staring at disabled people?

Czarcasm

Frito wrote: »

I still maintain my position that staring should be avoided, unless (as by your friend's example) you are invited to.

The thing is Frito, it'd be all lovely and polite in an ideal world if people didn't stare at other people, but the fact is - they do, because the people that stare are just as much human beings as the people they stare at. So, you can either run around telling everybody else not to stare, or, you can teach the person being stared at to ignore people staring at them, or to focus on you instead of the person staring at them. If they're aware of their surroundings and they're aware of being stared at, then they can be taught to ignore being stared at.

It's the very same as when my wife used go to a busy shopping centre with our child and she'd be scanning for "paedophiles everywhere". I used tell her instead of looking at everyone else thinking they're going to snatch the child, keep your focus on the child.

Instead of looking to see who is staring at the person with disabilities, keep your focus on the person with disabilities.

Chattastrophe!

Does anyone else just not get WHY adults would stare at people with disabilities, what is the fascination?

I mean, as a kid, I'm sure I probably stared because they looked different to other people and I probably didn't understand why. As I got older, I'm sure that as I grew to understand what Downs Syndrome was, or why someone might need to use a wheelchair, etc, I came to understand why those people looked different, and I stopped staring.

Now, I can't imagine giving someone a second glance because of their disability. Why on earth would I?! It holds no fascination for me.

And even if I DID feel some need to stare, I would like to think that, as an adult, I would manage to control myself and avoid any urge to stare. It's socially inappropriate to stare at strangers; I wouldn't appreciate others doing it to me, and I don't do it to others.

Duck's hoop

Czarcasm wrote: »

you can teach the person being stared at to ignore people staring at them, or to focus on you instead of the person staring at them. If they're aware of their surroundings and they're aware of being stared at, then they can be taught to ignore being stared at.

More patronising BS. Only now you've subtly reduced PWD to people who may be sentient enough to be TAUGHT by their betters.

Always with the fücking teaching. 'They should be taught this and taught that'.

Maybe they want to teach people to have some fücking manners and not be staring at them.

Czarcasm

Duck's hoop wrote: »

More patronising BS. Only now you've subtly reduced PWD to people who may be sentient enough to be TAUGHT by their betters.

You really can't afford to be getting up on that high horse when you reduce people with disabilities to "PWD". That aside, I never said anything about being taught by their "betters". This discussion is about treating people with disabilities as equals, not better than or worse than, any other human being.

Always with the fücking teaching. 'They should be taught this and taught that'.

Yes always with the teaching, the very same as people suggesting that people who stare need to be taught not to stare. That's one approach. I've found the far more effective approach rather than teaching one hundred people not to stare, is to teach one person to ignore the one hundred.

Maybe they want to teach people to have some fücking manners and not be staring at them.

Who's they? I certainly don't picture you teaching anyone manners when you seem to have difficulty with the concept of a civil discussion.

Annasopra

Czarcasm wrote: »

I've found the far more effective approach rather than teaching one hundred people not to stare, is to teach one person to ignore the one hundred.

What's effective about it? Does it change societal attitudes? Does it reinforce to people with disabilities that other people will treat them differently or rudely?

Czarcasm

mango salsa wrote: »

What's effective about it?

It focuses on the individual affected by the issue of people staring at them, rather than attempting to reach people who simply don't give a shìt. I care about the individual, I'm not so concerned with complete strangers who will take no notice of me asking them not to stare.

Does it change societal attitudes?

mango I'll make no bones about it - I'm not particularly concerned with "societal attitudes". Yes, I know what you mean and I know where you're coming from, but again, I have no particular interest in holding anyone up as the poster child for what society should aspire to. It takes all sorts of human beings to make a society and each person in that society will have their own priorities and issues that mean something to them. Just because someone doesn't care enough about someone else's particular issue doesn't make them a lesser human being.

Does it reinforce to people with disabilities that other people will treat them differently or rudely?

People will treat people differently or rudely if they never had disabilities, that's the whole point of teaching people with disabilities that they are equal to people who do not have disabilities. It may not be nice, but it's about treating human beings equally, no better and no worse than any other human being.

marwelie

IvySlayer wrote: »

Person in wheelchair runs over your toes, you end up apologising to them :P

Happens all the time, I get away with murder

Kids are terrified and facinated in equal measure by my wheelchair. I dont mind them staring because thats what they do. Friends and cousins have kids and I actively encourage them to get into the wheelchair, youd be amazed how different they react afterwards. Adults staring are a different matter altogether, although I cant think of a time that has actually happened. Having said that I can tell when someone has had previous experience of talking to a disabled person within 30 seconds of meeting them.

