Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ
Yet you feel perfectly entitled to incorrectly comment and assume about the disability of others.
You won’t see it but the rest of us can see the irony of that post going in to orbit.
Just wow.
|
No, I comment upon the effects of various conditions that I know something about.
---------- Post added at 03:29 ---------- Previous post was at 03:27 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul
|
Yes it is. Would someone go up to a wheelchair user and question their disability because they saw them walking the previous day? I think not.
---------- Post added at 03:38 ---------- Previous post was at 03:29 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh
No one (to the best of my knowledge) questions your disability - we question your repeated attempts to conflate disagreement with what you post with your disability…
|
Both Pierre and Russ have questioned the effects of my disability because of the way that I post.
In general, when I do get things wrong, instead of explaining things in a right manner and trying to help me, I am met with snide, rude and discriminatory remarks by various people. These are often deliberately crafted to publically humiliate or embarrass me as a disabled person.
If someone here developed dementia (about 50% will), would members be allowed to do the same thing when they forget things, ask the same question shortly after having already asked it etc?
I have no problem with interacting with others with differing views (that's a major part of internet forums), the issue is the issues outlined in paragraph two.
---------- Post added at 04:16 ---------- Previous post was at 03:38 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackshep
If people are being harassed, abused or mistreated online there are already criminal law remedies for it and have been for quite sometime. Life isn't guaranteed to be totally safe or free from idiots but you cannot expect everything to have a law apart from the stupidity of that the more complex the law becomes the more often then not it fails in it's intended aims. I have a disability but just because I do I don't expect the world to adapt to me I've had to adapt to it personally and professionally and that's how it should be.
True free speech is speech without control meaning we may hear thing's that upset, offend or disturb us and again we need to use those experiences to strengthen ourselves and to learn to oppose ignorance and hate. You don't get rid of ignorance and hate by law you drive it underground concentrating it in echo chambers's without opposition or differing views further cementing it. You cannot say you support free speech and then call for and support it's restriction you have to take the bad with the good and laws rarely apply context.
|
Yes, there are laws already in place to prevent companies and individuals from making inappropriate comments. I have used them myself and find that the majority change their attitude after a little bit of education, the rest settle out of court and a minority had to be put through the legal process. I am lucky in that I get free legal advice through work, but the majority will not have this privilege.
These new laws aim to make the online experience a much better place for both protected groups (including children) and beyond.
I have changed the attitude of various individuals & companies, received recompense for the effects caused and/or had various payments made to charity on my behalf. I have offered to help pay towards the running costs of this site, gave forum members an opportu nity to help me choose which charities to support and offered food to those struggling because of the Government's benefit cuts.
I don't expect to be thanked, but neither do I expect to be subject to snide, acerbic comments and generally belittled for exercising my legal rights and sharing the proceeds of any recompense.
We will have to agree to disagree regarding your belief that the minority should adapt for the majority. Thankfully, our society agrees with me and we have efforts to adapt to the minority who need things being made accessible in braille, wheelchair accessibility ramps, induction loops etc.
Despite this, disabled people
do try to adapt to the majority non disabled world. Sometimes this is because they have no other choice, eg going down stairs on their bottom, or because they want to appear 'normal' as a matter of personal pride because of the negative connotations associated with disability.
Some even attempt to outright reject the notion that they are disabled at all and try to ally themselves with non disabled people, whilst insulting fellow disabled people in a desperate attempt to try and convince themselves that they are not disabled. I often compare this to the black comedians of the seventies who told racist jokes to appease white people.
I do not support the notion of total free speech for, what I hope, are obvious reasons. Heck, you can't even say anything that you want on this (and other) forums!
I don't mean that we shouldn't be allowed to openly disagree with, for example, the Government, but neither should people be allowed to do something like openly mock someone with a facial disfigurement.
A late member on here who was severely sight impaired claimed that he had received a PM saying that he should have been drowned at birth. These attitudes don't come from nowhere, they occur by stealth and this is why inappropriate behaviour needs nipping in the bud before it deteriorates to this level.
We have the right to free speech within defined reasonable parameters and this worked well for many years, but the internet changed this. The Government tried the route of self regulation, but this failed miserably, hence the need for new statutory legislation.