Disability hate on MN

Please don't post directly to me when the OP has requested I no longer respond on this thread. It is obviously putting me in a very unfair position where I have to either let your comments remain unchallenged or I respond and get accused of taking over the thread.

OP addressed this thread to MNHQ. It wasn't set up as a safe space but as a call to action. Posters were specifically referencing my posts as examples of posts that should be removed. I posted here to defend myself and my posts. You do not have the right to tell me that I can either apologise or say nothing at all. You are not the MN Thought Police.

I don't report posts often because I don't think they break the Talk Guidelines. I am however frequently offended and upset by what I read, but I am aware this isn't necessarily justification for removing someone's free speech.

Agreed.

sometimes its good when someone comes on a thread like this and proves the point.

And, to add, I find it interesting that you think people who report posts are putting pressure on MNHQ rather than reporting something because it actually is toxic or harmful.

I would actually say that particular forum is an echo chamber where people egg each other on, often actively seeing how far they can push things before deletion (and knowing what MN will and will not deal with) on and howl at the few posters who appear to try and engage in a debate or offer another viewpoint. don't want to start a debate about that on claudine's thread about disability but I do feel that 'freedom to speak out' has emboldened certain MNers , safe in the knowledge that their freedom to be offensive, to mock, to deride is protected. Some of the threads on Brianna Ghey contained some of the worst things I have ever seen in writing.

Even on the Black Mumsnetters forum , non Black posters come on (frequently) and instruct Black posters that they are incorrect in their thinking (happened yesterday).
It's the condescension towards others and the outright othering all over MN that needs fixing. And the stubborn belief from posters that they are correct in the face of statistical data and/or evidence from lived experience. Of course, hiding behind a keyboard makes people brazen.

Unless you have reported numerous outright unpleasant, cruel and othering posts yourself, bumpity you wouldn't know that it is often extremely hard to convince MNHQ that they are hurtful, damaging or - in any form - prejudiced and discriminatory. And I would suggest your robust defence of yourself and your posts imply you know the boundaries and know what you can say on here - and so, regardless of upset, you'll say it and repeat it anyway.

The OP tried to create a place for people to discuss how they feel and you have repeatedly told a few posters that they are wrong to be offended. Just say sorry or , if you aren't, say nothing. The OP is a fabulous person and doesn't deserve this.

Trouble is they all claim they personally know the 0.2% or that they work/have worked in 'the public sector' and so know better than the ONS.

If you do this it's worth reminding people that disability benefits consistently have the lowest level of fraud of any benefit (and much lower than tax fraud). Anyone can check for themselves using ONS or other Gov statistics where rates < 0.2-3% are typical.

I've told people this many a time. They don't want to hear it 🤦🏻‍♀️

Yes the level of output is huge so the person must be a really fast typist and heavily invested or it’s ChatGPT. But if that is the case that ought to be investigated as it’s disturbing.

I agree there's a lot of disability / benefit hate on MN atm.

I feel like it's being done by bots or sock puppets, the lack of nuance is a giveaway.

I think MN just welcomes the traffic and doesn't care.

No it isn't how discrimination works but that isn't what a resources thread is for. A general resources thread with information and experiences is useful for people going through the process or looking for new ideas. If others find the information useful or informative then fine but the target audience is people looking for support.

I wouldn't put it on the main boards but its a model which has worked well on other discussion groups/forums.

If you do this its worth reminding people that disability benefits consistently have the lowest level of fraud of any benefit (and much lower than tax fraud). Anyone can check for themselves using ONS or other Gov statistics where rates < 0.2-3% are typical.

Not just cunts, stupid cunts, clearly. Because they choose to ignore the point that people on out of work benefits have to prove they are looking for work, or the benefits stop.

Were these people asleep for the duration of the last 14 years when the current government has cut, cut, cut everything to the bone?

They have been at war with disabled people from the very beginning. And it shows!! With nasty comments filtering through to people who think it's ok to say that disabled people shouldn't be able to go to the fucking cinema.

No matter how much they have cut everything and made it impossible for people who are disabled to get disability benefits, the same ignorant people bleat on about how benefits are too high and people can live lives of luxury on them.

I’m an appointee for my adult child. They would have been entirely unable to make the initial phone call for an application form. It meant I did the assessment on their behalf which was terrifying but we got a good result which has made an unimaginable difference to their life.

So many on here advise people making over 100k to stick the excess into their pension so they can claim free childcare, yet begrudge those with disabilities any sort life experiences or money. Fucking shocking

Yes I agree. This will be last post on this matter.