The most difficult thing for me being in a wheelchair is being in a social situation where you are so low down you cant participate in the conversation. I hate pubs because they are too loud, generally inaccessible and usually don'thave a wheelchair toilet. You'll either find me in the cinema or in front of the East Stand at Tallaght Stadium. Come up and say hello, I'll only bite you if you ask me to

Annasopra

Czarcasm wrote: »

It focuses on the individual affected by the issue of people staring at them, rather than attempting to reach people who simply don't give a shìt. I care about the individual, I'm not so concerned with complete strangers who will take no notice of me asking them not to stare.

mango I'll make no bones about it - I'm not particularly concerned with "societal attitudes". Yes, I know what you mean and I know where you're coming from, but again, I have no particular interest in holding anyone up as the poster child for what society should aspire to. It takes all sorts of human beings to make a society and each person in that society will have their own priorities and issues that mean something to them. Just because someone doesn't care enough about someone else's particular issue doesn't make them a lesser human being.

People will treat people differently or rudely if they never had disabilities, that's the whole point of teaching people with disabilities that they are equal to people who do not have disabilities. It may not be nice, but it's about treating human beings equally, no better and no worse than any other human being.

I can see to an extent where you are coming from but to me that is completely the wrong approach - It does the opposite in my view of what you think it does
1. It makes rudeness and people looking down on others as acceptable
2. It internalises the issue within the person with disabilities so that they accept being treated as a lesser human being because of their disability
3. It continues this cycle rather than actually changing it
4. There is no equality there. People with disabilities are treated as lesser because they have a disability.

Paddy Cow

I'm not disabled but I have a very large burn scar on my upper back. I got it when I was 2 so for me I've never known a time when it wasn't there and it doesn't bother me. When I was young people would only really notice it if I was at the swimming pool and they would look. Then they would realise that they were looking and get mortified/embarrassed and look away.

When I went to Australia I had a job in a pub and it was so hot that I wore little tops the whole time. I had been working there a few days when another girl approached me and asked about the scar on my back. She was really nice about it and was kinda afraid to ask in case I was sensitive about it but it turns out that everyone at work noticed it and were wondering how it happened. They had gotton to the stage where they thought that maybe I had been abused as a child or something. I lol'd at that and just explained that it was an accident as a child. It was never mentioned again.

If there is something about you that is different, people are going to look. Most people are not gobsh!tes and won't judge you or discriminate because of it and won't say anything or will ask in a nice way. I have found that it is the minority who are clueless and feel like they have to say something who end up saying something ignorant and hurtful.

You would think that having a noticeable "flaw" myself I would be more sensitive and not notice other peoples but I do. I don't mean anything bad about it and would never judge someone, whether they have a physical or mental disability. It's human nature to notice someone who's different. It's totally down to your own personality how you treat that person after noticing they are a bit different.

Duck's hoop

Czarcasm wrote: »

You really can't afford to be getting up on that high horse when you reduce people with disabilities to PWD

PWD is a common and accepted acronym for persons with disabilities. I presumed you'd be aware, what with your wide and extensive experience of working within the sector.

Scraping the barrel on that.

Duck's hoop

Paddy Cow wrote: »

I'm not disabled but I have a very large burn scar on my upper back. I got it when I was 2 so for me I've never known a time when it wasn't there and it doesn't bother me. When I was young people would only really notice it if I was at the swimming pool and they would look. Then they would realise that they were looking and get mortified/embarrassed and look away.

When I went to Australia I had a job in a pub and it was so hot that I wore little tops the whole time. I had been working there a few days when another girl approached me and asked about the scar on my back. She was really nice about it and was kinda afraid to ask in case I was sensitive about it but it turns out that everyone at work noticed it and were wondering how it happened. They had gotton to the stage where they thought that maybe I had been abused as a child or something. I lol'd at that and just explained that it was an accident as a child. It was never mentioned again.

If there is something about you that is different, people are going to look. Most people are not gobsh!tes and won't judge you or discriminate because of it and won't say anything or will ask in a nice way. I have found that it is the minority who are clueless and feel like they have to say something who end up saying something ignorant and hurtful.

