AIBU to thin mn hq should not allow some of the threads on mn

[saint2shoes]

that seem to suggest that the world would be a better place without disabled paople?

YANBU

Full stop, really.

is there a particular thread you are referring to ?

no youre not being unreasonable at all, its wrong that if there was a thread suggesting that all asian people for example (this is just an example so dont all come down onme!!) were to be gradually wiped out with genetics (in the same way as breast cancer genes etc) mumsnet hq would remove this immediately yet a disability thread its ok???? I dont understand why such hatred is alowed both on mumsnet and in society but racism, for example is seen as wrong. In my opinion they are both wrong as everyone has a right to be here regardless of whether they are different to others!! what if einstein had instead of doing all he did found a way to make the world all autistic people - would we consider people without asd as disabled. whatever makes someone different makes them just that, different not inferior!

rant over!

I'm not sure I have ever really criticized MNHQ before, but am aghast at their deletion of your thread.

I was post 3, it got to 6. So unless the 3 following me were full of personal insults and slanderous accusations I think they have some explaining to do regarding the romoval of you posts and the 'super race' thread to stay.

I'm all for debate, but that means both sides get to put their opinion accross.

I am seriously pondering the motivation of MNHQ on this.

I am awaiting a reply.

Nope, think all the loons and prejudiced people should be allowed to post - in educating them and the people who agree slightly but are too afraid to post you win the battle.

I have learned so much from reading what people post on the special needs board.

Also I don't want special needs to be 'different' or 'precious' - it seems to me that we are making Britain more tolerant in almost every area but that lowering prejudice on people with disabilities is a slower process?

Not sure if anyone would agree with me on the last point.

My gran used to say (very old and very dead now) 'we've always had poofs since Oscar but you never used to see people with proper disabilities because they were always locked away'. If she was right then integration into mainstream society and changing attitudes has only been going on for about 30 years?

Long way to go to get rid of prejudice in this area.

Sorry, I only answered the original OP

I had no idea this was a thread about another - apologies if I've caused any offence.

I agree that sometimes things are said which are v offensive about disabled people.

But if, for example, a couple undergo genetic testing to avoid having a child who might live with discomfort and die young (say) that does NOT necessarily mean that they think that disabled children who exist and live happ lives with parents who (obviously) adore them unconditionally.

I have no patience with discrimination against disabled people, or derogatory views about them - but the debate about what to do with emerging genetic knowledge and expertise is one that must be had. Most people find disability more complex to think about than race (as a comparison) because discrimination aside, your race has no affect on your life per se. All parents will hapily know that thier children will be the same race as them. It will take a lot more attention and investment in the Social Model of disability before anyone will say hand on heart that disability is something that you would choose for your children. Although some deaf parents have said they would prefer a deaf child because of the cultural and communication issues.

But don't know if you are talking of a particular thread.

And of course, the most important thing in society is that we accept and support all our children and community members, who ever they may be - not strive consciously to create a particular demographic.

Aha!

Have seen thread now.

'Super race' is a horrible concept, and has horrible associations with horrible beliefs and practices behind some horrific events. But some v interesting and good things have been said as a result of the discussion.

And yes, I agree - it seems pretty routine to hear offensive things said about disabled people, as slang in general conversation, and in particular, about actual people or groups of people. It's disgraceful....should the ignorant and horrible folk who do this be genetically weeded out?

but Blu. would people be so happy to post if the op had been about race? I remember the fall out when some one put their racist views on here, yet people seem to be able to say what they like about disabled people. surely MNHQ should treat these threads and posts in the same way they do racist ones.
I reported a post once where the person was talking about how she felt a disabled boy she had once seen should have been killed, mn hq said it was just her opinion and let it stay. now imagine she had been talking about killing a black child!

I emailed hq about someone who posted lasted week (not going to re-air their offensive views) and had an email back saying to let it stand.

It was a good idea cos they outed themself as a real arsehole for all to see.

Repulsive views should generally stand - freedom of speech important so we all know who to avoid

then surely racist posts have to be allowed.

still no Answer from mn hq

There are lots of racist views expressed on mumsnet that get under the radar - there was one last week about recruiting an Eastern European cleaner as 'British' cleaners don't work 'so hard' for 'the pay'.

Is it different though? If someone posted an abhorrent view like the one you describe isn't it more about how uncomfortable she was with seeing a child in what she probably thought was pain with a low quality of life (by her ridiculous judgement you understand - not in reality). Far better for great people like you and Riven to come on and tear her a new one/teach her about her prejudice.

We seem to have come a long way with racism since Steven Lawrence - with a big push and the still fairly recent DDA we can do the same for prejudice against people with disabilities.

but I don't want to, I want to be able to just get on with life, there are anti discimination laws in place, why should people like me have to spend our free time educating idiots!
mn should deal with the posts imo.

We still seem in the infancy of debate about eugenics/screening for disabilities. This debate is only going to get tougher as conception is such an emotive area.

It's also such a finely tuned argument that you really have to think about it individually. Like for me for example I would screen for certain conditions (to prepare myself) but I would be very unlikely to have an abortion or give up a child who I gave birth to do that then went on to have special needs.

There are so many variables in that sentence about just my opinion about me that no wonder there is so much debate about it.

You don't have to - although I notice that you do challenge when you can.

As do others, you're not alone.

I'd rather people were forced to confront and debate their prejudices rather than they were not allowed. Or we can't move forward and then they get away with holding onto unchallenged views.

The DDA has been around since 1995.

13 years later, there are over 10,000 convictions a year for race hate crimes, and 141 for disability hate crimes.

up to 90% of people with a disability have experienced bullying. 12 out of every 100 people with a disability experience violence at work. That's around 60,000 people experiencing violence in the workplace.

And 141 people have been convicted in 2007-8.

That's how much protection we get. Functionally none at all. The chances of someone being convicted are around 60,000 to one. No-one cares. Especially not the government, who wrote to tell me that there's nothing wrong with the laws.

Difficult to believe it's 2009, eh?

I have no idea if there's anything wrong with the actual laws because it's really not that much different for the 6% of reported rapes actually get to court with a 2% conviction rate.

It's all shit, and slow. And vulnerable people suffer.

Whilst I think original post was a con ... why should parents of children with SN have to constantly explain and educate those who choose to live in a bloody bubble? I had a mate who referred to any child with SN as 'funny children'. I couldn't bring myself to tell her about my son for ages. When I eventually did, she was no different. Told me he should not be allowed in MS education and they should all be in one place ... so she didn't have to look, acknowledge or come into contact with them, I assume.

Apart from wanting to bash her head into a wall, I felt so sad that this could be the world and attitude my son, along with millions of others, would be living in and facing as they grew up. I wanted to pick him up and keep running ,,,

If we are going to educate and develop into an all accepting and tolerant society, what good would eradicating these 'special' babies do (apart from the fact it's just plain WRONG) - surely that will only compound and worsen the prejudices further. rant rant rant rant .... now I've got a bloody edache!

Lauriefairycake

Rape: say 2 out of every 100 rapists get convicted.

Disability: 1 in every 60,000 bullies get convicted.

It's different.

Cheers ! I needed that .... mothers ruin ....