Thanks Homies!

[Bugz]

Toht I enjoyed FH more when you were on a break. Deciphering your posts from what you say and what you intend is a fuckin chore!

 

[Aoami]

It's an example, you know what i mean and you know it happens.

I don't, quite frankly, know that it happens

 

[old.Tohtori]

Toht I enjoyed FH more when you were on a break. Deciphering your posts from what you say and what you intend is a fuckin chore!

And i liked you better when you weren't pussywhipped into a GF mold. Tough shit.


Ok, maybe this is simple enough;

You can't expect to be treated normally and then pull out the disability card when you feel like it.

That does not apply to things you CAN'T do.

For example; pulling out the disability card when made fun of in other ways.

Don't try to make me sound like i want disabled peeps jumping in the Olympics and stop whining 'cause that's not even REMOTELY what i said.

 

[Bugz]

But the vast majority of people don't want to be treated exactly as an person without disabilities, they want to be treated as a human being who is independent in the things he can do and appreciates the help for the things he can't do.

 

[old.Tohtori]

But the vast majority of people don't want to be treated exactly as an person without disabilities, they want to be treated as a human being who is independent in the things he can do and appreciates the help for the things he can't do.

Did i call ALL disabled people something? Did i say ALL disabled people do this?

No.

It's like calling some americans morons, you don't mean they ALL are morons. But hey, it's disabled people, can't judge right?

 

[tris-]

Seems to be a case of "i meant this but i said that".

Everyone seems to think you meant something else. No offence or anything, but maybe you should type exactly what you mean? As this seems to happen more often than not!

As for what you are now saying, I dont think any self respecting disabled person would do that.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Seems to be a case of "i meant this but i said that"

Actually no, the point hasn't changed to anything and the first post is valid enough, just a bad example that had a little "assume" added to it.

That was cleared up.

 

[Bugz]

lol toht you were the one who generalises a minority into a majority. I'm doing the better of the two and generalising the majority as the majority.

It's the same messed up logic that applies to people with handicaps.

"Treat me as equal!"
Fair enough, you're equal.
"Give me that seat, i'm handicapped!"
What happened to equal?

 

[old.Tohtori]

No. The example clearly shows what happens.

Now did i say all handicapped act this way? No.
Is that handicapped person a prissy motherf*cker? Yes.

You seem to think that someone saying ANYTHING wrong about ANY handicapped people is saying abd things about ALL handicapped people.

 

[tris-]

Actually no, the point hasn't changed to anything and the first post is valid enough, just a bad example that had a little "assume" added to it.

That was cleared up.

I am not assuming anything, unless all of us reading this have assumed exactly the same thing. I simply read the post literally as is the usual case when reading things.

Is this the cleared up bit?

""I don't want special treatment 'cause i'm in a wheelchair"
Fine. Get us a round o beers will ya?
"But i'm in a wheelchair!""

Im still not sure I understand it. Someone in wheelchair may be physically unable to get a round of drinks in. Not sure how that is pulling out a disabled card or whaever?

 

[Chilly]

cant we argue about the alien and not about whether seel meant to say ass instead of arse?

 

[Bugz]

No. The example clearly shows what happens.

Now did i say all handicapped act this way? No.
Is that handicapped person a prissy motherf*cker? Yes.

You seem to think that someone saying ANYTHING wrong about ANY handicapped people is saying abd things about ALL handicapped people.

You gave the impression, due to the fact you seem to be unable to type anything as you intended in your mind, that it applies to 'people with handicaps.'

If that isn't generalizing the minority into the majority then I don't know what is.

If you had said 'applies to a small minority of people with handicaps,' or 'a small selection' etc etc etc.

Anyway - no doubt you will come back with another twist or turn or whatever...*waits for it*

 

[old.Tohtori]

I am not assuming anything, unless all of us reading this have assumed exactly the same thing. I simply read the post literally as is the usual case when reading things.

Is this the cleared up bit?

""I don't want special treatment 'cause i'm in a wheelchair"
Fine. Get us a round o beers will ya?
"But i'm in a wheelchair!""

Im still not sure I understand it. Someone in wheelchair may be physically unable to get a round of drinks in. Not sure how that is pulling out a disabled card or whaever?

I didn't say you were assuming, i cleared it with Aoami.

You also need to think about what you read, perhaps try to see the point, not just go about it anally.

That example is valid because i've seen lpenty of people in wheelchairs get a round of drinks, ergo, if one guy in a wheelchair can do it, someone in an equal wheelchair position should too.

So, if this individual wants no special treatment, refusing to get a round of drinks is not logical.

You gave the impression, due to the fact you seem to be unable to type anything as you intended in your mind, that it applies to 'people with handicaps.'

What exactly gives the impression i mean ALL handicapped instead of those who act like dicks?

 

[tris-]

I



So, if this individual wants no special treatment, refusing to get a round of drinks is not logical.

???????????