You would think that having a noticeable "flaw" myself I would be more sensitive and not notice other peoples but I do. I don't mean anything bad about it and would never judge someone, whether they have a physical or mental disability. It's human nature to notice someone who's different. It's totally down to your own personality how you treat that person after noticing they are a bit different.

With all due respect, a scar is not the same as a visible disability.

People's attitudes change towards those with mobility impairments, hearing impairments, speech impairments etc.

There is not one chair user who doesn't have dozens or scores of stories of being patronised, talked over, down to, abused, made the butt of jokes, refused entry etc etc.

The 'people staring' thing is not simply people being 'curious' in most cases. It is outright bad manners and they often seem entitled to stare, as one poster said at the start of this thread when he, in quite staggeringly bad taste, compared PWD to exotic animals.

I have found myself looking back at people staring at me, slack jawed, for them to not even register me looking at them. I am subhuman or dehumanised in their eyes is my only explanation for that.

This is unlikely to occur because of a scar.

Czarcasm

mango salsa wrote: »

1. It makes rudeness and people looking down on others as acceptable

mango I'm sure you're aware of people with disabilities who are rude and look down on others? Often times I've found that this is because they themselves see themselves as separate and different because of their disability. Rudeness and looking down on other human beings is never acceptable, and should never be acceptable, but, people are free to do it regardless, otherwise you're gearing up for a "thought police" society. I don't think anyone wants to go there.

2. It internalises the issue within the person with disabilities so that they accept being treated as a lesser human being because of their disability

I don't know does it tbh, I'd be of the opinion that would completely depend on the person and how you would impart the approach to them. It's not like I'd suggest to anyone "People stare, your problem if you can't deal with that, but you'd want to get over it quickly now!". Of course different people are going to respond differently to different approaches at different levels, but if you shield people from reality and effectively blinker them, what happens you're not there to blinker them? They take it a lot harder when someone stares or insults them. People with disabilities can be taught to cope with their disability a lot better than the stranger who stares at them. Just look at BBOC's friend who is using her disability to her advantage as a performance artist to inform and educate people and normalise for them people with cerebal palsy. When those people come across someone with cerebal palsy again, they won't stare, because they won't see anything to stare at, they've seen it before. It's now normal to them.

3. It continues this cycle rather than actually changing it

Here's how your approach usually plays out (and believe me I've tried your approach on numerous occasions) -

We're in a restaurant and someone is staring at us...

"Excuse me, would you mind not staring, it's very uncomfortable"

"Whatever, fcuk off"

Escalation in humiliation. We leave the restaurant. We're going down the street when somebody across the street is staring at us...

"Excuse me, would you mind not staring, it's very uncomfortable"

You might just get away this time with the person rolling their eyes and walking on.

More escalation in humiliation. Now try that ten times a day, every day. Hell I've had people stare from their cars as I'm walking with my friend across a zebra crossing (she has cerebal palsy so walks with customised crutches, very slowly, and her movements are very jittery).

That's just one example of many, many more I could give you.

4. There is no equality there. People with disabilities are treated as lesser because they have a disability.

The equality is there because you're not treating the person with a disability any different to someone who they see as being different to them for not having a disability.

Tasden

Everyone is different though, I'm of the opinion that I'd like people to just come out with it and ask questions. I personally don't have any impairment or disability but if I'm with someone who does, both myself and all except one person I know with one would prefer someone to say to them "so what exactly has you in the wheelchair?" or " which eye do I look you in when we're talking?" Pretending it doesn't exist is ridiculous! But some people would prefer that its ignored, out of embarrassment/ sick of discussing it/ wants to be treated equal. Its the same with your approach to being looked at- some people shrug it off, others stare back or say something. Whatever works for the person being stared at I guess. Its gonna happen because we dont live in an ideal world so you do learn to just deal with it whatever way works for you.

Czarcasm

Duck's hoop wrote: »

PWD is a common and accepted acronym for persons with disabilities. I presumed you'd be aware, what with your wide and extensive experience of working within the sector.

Scraping the barrel on that.

Indeed you are. PWD might also be an acceptable acronym for you, but it's not acceptable to me. Strange how that works, isn't it? Individuals will have different standards of what they consider acceptable and what they consider unacceptable. Mine just don't happen to jig with yours, but they work for people whose opinion I actually consider worth listening to.

