How about a campaign where the users get MNHQ staff to take diversity training?

[Ghostofasmile]

MNHQ themselves have displayed ignorance (at best) over the last few months and prejudice / discrimination at worst when dealing with certain situations.
For example Justine, the sites owner herself over the last few days has made some very ignorant and damaging comments about diabetes.
We have seen the same with many times with Racism too as well as low level disablism.

Unless you are white, middle class and able bodied HQ isn't a nice place to be.

Post here if you would like this to take place. HQ need training and they need it fast.

It was laughable because it was a direct accusation at me when I had categorically not been disablist. I was not prepared to join in with the mud slinging and made the mistake of opening my mouth.

For those who don't think MNHQ delete quickly enough, do you report to the Night Watch? I only knew about it in recent weeks and have found this to be effective way of managing things until the mods are available.

It's knwn about cash. Day watch, as in night watch but in day, is really needed as a first line system until HQ can look at things.

I take your point crash but is there a reason why people with disabilities should all have the same ideas? I see this in a similar light to feminism. It annoys me that feminists speak 'for women' and I find many of their ideas extreme and ridiculous. But at the end of the day, I'm glad that there is a group of people who put aside time to promote equality for women and I don't think they have to represent 'all women' in order to call sexism when they see it. There is a horrible T-shirt currently on sale for women that actively encourages a rape myth - it's clear that women who buy the T-shirt don't share views that are feminist, but this in no way affects the validity of those who would label the T-shirt offensive and misogynistic.

Taking apartheid as another example, it wasn't necessary for black activists to have 100% consensus among the black community about their aims and vision. They would not have achieved anything if they had waited for that because people will always think and feel differently. Yet they were still right to call discrimination what it was and promote equality for all people, regardless of colour or even desire for an equal society.

As for making assumptions about people, I have never had so many assumptions made about me as when I was in a wheelchair. People thought I would be either very dull and compliant or difficult and adversarial. It was amazing the way I seemed to be known before I'd opened my mouth.

i was once told that even disabled people can be disablist which is laughable

That in itself is not laughable, its patently true.

It's been suggested a few times, by Jason other posters.

user14746 You took my sentence out of context. In the context it was delivered, it was laughable whilst also being offensive to me. It wasn't like I said "yeah I'm disabled but I used the word retard all the time". I disagreed with the way a thread was being dealt with by some people. It was a disablist thread with some disgusting comments. In hindsight, people were too wound up and emotional, so I shouldn't have said a word.

That's not worthy of a thread

In your opinion. Some posters felt it was worthy of a thread because the reporting wasn't working, the letters and direct communication wasn't working and they wanted to discuss what to try next. In their opinion, it was worthy of a thread and if you don't like the thread, why not leave?!

I don't disagree with the fact that disabilities shouldn't be ignored or the people suffering from them be marginalised. What I absolutely do disagree with is the ranting

If you have a disability (you haven't said either way), I would be surprised that you don't know how much ranting it usually takes to avoid being marginalised. MNHQ may respond politely on threads but they have ignored and evaded less public attempts at communication.

I don't think you will achieve whatever is your agenda

< Impressed at the thought I might have an agenda. >

MNHQ has no control - other than deletion - of disablist/racists/other rule breaking posts and this they do.

This they quite often don't IMO but in any case they have as much control as they choose to have. The campaigns are a great illustration of how much control they're able to have and willing to take when the issue is considered worthy enough. There are longtime users of the site who would like not to encounter language and attitudes that they find offensive and disablist - this seems to them as if it ought to be a 'worthy cause' and I agree.

What do you actually want them to do?

Others have gone into that at length, both here and in private correspondence with MNHQ (I believe it was ignored).

I've never found that pompously telling organisations what they must and must not do actually works for me

Have you ever been in a position where you have had to fight an organisation to do something it ought to do? It is sometimes necessary and it sometimes works. And there is no need to label someone 'pompous' because they find something unacceptable and want it to change. This is the kind of attitude that is very disabling to anyone putting forward an agenda for change.

