Plymouth, as a general rule of thumb, the lower your expectations the less heartbreakingly disillusioned you're likely to become.

Aspies are at risk, no doubt about it. We simply don't pick up social warning signs that 'normal people' (a phrase I personally detest with a venom) will pick up naturally. Also, we're often so isolated that we're wide open to being used and manipulated by people who aren't what they seem because a lot of us are quite likely to be ecstatic at having SOMEBODY take an interest in us that doesn't seem openly hostile to start off with and that leads to us being royally fucked and possibly in serious trouble somewhere down the line. Personally, I've learned not to trust anybody readily, to cut people off completely if they seriously fuck me over once (sticking around for a second dose usually invites one, in my experience) and that the human species isn't my favourite one on the planet. Sounds misanthropic, I know, but it comes from a lifelong experience of being drip-fed endless hostility from people who are openly vile towards me and being fucked over pretty badly (and more than a few times) by people who enjoyed twisting my mind into spaghetti while ably pretending that they ever gave a damn in the first place.


----------



## toggle (Sep 16, 2012)

Bakunin said:


> To be fair, the 'nicer' areas of Plymouth are only the ones that aren't as soul-destroyingly shit as the worse parts, the 'nicer' areas also having a lower level of being infested by cunts. With Plymouth, as a general rule of thumb, the lower your expectations the less heartbreakingly disillusioned you're likely to become.
> 
> Aspies are at risk, no doubt about it. We simply don't pick up social warning signs that 'normal people' (a phrase I personally detest with a venom) will pick up naturally. Also, we're often so isolated that we're wide open to being used and manipulated by people who aren't what they seem because a lot of us are quite likely to be ecstatic at having SOMEBODY take an interest in us that doesn't seem openly hostile to start off with and that leads to us being royally fucked and possibly in serious trouble somewhere down the line. Personally, I've learned not to trust anybody readily, to cut people off completely if they seriously fuck me over once (sticking around for a second dose usually invites one, in my experience) and that the human species isn't my favourite one on the planet. Sounds misanthropic, I know, but it comes from a lifelong experience of being drip-fed endless hostility from people who are openly vile towards me and being fucked over pretty badly (and more than a few times) by people who enjoyed twisting my mind into spaghetti while ably pretending that they ever gave a damn in the first place.


 
makes me wonder why in the hell you let me into your life so fast tbh


----------



## Bakunin (Sep 16, 2012)

toggle said:


> makes me wonder why in the hell you let me into your life so fast tbh


 
I took a leap of faith for once. 

For once, not only was I right to, but I've gained someone who makes all the previous shit in my life worth having been through.


----------



## Libertad (Sep 16, 2012)

Bakunin said:


> To be fair, the 'nicer' areas of Plymouth are only the ones that aren't as soul-destroyingly shit as the worse parts, the 'nicer' areas also having a lower level of being infested by cunts. With Plymouth, as a general rule of thumb, the lower your expectations the less heartbreakingly disillusioned you're likely to become.


 
That is so true.


----------



## Libertad (Sep 16, 2012)

Bakunin said:


> Aspies are at risk, no doubt about it. We simply don't pick up social warning signs that 'normal people' (a phrase I personally detest with a venom) will pick up naturally. Also, we're often so isolated that we're wide open to being used and manipulated by people who aren't what they seem because a lot of us are quite likely to be ecstatic at having SOMEBODY take an interest in us that doesn't seem openly hostile to start off with and that leads to us being royally fucked and possibly in serious trouble somewhere down the line. Personally, I've learned not to trust anybody readily, to cut people off completely if they seriously fuck me over once (sticking around for a second dose usually invites one, in my experience) and that the human species isn't my favourite one on the planet. Sounds misanthropic, I know, but it comes from a lifelong experience of being drip-fed endless hostility from people who are openly vile towards me and being fucked over pretty badly (and more than a few times) by people who enjoyed twisting my mind into spaghetti while ably pretending that they ever gave a damn in the first place.


 
No, that isn't misanthropy that's self-preservation.


----------



## treelover (Sep 16, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> froggy
> 
> the thing that got me about that aktion-T4 is that the economic justifications were clearly at the top of it, it was all like "look how much killing these people is gonna save the state"
> 
> obviously the situation now is nowhere near as bad but fucking hell naked economic considerations, or what


 



> *March 1914. Exhibition of the Reichsausschuss für Volksgesundheit (Reich Committee for National Health)*
> *“Three-year old boy, deaf, crippled and completely idiotic. The nursing costs amounting to 8 Marks a day”, *​http://mindinflux.wordpress.com/tag/black-triangle/​​​


 
it started well before the Nazis came to power..