Duck's hoop wrote: »

With all due respect, a scar is not the same as a visible disability.

...

This is unlikely to occur because of a scar.

With all due respect, a scar is a visible disability, just the same as psoriasis would be a visible disability, just the same as Scheuermann's disease or Cogenital Hip Dysplasia is a visible disability. The person who has the disability is only too acutely aware of how disabling their disability can be on their quality of life, and all of the issues I snipped from your post above can equally apply to a person with a scar. It just so happens that it doesn't meet your standards to qualify as a disability.

Duck's hoop

Czarcasm wrote: »

Indeed you are. PWD might also be an acceptable acronym for you, but it's not acceptable to me. Strange how that works, isn't it? Individuals will have different standards of what they consider acceptable and what they consider unacceptable. Mine just don't happen to jig with yours, but they work for people whose opinion I actually consider worth listening to.

Maybe you'd consider the opinion of Prof William Schabas worth listening to? Chairman of Irish Centre for Human Rights? Who supervised my research on Irish disability rights within the UN CRPD. And Ireland's failure to ratify same.

PWD was used throughout.

Scars are not disabilities.

Thespoofer

I was stopped at traffic lights one day recently in my van and directly next to me in the next lane was a minibus ( for disabled kids ) also stopped facing the same direction.
Inside was a few down syndrome kids about 8- 10 years old but the nearest to my window was a blondy boy about 9 years old which I made sure I kept staring forward not to make a point of staring out of respect for the kids.
My window was fully up and they had closed windows when I heard a ' knock knock ' ( don't look across, I said to myself ), again another ' knock knock '.....so I looked over at this boy and he gave me a friendly thumbs up, which I returned and faced away thinking, Jesus that poor kid.
I was still stuck in traffic when again I heard another 'knock knock'....,( don't look ),...'knock knock'.....ok, looked over but this time the boy had his thumb on his nose and wiggled his fingers at me ! I thought, you cheeeeky little bo**!x ! and off they sped away ahead of me. It made me laugh and for me made me realise that we are all the same but with our own slight quirks, differences, flaws, looks whatever you want to call them.

Czarcasm

Duck's hoop wrote: »

Maybe you'd consider the opinion of Prof William Schabas worth listening to? Chairman of Irish Centre for Human Rights? Who supervised my research on Irish disability rights within the UN CRPD. And Ireland's failure to ratify same.

PWD was used throughout.

No, no I wouldn't actually, nor would I be interested in turning this thread into a willy waving pissing contest.

Scars are not disabilities.

Any issue which impairs a person's quality of life is a disability, but we could argue our different standards all day.

I'd suggest at this point we try and raise the level of discussion a small bit beyond this petty back and forth that's getting either of us nowhere.

Duck's hoop

Czarcasm wrote: »

No, no I wouldn't actually, nor would I be interested in turning this thread into a willy waving pissing contest.





Any issue which impairs a person's quality of life is a disability, but we could argue our different standards all day.

I'd suggest at this point we try and raise the level of discussion a small bit beyond this petty back and forth that's getting either of us nowhere.

I've a scar runs from behind my hairline, across the bridge of my nose, under my eye and finishes at my chin. I'm also missing the tip of my nose and my ear lobe on left side.

None of these impact on my quality if life. Even if they did it would not constitute a disability.

The term persons with disabilities is used to apply to all persons with disabilities including those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which, in interaction with various attitudinal and environmental barriers, hinders their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.

Tasden

Duck's hoop wrote: »

I've a scar runs from behind my hairline, across the bridge of my nose, under my eye and finishes at my chin. I'm also missing the tip of my nose and my ear lobe on left side.

None of these impact on my quality if life. Even if they did it would not constitute a disability.

The term persons with disabilities is used to apply to all persons with disabilities including those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which, in interaction with various attitudinal and environmental barriers, hinders their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.

OK but that poster discussed their experience of being stared at and judged based on his physical appearance that was different to other people's, and you just tried to discount his opinion on the matter based on the fact he wasn't as disabled as you. It may not be something that impacts your value of life but it may well do for someone else and that's their battle not yours, it may not be a disability but its still something that the poster felt conscious about people looking at, or at least making assumptions about, which is what the thread is about.

Paddy Cow

Duck's hoop wrote: »

With all due respect, a scar is not the same as a visible disability.

