My DH's SN have prevented me from helping a woman in need

[BathshebaKnickerStickers]

Trying to cut it short - acquaintance I first met 12 years ago, she moved away, lost contact, met her in the street a wee while ago, gave her my number etc....

Her life is a mess. Too much detail would be identifying, but essentially it's a mess, mostly not of her doing....

She phoned tonight when I was dropping my youngest at an activity - she needed a place to stay tonight until she can get to the council offices first thing tomorrow.

I feel so upset as I had to turn her down. My DH is autistic and has social phobia - he simply couldn't have coped if I had brought a stranger home to stay overnight no matter how in need she was.

I had to turn her down - she was in tears and obviously desperate for a place to spend the night. I offered her sleeping bag/air bed etc if she can find somewhere to go but I feel helpless as I couldn't help her.

My DH is supposed to be away with work this week and if he had been away she could have come, but as he is here I honestly had no choice.

I don't have the money to pay for her to have a night in a b&b or anything, and she clearly doesn't have the money either.

And I will state now, that my constant replying on this is part of my aspergers. I feel I need to explain everything on others behalf and keep peace constantly. Its why I rarely get involved on these threads and name change every few months. So apologies. I'm going to bed. It's been an unexpected day for me which strangely actually involved an extra unexpected guest sleeping here tonight. Thankfully I know them very very well, but I am still having tics none the less.

See I would take pet more like favourite rather than as a lesser. But I wouldn't take "speak for your own pet gay guy but that's not true for us all" as inherently homophobic especially coming from a gay guy.

Maybe that's regional statistically? I know further north than me that pet is used as a kind term, like sweetheart, darling etc. It's not round here so maybe that's why I see it differently?

I'm not sure because I can't see the original post as well whether it was clear is was coming from someone who had autism themselves. The thread moved so quickly as well.

Btw, I didn't report the post. To me it was a little offensive, but in the same vein that I see cunt as being offensive. But I don't report that, as it's a personal offence.

I am not sure it was clear originally which is why I think the initial deletion was maybe understandable as I think it depends on tone and context, but the repeated ones after she had explained she is autistic...not so much.

See...Scottish, swearing is a form of punctuation and cunt is virtually a term of endearment

Round here twat is used in the same vein as idiot. I'll never forget the first time I heard it meant cunt in other areas when I was a teenager! It's still freely used as idiot here by everyone.

Yeah it's idiot here too. As is fanny as in "what a fanny"

Hi everyone
Can we just be clear that when we delete a post reported for breaking our Talk Guidelines, any subsequent posts repeating the words in the deleted post may be deleted, too?

Pathetic response which ignores all of the points and explanations made. Despite being told why the comment was made with full explanation and that the person making the comment has the specified condition you continue to delete it for being disablist.

I recall a thread not so long ago where someone came on and told us all to stop using Aspie because she personally found it offensive.

I wasn't aware that one or two people disliking a word got its use stopped. Hundreds of us have said we hate 'cis' but that doesn't get deleted either.

Autist is not disablist, its self identifying and personal.

I always get confused with uses of cis because to me it stands for construction industry scheme and it always makes me temporarily

I've seen a few threads along those lines. Never goes well...

Pop I think the comparison with "pet gay" is very valid because the approach some take of "but I have an autistic friend!" is similar to "but I have a gay friend / black friend / (other) friend" who doesn't mind XYZ...

I have an autistic friend so I know they don't empathise!

I have a gay friend so I know they don't mind "you're so gay" being used as an insult!

Prince Harry has an Asian friend who positively loves being called Sooty!

In those circumstances, "your pet [whatever] might not mind but others do" is a perfectly valid response.

I am gay and I detest 'you're so gay' being used as an insult...
But who could mind being called Sooty? I mean, being compared to a cute, furry little superstar

Those who are saying "it's not right autist was deleted!" are majorly missing the point. I can only assume that you didn't read the post or are being purposefully obtuse. It wasn't about what that person called themselves but the context in which it was used about others. It categorically was not along the lines of a description such as; "your husband is an autist and it's likely he finds X difficult".

Nope, read the comment and the context and have discussed it fairly extensively thanks.

Just skimmed through this thread. OP, I would be putting your DH's needs way before a virtual stranger. TBH, even if she was your best friend, your DH comes first.
I don't have any SN, and I would not be happy with this arrangement either.

I wouldn't like to be called a "pet" disabled person, thanks. I am a human being. I always call people their names and if discussing something else, I ask them what they would like. I don't assume that other people like terms that I do. I have no issue with saying "I am disabled" but plenty of people do, so I wouldn't be so arrogant as to think it's not offensive to label people as a whole.

"Pet autist" bloody well was meant to be offensive. The poster who posted it first expressed her anger at being deleted and then went on to repeat what she'd written so it should be there for everyone to see.

Interestingly there is currently another thread running on MN where a poster is facing a disciplinary on the basis of racism because she referred to a co-worker by his colour I.e. "Black Steve," something which said co-worker is aware of. Yet the entire response to her post (and there are several hundred of them) are in unanimous agreement that for someone coming into the office for the first time using that kind of language would not be seen as appropriate.

It doesn't matter whether someone doesn't personally Find something offensive, if others do then the offence is theirs to take, not yours to dismiss.

There's a difference between (debatably) offensive and rude, and disablist.

MN doesn't habitually delete posts for being rude or offensive, only if they are personal attacks (i.e. calling a particular poster a cunt ), disablist, homophobic, racist, etc. Yes the poster was angry and has not denied that, but that's not why it was deleted. It was deleted because it used the word autist and MN considered that to be disablist language. That is what those of us arguing are pissed off about. If you are saying "It was offensive to that poster to call her husband her pet" than fine. But that's not why it was deleted.

And the argument about what is offensive in terms of language only works to a certain extent and is being taken to stupid levels overall. The autistic people on this thread have expressed diverse opinions about what words and phrases we do and don't like. There is a difference between "not the word I prefer to be used to describe me" and offensive. If we classed each term which an autistic poster has said they dislike as offensive there would actually be no acceptable terms left - I'm not being hyperbolic, I think between us we've covered them all!

Black Steve is not really a reasonable comparison.

Hi all,
We're continuing to get this thread reported, but we're just going to try to keep going as we have been and take each report on its merits. Wrt the example above, we would probably delete someone saying 'pet gay' as well, fwiw, because it's just a bit goady, but it would probably rely on the context.

A bit goady - yes. It was goady/provocative. But goady does not equal disablist.

Can you confirm that you will not be deleting in future for the use of the word Autist unless it is coupled with a post which would otherwise result in deletion ?