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 16, 2012)

treelover said:


> it started well before the Nazis came to power..


Eugenics was 'the new thing' all over Europe and that's partly why Marie Stopes got into birth control. The difference being that, distasteful though the idea of preventing the feckless lower orders from breeding is, the mass killing of children and lying to their parents about the cause of death started with Hitler, as far as I can ascertain.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 16, 2012)

froggyposting

yes it did, prior to 1938 disabled people were "just" sterilised and usually there was a semblance of consent

which was still shit but it wasnt hadamar


----------



## Frankie Jack (Sep 16, 2012)

Press portrayal of disabled people
A rise in hostility fuelled by austerity?
pdf by Disability Rights UK.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 16, 2012)

treelover said:


> it started well before the Nazis came to power..


 
In the US states that conducted sterilisations, they worked out who to sterilise according to supposedly-actuarial calculations of projected cost over a lifetime, plus cost of the "average" number of chidren etc.
It's always about economics, even when it's dressed up as something else.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 16, 2012)

> One early 16mm film Erbkrank (“The Hereditarily Ill” or “The
> Genetically Diseased”), variously dated as 1934 (U.S. National Archives)
> or 1936 (Bundesarchiv, Koblenz) was presented as an educational
> documentary by the NSDAP, the agency for racial affairs of the National
> ...


 
fucking hell.


----------



## Libertad (Sep 16, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> fucking hell.


 
I would like to make comparisons with current developments in Britain but there is no need really, is there?


----------



## NoXion (Sep 17, 2012)

Is it just me, or am I seeing parallels with the kind of rhetoric that depicts prison life as something akin to a holiday? That sort of talk has been going on since before the recession, as I remember.


----------



## Greebo (Sep 17, 2012)

NoXion said:


> Is it just me, or am I seeing parallels with the kind of rhetoric that depicts prison life as something akin to a holiday? That sort of talk has been going on since before the recession, as I remember.


Not just you.  It says something about how relentlessly tough life can be when people start thinking that at least in prison you'd be fed, have a roof over your head, and not have to work such long hours.


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 20, 2012)

cesare said:


> Yep. Poor show, LLETSA. It was only missing a picture of a burning disability aid as lols, like fucking Longdog's treatment of an advice thread re travellers. What is it that brings out the bloody worst in people like this, the ability to exercise power? Fuck's sake.


 
There was  and is no comparison whatsoever between what Lletsa said and longdogs posts.


----------



## cesare (Sep 21, 2012)

Fedayn said:


> There was  and is no comparison whatsoever between what Lletsa said and longdogs posts.


I suppose that depends if you were on the receiving end, or not, doesn't it?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 21, 2012)

Recieving end of what? I know feelings are (rightly) running high over issues pertaining to disability ATM but like I said somewhere else, opinions were ascribed to LLETSA which, if you read his posts properly, he didn't actually give voice to.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 21, 2012)

Frankie Jack said:


> Press portrayal of disabled people
> 
> A rise in hostility fuelled by austerity?
> pdf by Disability Rights UK.


 

FFS! Because of Sonia Poulton's articles, the Daily Mail comes out 2nd on top for positive coverage 

although it does also come 2nd on top for negative coverage


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 21, 2012)

Frances Lengel said:


> Recieving end of what? I know feelings are (rightly) running high over issues pertaining to disability ATM but like I said somewhere else, opinions were ascribed to LLETSA which, if you read his posts properl*y, he didn't actually give voice to*.


 

the frequency with which that happened on many many threads suggests either a) he is a poor communicator (don't buy that one) b) his audience are bad readers (some are some aren't) or c) he regularly trailed his coat to get a reaction.

I know which I think most likely.Don't think it should have been permanent mind


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 21, 2012)

You've probably got a point. Maybe a week's ban would've been more fitting though.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 21, 2012)

Frances Lengel said:


> You've probably got a point. Maybe a week's ban would've been more fitting though.


Going by past performance on a temp ban, he re-registers pretty sharpish. This wasn't about one incident. It's a catalogue.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 21, 2012)

Personally,I think he trolls deliberately.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 21, 2012)

of course, its just a version of the lie by omission, where you don't say something but allude to it and allow people to think something.Then when pulled you can say 'ah but I didn't say that, I am not responsible for conclusions you have leapt to'. Cunts trick


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 21, 2012)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Going by past performance on a temp ban, he re-registers pretty sharpish. This wasn't about one incident. It's a catalogue.


