to have taken offence to this or should I have been the bigger person . . .

[ZanyMobster]

On a facebook closed group, discussing a specific type of holidays that's all.

Someone posted about their holiday then ended by saying that 'apparently and allegedly' able bodied people were using the lifts yet again.

Quite a few people came on and said that they looked ok to outsiders but actually can only manage a flight of stairs at a time etc. I said that I thought the poster shouldn't be so quick to judge and actually the lifts are there for everyone as long as everyone is considerate and ensures the priority users get in first.

I was basically jumped on by the admin but felt I needed to keep arguing my point, he is usually a reasonable person so I thought explaining how yes of course people may make snap judgements at first sight but surely it's unacceptable to publicly say that sort of thing as it purposely causes offence, I likened it to moaning on there about a child having a tantrum when in fact they have special needs, I said surely he wouldn't accept that as admin of the site. His response was that regardless of special needs if it's causing a disturbance then it's the parents fault.

I was fuming at this point so went on to explain why it isn't ok to say that. He kept saying that if you don't know then how can you not judge, well er by not judging or just keeping it to yourself or maybe even opening your mind a bit.

WIBU? I am super sensitive at the moment as DS2 is in the process of a possible autism diagnosis so not sure I am thinking straight about it all.

And that was my point on the group, it's all very well the poster said 'apparently and allegedly' but IMO it was intended to offend as they knew full well people with hidden disabilities would be straight on there saying similar to what you have said.

Zukiecat, you're just like me on escalators!! I can stand there for ages trying to get on and failing while there are people behind me wondering what I'm doing :)
I've always assumed that lifts are for everyone with the exception of the ones (as PP mentioned above) in shops that are pretty much obviously for physically disabled (say next to a couple of stairs and with a see-through barrier round them instead of solidly enclosed). I'm not sure I'd even give disabled priority (as such) on normal ones - though unless they're v. busy lifts I'd allow all others (inc non-disabled)on first before joining them, just out of good manners.

I see your point re not necessarily letting disabled people on first but I think on the cruises often there are things at specific times, such as getting off board for trips or dining times so often even if we were intending on getting the lift we may let a disabled person on first and then use the stairs if it meant we would be late as obviously they don't have that choice but if for instance I had a shopping trolley in Tesco then I probably wouldn't.

But the lifts thing has come from the loos which are for everyone but are more accessible to wheelchair users.

It has also come from the "Everything is a disability" viewpoint. We used to have a wide range of more or less able people and some people who were clearly disabled, (my disabled friends always preferred handicapped as it was more accurate but that word has been abandoned now).

Now so many variations of "abled" are considered "disabled" that it is not clear what disabled actually means. That leads to fights over toilets, seats on busses and lifts.

There is probably no way back however.

My DF never considered himself in any way disabled - although by today's standards he would be. None of that generation did. My Mother can not walk more than 10-15 yards but it would not occur to her to call herself "disabled" she just "has a bad back"

No criticism whatsoever of anyone dealing with disability of whatever type - just commenting on the labelling and the focus on categorising rather than just looking at the whole person. If someone needs a lift or a loo - let them use it. They don't have to have a specific label to do so.

Same with a parent clearly struggling with a child. The child does not have to have a label for it to be forgivable. Just help if you can.

I love that post BadKnee, this is really what I don't understand about people in general.

It reminds me of my friend who had a potty training toddler and a baby in a pushchair, there was a queue in the ladies, the toddler was desperate so she used the accessible loo, someone complain and the shop manager 'told her off' in front of everyone, she was very upset. The worst that had happened was that someone in a wheelchair was waiting for a few seconds whilst the toddler had a wee, the same could have happened if another disabled person was using the loo. They could have just been understanding about it and thought actually she had a need at that time.

I actually still feel a bit pissed off about it all but I said my bit and have moved away so I guess it's all good.

Gin - it's not the parents not being responsible or not telling their child off, I was talking about a meltdown or something similar, sometimes you can put everything in place but it still happens. I have never heard someone say such a thing about not telling off an autistic child.

Have you come on here to just cause upset? Your comparison with the blind driver is ridiculous quite frankly, should parents of an autistic child never take them out?

I am shocked at your venom and nastiness TBH. You are completely missing the point of the thread and here I am arguing my point when in fact I should have just ignored.