Instructing them to attend 'diversity training' is just rude and patronising... as it was intended to be.

Now who is making assumptions? I sincerely disagree with that. Judging from posts by MNHQ, they would actually benefit hugely from said training. Many, many organisations send employees on this kind of thing - we can't all know everything about these issues and fortunately are living in an age where it's necessary to find out.

This thread is nothing more than an ill-disguised, disgusting rant at MNHQ and I'm not going to be party to that.

That is not the least bit pompous...

If you find it so offensive, it's difficult to see why you're still on it.

I have noticed that even when a thread isn't about disability certain posters can't wait to make it into one.

I think sometimes when someone mentions disability, that people often assume they are trying to make the thread into a disability thread. That's not it. Those of us that live with disability are bound to mention it at some point - it's a huge part of our lives. It's relevant to our lives, our experiences, and often our anecdotes. Just like other people have other things in their lives that they mention.

Maybe if instead of considering the mention of disability as an attempt to derail a thread, people just considered it an attempt to engage in the conversation, it wouldn't become so adversarial.

I loathe the term 'cis'. I would like it banned, but that isn't going to happen. I will not stamp my feet and demand that MNHQ back up my stance on the word or I will get handy with the emailing and the Arsey thread after thread about how my rights as a woman are ground into the dirt by its use.
If I felt MNHQ had crossed a line where 'cis' had taken hold to the extent that I no longer felt comfortable here then I would leave.
So it's not 'fuck off if you don't like it', it's why on Earth stick around on one site in the whole Internet that appears to make you unhappy? I genuinely do not understand why people do that, with all the options open to them online.

Your 'sniping' is another person's reasonable complaint.

No, I'm talking about passive aggressive language, personal attacks, that kind of thing. Stuff that makes us go around in circles, he said, she said - that's what I meant.

I of course support anyone that wants to challenge the heart of what they are trying to achieve.

I think that is what many people have got very fucked off about. The heart of the problem has been lost in all the sniping.

Navy I'm not going to get into an argument with you. I'm not looking for aggression. I just made a comment that I thought might be helpful. I'm sorry if you don't see it that way.

Oh well slender, we shall have to agree to disagree.

This thread isn't going to achieve what it wanted (unless it was a ruck?) and it will disappear into the depths of thread oblivion. I won't care a jot about that.

I'll continue to care about the issues that matter though and not continue to engage with posters who just want to rant and be offensive because it's futile.

Not everyone Feels The Same

Good motto for a free website with light moderation.

I'll continue to care about the issues that matter

I'll continue to remember that not every issue that matters necessarily matters to me and so it makes sense to be respectful when others in a more vulnerable position are offended and request change.

I don't think anyone would mind if you stopped engaging with the ranting, offensive posters on this thread.

This www.opendemocracy.net/lesley-abdela/democracies-free-speech-and-right-to-offend

Is an interesting read and very relevant to this rather unpleasant thread.

People have a right not to be verbally abused, have violence etc incited against them. They do not have the right to not be offended.

This is about hate speech its

I've been on some threads with some of the posters on here. The thing that strikes me more than anything else is that they try to make everything about disability.

You could be discussing literally anything and they will try and force a particular agenda.

I'm actually amazed that they have been pandered to for do long by the moderators of this site.

Nobody is forcing anyone to be here, and nobody cares if you leave or not, that goes for all of us, it's an Internet forum,- that's all.

I suspect though, that they have no intention of leaving, and will just continue in the same carping and complaining vein as they always do.

Sorry- wrong emphasis.

Generalised disablism is just as unacceptable as generalised racism (for e.g.), it doesn't have to be directed at an individual (verbal attack) to be over the line.

Is that a line of argument that you're applying to the whole diverse group of us who think the disablism issue isn't quite fixed yet petit?

Or more of a personal aside?

Disablism: discriminatory, oppressive or abusive behaviour arising from the belief that disabled people are inferior to others.

I'm not sure that all posts meet this. The problem is it very easy to define when a post is well over the line, but for more borderline posts it is a tricky balance between that and freedom of speech.