 
Wonder if he'll come back as a woman again?


----------



## where to (Dec 15, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> c) he regularly trailed his coat to get a reaction.


 
so what if he did?  it opened up debate and challenged opinions.  isn't that the point of this place?  omni-thought achieves nothing.

joke of a decision.  he took an unpopular stance, defended it (generally pretty well impo), and got banned off the back of it.  pathetic.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 15, 2012)

where to said:


> so what if he did? it opened up debate and challenged opinions. isn't that the point of this place? omni-thought achieves nothing.
> 
> joke of a decision. he took an unpopular stance, defended it (generally pretty well impo), and got banned off the back of it. pathetic.


 
You're a bit late to the party, mate.


----------



## toggle (Dec 15, 2012)

where to said:


> so what if he did? it opened up debate and challenged opinions. isn't that the point of this place? omni-thought achieves nothing.
> 
> joke of a decision. he took an unpopular stance, defended it (generally pretty well impo), and got banned off the back of it. pathetic.


 


no, that ins't the point of this place at all. sometimes the point of this place is for people to have a safe space where victims of abuse aren't 'challenged', cause life is challenging enough without some cunt accusing them of lying when they share their expereinces.


lletsa came into the thread, not to debate, but to stir up shit. at the expense of others, for his own entertainment. and if you want to defend him doign that, at the expense of taking away a safe space where victims of abuse can gain some comfort from sharing expereince, then you're a cunt as well.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 15, 2012)

where to said:


> so what if he did? it opened up debate and challenged opinions. isn't that the point of this place? omni-thought achieves nothing.
> 
> joke of a decision. he took an unpopular stance, defended it (generally pretty well impo), and got banned off the back of it. pathetic.


This isn't about 'omni-thought'. Lletsa was deliberately out to cause pain for his own entertainment, on a serious thread. He deserved the ban for this and other times he did the same, usually at the expense of posters who are vulnerable.

If you think he was right to do that, then you're as much as a shit as he is.

And as VP says, bit late to the party...why are you bringing up something that is best left alone?


----------



## Meltingpot (Dec 15, 2012)

Libertad said:


> That is so true.


 
(and Bakunin) Are other places any different though? I think people are people wherever you go. I spent a lot of time in a village in Cornwall when I was growing up, and I'd wager there was at least as much meanness and downright interpersonal shittiness there as there was anywhere else.

And then I did my degree in a city where a significant minority of the population hated students - that was "interesting" too at times. If you can show me a place where everyone's nice to each other, I'd be happy to live there.

P.S. There are plenty of nice people in Plymouth - my godmother lives there for one.


----------



## toggle (Dec 15, 2012)

Meltingpot said:


> (and Bakunin) Are other places any different though? I think people are people wherever you go. I spent a lot of time in a village in Cornwall when I was growing up, and I'd wager there was at least as much meanness and downright interpersonal shittiness there as there was anywhere else.
> 
> And then I did my degree in a city where a significant minority of the population hated students - that was "interesting" too at times. If you can show me a place where everyone's nice to each other, I'd be happy to live there.
> 
> P.S. There are plenty of nice people in Plymouth - my godmother lives there for one.


 
I think bakunin's expereinces in plymouth were particularly bad. and he never told anyone because he was wanting to proove he could cope. rather than having to run to others for support. which made it all into a really bad combination.


----------



## Meltingpot (Dec 15, 2012)

toggle said:


> I think bakunin's expereinces in plymouth were particularly bad. and he never told anyone because he was wanting to proove he could cope. rather than having to run to others for support. which made it all into a really bad combination.


 
I understand that. It's pretty hard to call for help anyway when you're young; there's a taboo against it amongst young people of school age in particular.

Plymouth's quite a conservative city in some ways because of the strong naval presence, and Devon as a whole is pretty conservative too. I remember watching "The Life of Brian" at a cinema in Leicester (where I was studying at the time) and then coming home to Plymouth and finding that it was banned (and also was everywhere else in Devon). I don't think the guy who imposed the ban (Councillor Ted Pinney IIRC) even saw the film.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 15, 2012)

where to said:


> so what if he did? it opened up debate and challenged opinions. isn't that the point of this place? omni-thought achieves nothing.
> 
> joke of a decision. he took an unpopular stance, defended it (generally pretty well impo), and got banned off the back of it. pathetic.


 

this place, perhaps. This thread- not really. As I said before I thought a temp would have sufficed but then I'm not in charge


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Dec 15, 2012)

Often bans are not lifted if the bannee keeps re-registering.


----------

