MNHQ .. Can we talk about disability bashing?

Amberlight if we remove the word from the dictionary we won't be able to refer to certain technical/engineering situations. It has other meanings you know.

I agree with the OP, something needs to be done to protect the dignity of those affected by SN. It is not appropriate to be sexist or racist and these sorts of posts would be dealt with swiftly and efficiently by MNHQ, so why not apply the same rules to those who are abusive to people with SN. Great topic BSSB.

I honestly had no idea 'm**g' was anything to do with special needs Not that its a word Ive used for at least 15 years anyway, but it wsa always used in the 'stoned' sense. You learn something new everyday

Shoesy - what did you expect? I'm not at all surprised that a poster made a snide comment about it being a freakshow, her post has now been deleted BTW.

I always say that people who have no SN children, or no SN themselves, no physical issues, mental health worries etc, they are the people who need to spend a day in our shoes.

Ignorance is bliss...... isn't it?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/telly_addicts/1229411-BORN-TO-BE-DIFFERENT-is-back-on
if youw ant to see the response people get when they object look an the post below fanjo's

Agree Ninja

wow obama has just gone up in my estimation

I'd also like to see mnhq take a stronger stance on this. Mn has become so big recently I think some of the self regulation doesn't work so well anymore.

I would also look into legal action, BSS. Hence why I asked Amber how to report breaches of the Act

amberlight, would you be able to advise how breaches of the Act can be reported?

I didn't know that about Obama backing the campaign against "retard", Amber, that has made my day! American so-called comedy films fling that word around all the time. Obama is a big supporter of autism causes too!

I agree that Justa's list is very good.

I work as an adviser on disability and the Equality Act. Purely for information for this debate, the general advice I give to organisations is this: With the new Equality Act, the Government guidances gives useful examples throughout. website owners have legal responsibility for the actions and inactions of their staff, volunteers, and other service users for anything that creates a hostile or intimidating environment for people with a protected status (including ostracism). There is also the potential for bystanders to claim compensation if they are appalled by watching a disabled person being humiliated and a team doing nothing to stop it.

Max court award now standing at £750,000 if it affects someone's employment. Average court award £30k. Not small sums of money. It pays any and all website owners. small business owners, large corporates, service providers generally etc to review their terms very carefully, and make sure their staff are trained effectively on how to spot intimidating situations and act swiftly to resolve them.

On a personal note, having been called all sorts of names over the years for daring to exist and try to communicate with others whilst autistic, I'd be happy to see the word 'r***' erased from the dictionary altogether. Good to see that President Obama is backing the campaign to have the word removed from statute in the USA.

trouble is a lot of people with cp don't have a voice or realise that people calling them spaz is a piss take, we have ot defend them(I have one of those)

In the correct context, ie Peachy's thread, yes. I think they need to stay.

Where as a thread in Relationships that might say 'DP says I catch like a spaz' needs to be dealt with by MNHQ.

"I agreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee"

Great list, Justa.

Oneminute
Yes, you are right. My parents would have pulled me up for using those words back in the 70s. They were never acceptable.

mary I agree that in that context the word should say, peachy used it to explain the abuse her child faces, so it is part of the back story so valid.
if the poster who used the s word in her thread title had said "my dh has just been rude to me" and then in her post said the s word, it would have held more validity, and not been so offensive as it would be a more omg I am shocked post iynwim.
but if someone is just trolling or making disablist comments, or using these words as insults they should be gone, if they are used in a thread title the thread should be deleted and the op emailed and told why, giving them the chance to start again without the word.

but do you know something MN HQ won't even come back on this thread so nothing will change

I agree, I think it is good to air this debate. Because if kids in school pick up from mum's usage that the words "retard" or "mong" or "spaz" are ok, they'll use them to abuse the not-so-clever or disabled kid in class. And mum may or may not be using those words ironically or something, but kids don't get that nuance. If you've ever seen a group of teens standing around taunting a helpless autistic or otherwise disabled kid with the word "retard", you'd never use it again. It is an ugly word and leads to ugly behaviour.

Agree Peachy

I think it needs to be defined whether the thread is for real or a wind up too. If the poster is willing to change the offending word to something more suitable, then let the thread stay.

Another thing I thought about was repeat offenders. 3 stirkes and your out should be a rule maybe?

What do you think?

I reckon it probably would Aitch, the outcry would be enormous and tbh i think MNHQ have SN-outcry fatigue.

but there is always the simple option of rewording before deletion: Mn change Paki (goodness I hated typing that) to ' a racist rerm', or similar. Easy. Thread remains, but boundaries established.

And nigger would be off the board in seconds, rightly