People's attitudes change towards those with mobility impairments, hearing impairments, speech impairments etc.

There is not one chair user who doesn't have dozens or scores of stories of being patronised, talked over, down to, abused, made the butt of jokes, refused entry etc etc.

The 'people staring' thing is not simply people being 'curious' in most cases. It is outright bad manners and they often seem entitled to stare, as one poster said at the start of this thread when he, in quite staggeringly bad taste, compared PWD to exotic animals.

I have found myself looking back at people staring at me, slack jawed, for them to not even register me looking at them. I am subhuman or dehumanised in their eyes is my only explanation for that.

This is unlikely to occur because of a scar.

I known that a scar is not the same thing and I nearly didn't post my post because I don't want to trivialise anyone elses situation. I haven't read the whole thread so don't know the tone it has taken or what people are discussing.

I thought I made it clear in my post that if you are different, people are going to look. It's human nature. Most normal people will find themselves looking and feel embarrassed and look away. The people who feel the need to continuously stare or make an ignorant comment are a special type of cnut.

I have relatives who have "silent" or "hidden" disabilities. To look at them, they look perfectly healthy. They have disability stickers on their cars and because they don't get out of the passenger seat in a cast or wheelchair, people look at them like they are making it up. One day my cousin was driving us somewhere and he had to stop three times to take a break. My cousin is 50 and has driven all his life. I could tell that it upset him to have to admit to not being able to drive. What upset him most was that he said most people didn't see him like that - weak and barely able to drive - so a lot of people thought he was exaggerating.

If we are being honest, having a disability sets you back in life unless you have family and friends who support you.

Czarcasm

Duck's hoop wrote: »

I've a scar runs from behind my hairline, across the bridge of my nose, under my eye and finishes at my chin. I'm also missing the tip of my nose and my ear lobe on left side.

None of these impact on my quality if life. Even if they did it would not constitute a disability.

DH you'll have to excuse my earlier abruptness in dismissing the suggestion that I consider the opinion of Prof. William Schabas (I'm familiar with his work), but I'm not a fan of people parroting the opinions of others. I give much more regard to someone who would offer their own personal perspective on an issue. Now, while you personally might not consider physical scars an impairment to your quality of life, there are many people that do. Their opinion just doesn't jig with -

The term persons with disabilities is used to apply to all persons with disabilities including those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which, in interaction with various attitudinal and environmental barriers, hinders their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.

Which is the definition used by the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (I'm familiar with their work too).

You also failed (or purposely omitted from your earlier post) that while Ireland are a party to the Convention, the reason Ireland hasn't yet ratified the convention is because we have yet to reform sections of Irish legislation to comply with the Convention, unlike the US who are also party to the Convention but have failed to ratify the Convention because of their own political objections.


Having said all that, I'd still be interested in studying your research purely for my own benefit if you'd care to PM me a source.

Frito

Czarcasm wrote: »

The thing is Frito, it'd be all lovely and polite in an ideal world if people didn't stare at other people, but the fact is - they do, because the people that stare are just as much human beings as the people they stare at. So, you can either run around telling everybody else not to stare, or, you can teach the person being stared at to ignore people staring at them, or to focus on you instead of the person staring at them. If they're aware of their surroundings and they're aware of being stared at, then they can be taught to ignore being stared at.

It's the very same as when my wife used go to a busy shopping centre with our child and she'd be scanning for "paedophiles everywhere". I used tell her instead of looking at everyone else thinking they're going to snatch the child, keep your focus on the child.

Instead of looking to see who is staring at the person with disabilities, keep your focus on the person with disabilities.

In an ideal world we could do so much.
I didn't have to teach my sis to ignore people who stared at her, she could figure that out by herself. Her way of dealing with the stares was by challenging people, not ignoring them. Her philosophy was that people could not be expected to change their behaviour if they didn't realise their behaviour was offensive (ie for them to know they had been caught in the act, so to speak)

Her way of dealing with staring is not for everybody, I appreciate that. Which is why I'm not in the habit of giving unsolicited advice to disabled people. I'm more concerned with the spirit of thread; about the attitude of the general population to disabled people, about how society can adapt to disabled people (not vice versa) Currently we don't really have to do much (on an individual level) - offer up a bus seat, don't use disabled parking spaces, and don't stare. We can be curious without being rude.

shleedance

mango salsa wrote: »

What's effective about it? Does it change societal attitudes? Does it reinforce to people with disabilities that other people will treat them differently or rudely?