Lets take Steve who I work with. I dont know about his illness, but he cant walk, cant move his arms and most of his muscles dont work. If he refuses to bring me a round of drinks , I wouldnt blame him.
In fact, lets take Julie who isnt even in a wheel chair. She has something wrong with her hands and cant grip anything propley. I wouldnt blame her either.

Does anyone else understand or is just me making assumpotions or whatever Im supposed to be doing wrong here?

 

[Aoami]

That example is valid because i've seen lpenty of people in wheelchairs get a round of drinks, ergo, if one guy in a wheelchair can do it, someone in an equal wheelchair position should too.

So, if this individual wants no special treatment, refusing to get a round of drinks is not logical.

Why? What if one person in a wheelchair has a broken leg, and another has MS. Hardly the same thing is it?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Lets take Steve who I work with. I dont know about his illness, but he cant walk, cant move his arms and most of his muscles dont work. If he refuses to bring me a round of drinks , I wouldnt blame him.
In fact, lets take Julie who isnt even in a wheel chair. She has something wrong with her hands and cant grip anything propley. I wouldnt blame her either.

I already told you; if you can't do something, fair enough, you can't.

But you can't pull the disability card if it's possible for you to do something when you want to be treated the same.

 

[Bugz]

Have fun Tris - I'll leave you to it!

 

[tris-]

Well the last one actually makes sense, but cant say I have ever met a disabled person with that little respect for them selves. However, I have met countless able bodied people who fit that bill.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Well the last one actually makes sense, but cant say I have ever met a disabled person with that little respect for them selves. However, I have met countless able bodied people who fit that bill.

Glad it's cleared up and i have seen a case or two.

It's no better then a normal person going about being fat, demanding not be treated as fat and then get all chuffed 'cause some thing doesn't work for fat people.

It's not at disabled people spesifically, it works on any group of people, just that the point i answered was more towards disabled.

 

[Marc]

Can anyone tell me what Toht is arguing about this time?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Can anyone tell me what Toht is arguing about this time?

Nothing actually.

Or like tris said;

Some disabled people are lazy just as some able bodied people are lazy.

With the added "some disabled people are using the disability card to be lazy".

By the way Marc, nice to see you've changed your way of "won't comment on the subject of the topic at all, in any way, but instead come and flame tohtori"....no wait.

 

[tris-]

Some disabled people are lazy just as some able bodied people are lazy.

 

[Zebolt]

Seems to be a case of "i meant this but i said that".

Everyone seems to think you meant something else. No offence or anything, but maybe you should type exactly what you mean? As this seems to happen more often than not!

I think almost everyone except you few who posted undertood what he meant.

As for what you are now saying, I dont think any self respecting disabled person would do that.

My mother work with disabled ppl so I meet quite alot of them in different ages and can tell you I see alot who use their disabilities for their advantage. I'm not saying they shouldn't but they sure do.

 

[tris-]

I think almost everyone except you few who posted undertood what he meant.



My mother work with disabled ppl so I meet quite alot of them in different ages and can tell you I see alot who use their disabilities for their advantage. I'm not saying they shouldn't but they sure do.

I dont doubt it, but I was refering to self respecting disabled people.
abled body people do it too, its called being a lazy twat.

 

[Dark Orb Choir]

a wankers a wanker, able bodied or not, tots posts are full of weasel wee and are deliberatly ambiguous to the point where if you try and counter his argument he just says "oh i didn't mean it like that i meant it like this", which leads to him just looking like the an idiot.

and just becasue you post 1254167 times per day doesn't make your comments any more valid than a person who posts once per week.

now, getting back on topic, fair play to the guy who posted these youtube videos, seems like he's got a bit of life in him and is making the best out of his situation, its very easy for the ultra 1337 on the internet to flame but at least hes trying, as misguided or not as his videos are.

 

[old.Tohtori]

a wankers a wanker, able bodied or not, tots posts are full of weasel wee and are deliberatly ambiguous to the point where if you try and counter his argument he just says "oh i didn't mean it like that i meant it like this", which leads to him just looking like the an idiot.

and just becasue you post 1254167 times per day doesn't make your comments any more valid than a person who posts once per week.

First point; There's none of that here, there hasn't been for a while. Let it go man. Only thing that happened is that i explained the point i made and i explained the misconception that i meant all disabled people(since it was assumed from thin air). There's nothing ambiguous about it.

Second point; Never claimed it did and fyi; the high post count comes from a long relationship with FH and being here almost daily, not from posting umpty times/day.

Stop trying to make up insults about things that aren't happening.

 

[Dark Orb Choir]

well, you would say that wouldn't you........

 

[old.Tohtori]

well, you would say that wouldn't you........

Well since that's like saying "No you!", i'll just leave you to fume at my "bad ways" as it seems so important in your life.

And seriously? Negative rep for disliking me and "my style" and not even what i posted?

 

[Dark Orb Choir]

boo hoo, i gave you bad reputation, i do not have to explain why i did it and unless i broke some rules you best stop moaning

 

[old.Tohtori]

you best stop moaning

Or what exactly? You'll....post at me?! Oh no!

Don't get me wrong, i'm honored you feel so strongly about what i do