This. Especially that first part. I've even had my cane almost forcefully removed from my hands by my mom because of the looks people were giving me for being slightly overweight and using a cane, and I've been confronted by random strangers suddenly playing physical therapist and accusing me of just "making my condition worse".
To be fair, I probably did actually mean "significant enough in number to have a material effect on overall statistics". Which is not the right concept for the words I grabbed out of a hat. That said, I actually don't have evidence that the number is even statistically significant in the sense of "large enough to allow one to derive meaningful statistical claims about the group". As in, I have at this point no reason to believe that the total number of people who are faking medical conditions in order to get access to mobility scooters is even, say, 100 people, total, in the world. If evidence for such a claim exists, none has been presented. I dunno about "angry and unhinged", but I will concede "frustrated and annoyed that this keeps happening without improvement". And yeah, my usual "but definitely everyone will respond in any way at all if listened to carefully and talked to patiently" heuristic seems to have failed me. I've watched a fair number of people try, from many different angles, and it's been a complete wash. I've stated what I'd like to see Greallan do for me to expend more time and effort on this. I don't think it's actually likely to ever happen, but if it does, doubtless someone will let me know.
I've never found an actually decent swordcane. They either don't unshealth right (too difficult OR too easy, take your pick) or rattle obnoxiously so that everyone knows something in hinky with your cane.
I meant Maya's message, quoted directly below that. They're still misreading and getting frustrated at that. Example: Like, what? If someone says "you have to remember that my dog is blind" is that a bad thing? Should I not remember that something is possible as part of a decision-making process? And now people are taking shots @rigorist for trying to get people to calm down. A lot of this stuff seems like such basic knowledge. Like, how do you not get hurt when training if you haven't read enough to encounter the idea that gaining muscle will make the numbers on the scale go up? I've been part of a few diet communities and most of them will talk about things like "it's not working" and talk about what might have gone wrong or tell people not to worry about plateaus if it hasn't lasted long. There's also such a thing as not using the scale to measure success. A little bit of a tangent, but earlier I was reading tips on how to find a non-fatphobic doctor. It scares me a bit to have a world where I might not notice sudden weight-gain and have a doctor who is afraid to talk to me about it. Do I need to bring up things like thyroid checks myself? I would have ignored the hersutesm if the doctor hadn't noticed. That's a thorny issue when it comes to trying to get around weight that doesn't have to do with the health complaint. Well, there is a solution to that. Education programs. You even have the perfect way to find those people. Make awareness mean more than just being aware that disabled people exist. Yeah, it's not about policing bodies.
If remembering that it's "possible" makes your decisions objectively worse and less accurate, then you probably shouldn't. In this case, since the error rate is so one-sided, and the harm done by errors is so one-sided, it turns out that simply completely ignoring the theoretical possibility that people are faking produces better results. Is it possible that failing to put on your seatbelt will result in you surviving a car accident which would otherwise have killed you? Probably. Is it likely? No. In fact, it's much more likely for an accident to be fatal if you're not wearing your seatbelt. But if you "remember that it's possible", you might think that this justifies some strategy like "not wearing a seatbelt", because you think that will somehow help. Which is actually a really bad idea. Remembering that it's "possible" can't actually help you make better decisions, in that case. It is vanishingly unlikely that you will ever actually be in a situation where considering the possibility that someone is faking a disability will allow you to make a better decision. It is extremely likely that you will be in many situations where "remembering that it's possible" will lead you to do things that do significant harm to innocent people. So: Why is it better to hurt innocent people for no benefit? I don't think it is.
With the constant objections to the idea that fat people could be non-miserable, I'm smelling sour grapes from Greallan and I don't mean the alcohol.
Popping back in to say that was unnecessarily mean. I understand frustration but the last half of that was cruel when it's established she has a problem. Let's not mock an addiction.
I think you're reversing things. How is thinking that could be genuine and leaving them alone making a decision worse? Do you want me to start razzing on the guy in the powerchair? Yeah, if you can't figure out what "it" I'm talking about, ask for clarification before going off on me for holding the opposite view of what I'm saying. Where am I saying they cannot possibly be non-miserable? Some people are unhappy for reasons that have nothing to do with social issues, I said that some people could be happy the way they are.
sadly :( otherwise you bet i would just fucking make myself one with that limited knowledge in welding i have!
You asserted that there was a significant large-scale problem against which we must be on-guard, which is that people are always faking disabilities and this is a big problem we need to worry about. We pointed out that this isn't a thing on any scale that affects someone. You said "you have to remember that it's possible". The only thing the possibility of which was disputed was "someone might be faking". That said, I do concede that I have no ability to figure out what you're talking about. I honestly think you might benefit from completely discontinuing all use of pronouns entirely, because so many confusions in discussions have come from unclear antecedants, and asking you for clarification has usually not worked. And if you really did mean "you have to remember that it's possible that people aren't faking", that's actually still really fucked up. You shouldn't be thinking it's "possible". You should be taking it completely for granted that people who claim they need accommodation actually need that accommodation. Treating it as a "possibility" strongly implies that you think it's unlikely, and you think it's up to you to decide whether it's likely enough.
Have people been asking for clarification before they attack? My default is usually not to worry about people in the wild even in the rare cases that I even notice them. Even if there's doubt, confronting them will just mean that I managed to get someone who's not faking. And you're exaggerating the numbers-talk.
Even though I've tried and failed to make this point before, the issue is not about you directly confronting individuals in real life. I don't think anyone believes you're doing that. The issue is that every time in here you assert there are loads of liars and fakers, you're hurting other people. It isn't about individual confrontations, it's about hurtful, sweeping generalizations. You've provided no evidence that there are many liars in the first place, but still say that this collateral damage is still perfectly acceptable, because these masses of malicious liars and fakers totally exist. Somewhere. You think you're just passing private judgment on this theoretical group (which may or may not exist). I get that. But you're sharing that judgment over and over in here, and through that, you have been actively hurting innocent bystanders.
I don't think that's particularly relevant, given Greallan's repeated actions towards other people based on the belief system. We regularly see Greallan accuse other people as a class of faking, and for all the disabled people who get accused of faking by random strangers, that is in and of itself hurtful. It doesn't actually innately matter whether she has false beliefs, but she consistently acts in ways that hurt people and appeals to those beliefs as justification. They have asked for clarification on many occasions. You have not generally offered clarifications when asked. Well, exactly. Because people aren't actually faking. Because the doubt is entirely of your own making. Am I? You haven't offered any evidence for your claims. I have spent a fair bit of time on this issue, and I don't believe that the faking you think you're observing actually happened. You have offered no concrete standard for how you would determine that someone is faking, or why you think it's a problem. You talk about hypothetical bad people faking and making trouble for everyone, but you offer no evidence that it happens.
You have full censorship powers over the posts you say are harmful. You have the ability to make them go away so they do not cause the harm you claim to others. That is a very simple solution to the problem of the alleged harm.
Gonna buy a lot of stock in Minnegasco, cause looks like the demand for gas is going way, way up! Your actual post addresses the bad thoughts of G. Not the posts. The bad thoughts.