Agreed. Despite curiosity, staring is quite rude. I'd rather teach people to not stare. I don't think just being curious is wrong in itself, but once you stare then it usually does take a negative form.

Teaching one to ignore seems logical, but it does not fix the underlying issues of discrimination etc. Hate to make a bit of a hyperbole, but what use is teaching a disabled person to have thick skin if he/she is in physical danger by someone who doesn't like disabled people? What if their discrimination disallows the disabled person to go into various shops?

There is no need to teach a disabled person to have thicker skin. They usually already have developed that in order to cope with the nonsense of others.

keithclancy

shleedance wrote: »

Agreed. Despite curiosity, staring is quite rude. I'd rather teach people to not stare. I don't think just being curious is wrong in itself, but once you stare then it usually does take a negative form.

Teaching one to ignore seems logical, but it does not fix the underlying issues of discrimination etc. Hate to make a bit of a hyperbole, but what use is teaching a disabled person to have thick skin if he/she is in physical danger by someone who doesn't like disabled people? What if their discrimination disallows the disabled person to go into various shops?

There is no need to teach a disabled person to have thicker skin. They usually already have developed that in order to cope with the nonsense of others.

Just an Irish/UK thing I guess.

Over here, everyone stares at everyone... its like a national pastime.

Annasopra

keithclancy wrote: »

Just an Irish/UK thing I guess.

Over here, everyone stares at everyone... its like a national pastime.

Where in Ireland or the UK? I can't say I've noticed it myself.

keithclancy

mango salsa wrote: »

Where in Ireland or the UK? I can't say I've noticed it myself.

Holland / Germany

Some peoples apartments look like a zoo enclosure since they are so 'open' about letting people see whats going on :pac:

EDIT: I meant to say that in Ireland/UK, staring is generally seen as rude. Over here nobody really cares.

Czarcasm

shleedance wrote: »

Agreed. Despite curiosity, staring is quite rude. I'd rather teach people to not stare. I don't think just being curious is wrong in itself, but once you stare then it usually does take a negative form.

Staring at people is rude, absolutely no question about it and I think we can all agree on that, I'm not trying to defend it or have it be seen as acceptable in a civilised society. Your idea of curious is another person's idea of staring, glancing, looking, etc. It's how it's perceived BY the other person, and I can only speak for my own experience on this one when I say the majority of the time people are staring/looking/glancing, etc, it's because they are assessing whether you require assistance, or actually offering assistance. How a person perceives that is up to them, like this example -

Czarcasm wrote: »

Eesh

When you're standing at the bus stop and this black guy says to you "Man you're fly!". You think he's giving you a compliment and you thank him politely and look the other direction.

Then you realise he was politely alerting you to the fact that your zipper was undone

I don't agree that staring at someone is always intended in the negative form, but we could argue all day about that one. I'd suggest such people are very much in the minority as most people have better things to be doing with their lives.

Teaching one to ignore seems logical, but it does not fix the underlying issues of discrimination etc. Hate to make a bit of a hyperbole, but what use is teaching a disabled person to have thick skin if he/she is in physical danger by someone who doesn't like disabled people? What if their discrimination disallows the disabled person to go into various shops?

It's not about teaching people to have a thick skin, it's about teaching people that they are no different to anyone else. If someone is in physical danger, they're in physical danger, the motivations of the perpetrator are a secondary concern -

Czarcasm wrote: »

I was up in Dublin a couple of months back and standing at George's Quay waiting for the bus when a young lad tried to whip my phone out of my hand. I was having none of it and managed to restrain him when two more young lads came out of nowhere and proceeded to kick seven shades out of me. I was at a disadvantage being on crutches, they got away with the phone, but they didn't manage to get their hands on my laptop in my backpack.

So as you can see, for me personally, it isn't just about who's weaker or who's stronger - it's about using appropriate force to neutralise the immediate threat.

There is no need to teach a disabled person to have thicker skin. They usually already have developed that in order to cope with the nonsense of others.