I think it's hard for MN HQ to moderate fairly in the context of threads like these with pressure being applied to take down any posts that posters find offensive. I hope they read each post as it is written, not as they have been interpreted. The continuation of the gender boards have led me to believe that the squeaky wheel doesn't always get the oil and that debate can continue on sensitive subjects.

That's disgusting, there is something seriously wrong with some posters on here

I am trying hard not to be accused of taking over this thread but even if this scenario was completely hypothetical (which absolutely wasn't clear in your post and you never said it was hypothetical in the thread in question) then the assessment of the hypothetical trip's cost was reasonable as you mentioned lunch for the carer and their drink, transport to the cinema, the cost of your son's ticket plus at least four hours of the PA's time (hourly pay plus employer's NI and Pension costs). That might not be all paid by the state but it is still the cost of the trip.

You have interpreted the quoted section incorrectly. I never wrote that he shouldn't have cinema trips but it's hard to accept that they're an 'essential part of life'. If I wrote that going to the park wasn't an essential part of life for a child then that doesn't mean that I don't think that child should go to the park. 'Essential' is the operative word here! The interpretations are always so extreme and never what was actually written. You'll notice that in the extract you have pasted I was responding to another one of your posts where you had accused me of wanting disabled people to stand in a corner and die quietly. Except I hadn't written anything of the sort and don't think this.

Hopefully MN HQ will get time to check the thread and make an objective judgement on whether what was written was ableist and should be deleted.

Nobody wants to see disabled people cold, hungry and homeless but it's hard to accept that cinema trips and other luxuries are essential parts of life when so many people can't afford them.

I have no words. 😳

This place CANNOT be for real.

Here is where I explained exactly what happened on the night again copy and pasted …

……

I’m trying to decide what is an acceptable activity.

The cinema ticket was funded by parents

The cinema gave a ticket to the Pa

The state paid the Pa for my son to access the community - this gives us his parent carers also respite - the alternative is a 1800 bill per week social care plus housing. I need respite after so many years - you know the luxury of a Saturday night free.

The state is funding the PA / the Pa expenses and the taxi if son refuses bus - as it was the Uber was a mess up and hubby ended up having to pick up. Be it cinema or a drink in a pub or pizza the costs are low in the scheme of needs. It’s all regarded as education to get him out- mixing. His natural inclination would be to stay in. Before long he would go backwards and then he would be a major problem.

……..

‘Nobody wants to see disabled people cold, hungry and homeless but it's hard to accept that cinema trips and other luxuries are essential parts of life when so many people can't afford them.’

From these words I interpreted that my son should not have a cinema trip when others can’t afford them.

This is what happened actually

i explained why a taxi or Uber might be necessary - through several posts I explained that my son might refuse the bus and need an Uber

you persisted in your various arguments re Uber and completely took over the thread my a ridiculous almost obsessive number of posts.

I explained that hypothetically if my son did not take an Uber

the Pa would have to wait in the rain - the cost would he more and also the advertising costs for a new PA would he £250

i then explained that actually what happened was and here are the words copied and pasted - my son was scared of the bus at night - the Pa panicked and messed up the Uber it cost £6 but in any event my husband picked up

You then jumped of the conclusion from guesswork that the trip cost £100 and said it was unsustainable

Here are the copy and paste

You

I didn't say that or imply that.

There is a vast difference between questioning a £100 cinema trip and saying all disabled people should stand in a corner and die quietly!
Show quote history

me
I’m trying to decide what is an acceptable activity.

The cinema ticket was funded by parents

The cinema gave a ticket to the Pa

The state paid the Pa for my son to access the community - this gives us his parent carers also respite - the alternative is a 1800 bill per week social care plus housing. I need respite after so many years - you know the luxury of a Saturday night free.

The state is funding the PA / the Pa expenses and the taxi if son refuses bus - as it was the Uber was a mess up and hubby ended up having to pick up. Be it cinema or a drink in a pub or pizza the costs are low in the scheme of needs. It’s all regarded as education to get him out- mixing. His natural inclination would be to stay in. Before long he would go backwards and then he would be a major problem.

Your words

I am sorry but I don't believe that a £100 cinema trip is the only option for someone to get out of the house. I know it can be difficult when neurodiversity is involved but I just don't buy that at all. Even if it were true, how many times would they have to go a week for it to mean that the person had a reasonable standard of life, afterall getting out of the house once a week surely wouldn't hit the mark? Twice or three times? £300 plus!!! This is completely unsustainable and unaffordable. This is why it's important to be realistic in expectations. Nobody wants to see disabled people cold, hungry and homeless but it's hard to accept that cinema trips and other luxuries are essential parts of life when so many people can't afford them.