Some people have, some people haven't. As I said already shleedance, it's not about teaching people to develop a thicker skin, it's about teaching them that they are no better, and no worse, than any other human being. Me personally, I don't particularly like the term "disabled", I prefer to use the term "differently abled", but that's just my own nonsense and I wouldn't expect anyone else will be adopting that approach any time soon either, so I just have to learn to cope with that, the same way as I've learned I can't police other people's thoughts, which is why I said in the first place it was ridiculous to try and do so.

stpaddy99

Czarcasm wrote: »

Staring at people is rude, absolutely no question about it and I think we can all agree on that, I'm not trying to defend it or have it be seen as acceptable in a civilised society. Your idea of curious is another person's idea of staring, glancing, looking, etc. It's how it's perceived BY the other person, and I can only speak for my own experience on this one when I say the majority of the time people are staring/looking/glancing, etc, it's because they are assessing whether you require assistance, or actually offering assistance. How a person perceives that is up to them, like this example -





I don't agree that staring at someone is always intended in the negative form, but we could argue all day about that one. I'd suggest such people are very much in the minority as most people have better things to be doing with their lives.





It's not about teaching people to have a thick skin, it's about teaching people that they are no different to anyone else. If someone is in physical danger, they're in physical danger, the motivations of the perpetrator are a secondary concern -








Some people have, some people haven't. As I said already shleedance, it's not about teaching people to develop a thicker skin, it's about teaching them that they are no better, and no worse, than any other human being. Me personally, I don't particularly like the term "disabled", I prefer to use the term "differently abled", but that's just my own nonsense and I wouldn't expect anyone else will be adopting that approach any time soon either, so I just have to learn to cope with that, the same way as I've learned I can't police other people's thoughts, which is why I said in the first place it was ridiculous to try and do so.

they are often far better though...the way people overcome disabilities often with enormous dignity and fortitude is an example to us all and shames those who abuse

Czarcasm

stpaddy99 wrote: »

they are often far better though...the way people overcome disabilities often with enormous dignity and fortitude is an example to us all and shames those who abuse

That's my whole point paddy - nobody, nobody, is better than anyone else. We're all human beings and if you want to be treated equally, then don't treat other people differently on the basis of their disability or any other aspects that cause you to perceive them as different to you. That goes for everybody in a society, not just the people who we perceive to have nothing in their lives that they have to or that they've had to overcome.

Annasopra

Czarcasm wrote: »

Staring at people is rude, absolutely no question about it and I think we can all agree on that, I'm not trying to defend it or have it be seen as acceptable in a civilised society. Your idea of curious is another person's idea of staring, glancing, looking, etc. It's how it's perceived BY the other person, and I can only speak for my own experience on this one when I say the majority of the time people are staring/looking/glancing, etc, it's because they are assessing whether you require assistance, or actually offering assistance. How a person perceives that is up to them, like this example -
I don't agree that staring at someone is always intended in the negative form, but we could argue all day about that one. I'd suggest such people are very much in the minority as most people have better things to be doing with their lives.

It's not about teaching people to have a thick skin, it's about teaching people that they are no different to anyone else. If someone is in physical danger, they're in physical danger, the motivations of the perpetrator are a secondary concern -

Some people have, some people haven't. As I said already shleedance, it's not about teaching people to develop a thicker skin, it's about teaching them that they are no better, and no worse, than any other human being. Me personally, I don't particularly like the term "disabled", I prefer to use the term "differently abled", but that's just my own nonsense and I wouldn't expect anyone else will be adopting that approach any time soon either, so I just have to learn to cope with that, the same way as I've learned I can't police other people's thoughts, which is why I said in the first place it was ridiculous to try and do so.

I think that perhaps you are speaking throughout this thread about people with intellectual disabilities who perhaps sometimes need to be taught life skills because they are differently abled. Your approach may work in that context and I can see how it does to some extent in the sense that you are focused on the petson rather than the problem so it does provide some relief to the person and it does help them to get through life easier.

I can see that this approach has some merits and I can see that it does work but I still see several problems with it
1. You almost see this as the only solution and fail to recognise other solutions may also work
2. It doesn't necessarily address the route causes of the problem at all
3. By not challenging the issue you are in a sense normalising and accepting the behaviour - you are in my view teaching them that they are different and should accept different treatment
4. I am still not seeing any equality or equal treatment here. People with disabilities are being treated as lesser people

I accept that you don't necessarily want to go on some crusade against societal attitudes or to use people as some sort of challenge and I accept that for you this works but I don't accept it's the only way. I don't accept that people shouldn't be challenged on their views and attitudes. I don't accept that challenging people on their views and attitudes in order to change them is some sort of thought police.