Jump to content

Paralympic Games 2012

Peckhamgatecrasher

By Peckhamgatecrasher
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

Loz

Loz

Posted
Posted

pk Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> i'm a bit late to this but to me, i find some of

> the above to be pretty patronising and ill

> considered, although i am sure not intentionally

> offensive

>

> the use of the term 'the disabled' (and similarly

> 'them') (as in 'i'd be desparate to employ them')

> as if 'they' are a single homogenous group who

> should all be lumped together is something that i

> know e.g. baroness grey-thompson has objected to

> in recent days.

>

> i doubt that people would be similarly comfortable

> speaking about other groups who suffer from

> discrimination in the same way, would people

> really say e.g. 'the gays'?


Sorry? You are getting wound up by the use of the definite article? Blimey, some people must get up extra early some days in order to find things to get offended by.

bibimax

bibimax

Posted
Posted

We were at the stadium last night and had the privilege to see David Wier win the 1500m...it was a moment my friends family and myself will never forget...amazing! The stadium noise was deafening a massive WOW!


Two events that have me completely bowled over - blind long jump and the high jump (hop on one leg and dive over the bar)

pk

pk

Posted
Posted

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> pk Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > i'm a bit late to this but to me, i find some

> of

> > the above to be pretty patronising and ill

> > considered, although i am sure not

> intentionally

> > offensive

> >

> > the use of the term 'the disabled' (and

> similarly

> > 'them') (as in 'i'd be desparate to employ

> them')

> > as if 'they' are a single homogenous group who

> > should all be lumped together is something that

> i

> > know e.g. baroness grey-thompson has objected

> to

> > in recent days.

> >

> > i doubt that people would be similarly

> comfortable

> > speaking about other groups who suffer from

> > discrimination in the same way, would people

> > really say e.g. 'the gays'?

>

> Sorry? You are getting wound up by the use of the

> definite article? Blimey, some people must get up

> extra early some days in order to find things to

> get offended by.



i am not wound up or offended at all, thanks


but i do try not to do things that i am aware might offend or patronise others (given that i've read articles on the same in the last few days) and which can be easily avoided (which it seems that you think is not worth (even neglible) effort on your part)

Loz

Loz

Posted
Posted

pk Wrote:


> i am not wound up or offended at all, thanks

>

> but i do try not to do things that i am aware

> might offend or patronise others (given that i've

> read articles on the same in the last few days)

> and which can be easily avoided (which it seems

> that you think is not worth (even neglible) effort

> on your part)


Well, TG-T should have a good, stern word with herself.


"I also hope they will encourage people to be more open-minded and not just look at the disabled and think they are benefit-scrounging cheats. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/tanni-greythompson-the-trailblazer-who-is-still-fighting-for-recognition-8081350.html


If she can't be bothered, why should I?


Really, this is sillier than the Frankie Boyle brouhaha when the professionally offended got all up in arms about a few tweets that Adam Hills and the Last Leg bunch found rather funny and inoffensive.


PS I hope you are going to write to that famous charity "Riding for the Disabled" and tell them to change their terribly offensive name.

pk

pk

Posted
Posted

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>>

> If she can't be bothered, why should I?

>


because it might avoid offending people?


> PS I hope you are going to write to that famous

> charity "Riding for the Disabled" and tell them to

> change their terribly offensive name.


why do you hope that?

Loz

Loz

Posted
Posted

pk Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >>

> > If she can't be bothered, why should I?

> >

>

> because it might avoid offending people?


Sorry, but if the person you yourself quoted as publicly pushing this linguistic policing exercise can't be bothered following it herself, then I really can't be bothered. I don't try to offend people, but if people (like you) want to got out of their way to take unneeded offence then, really, that's their (and your) problem, not mine.


>

> > PS I hope you are going to write to that famous charity "Riding for the Disabled" and tell them to

> > change their terribly offensive name.

>

> why do you hope that?


Well, you are the one that seems to be bothered about the use of the phrase 'the disabled'. I hate to think you were being hypocritical by looking the other way on that example.

pk

pk

Posted
Posted

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> pk Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Loz Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > >>

> > > If she can't be bothered, why should I?

> > >

> >

> > because it might avoid offending people?

>

> Sorry, but if the person you yourself quoted as

> publicly pushing this linguistic policing exercise

> can't be bothered following it herself, then I

> really can't be bothered. I don't try to offend

> people, but if people (like you) want to got out

> of their way to take unneeded offence then,

> really, that's their (and your) problem, not

> mine.

>


i quoted an example, there are many more (even some dictionaries acknowledge this)


i've no problem here, just perhaps a little more empathy


> >

> > > PS I hope you are going to write to that

> famous charity "Riding for the Disabled" and tell

> them to

> > > change their terribly offensive name.

> >

> > why do you hope that?

>

> Well, you are the one that seems to be bothered

> about the use of the phrase 'the disabled'. I

> hate to think you were being hypocritical by

> looking the other way on that example.



you clearly struggle with the fact that context (and history) can impact on the way in which words are used, RFD have used that name for many years and have built goodwill in it (and indeed use that goodwill for charitable purposes) so i won't be lobbying them to change just as i didn't lobby the (then) spastic society to change its name (although they did themselves decide to do so as the usage of and associations with the word 'spastic' changed over time (as language does))


anyway, reckon that's it for me on this one

DJKillaQueen

DJKillaQueen

Posted
Posted

To be fair pk, I don't think anyone on this thread has been offensive to anyone......and most of us have thoroughly enjoyed watching, whether on TV or being lucky enough to have tickets, the paralympics.


It's not offensive either to point out just how important the sucess of this games will hopefully be in changing attitudes towards people with disabilities, because there is a lot of prejudice and assumption that disabled people can't achieve anything on a par with those without disabilities. If we are going to tackle prejudice where it exists we have to be able to say that.


And I for one hope that we will now see world championships and commonwealth games and a whole range of sprting events for those athletes now televised, so that we can follow the progress of these great athletes beyond the paralympics.

Loz

Loz

Posted
Posted

My biggest gripe with C4's coverage has been the complete Brit-centric nature of it (Oscar P being the one exception). Take last night. Rather than risk switching to an event that didn't have a Brit (or Oscar) in it, Claire Balding sat around for the best part of 20 minutes talking rubbish and the channel switched to three ad breaks in 15 minutes! Meanwhile, the USA/Australia wheelchair basketball semi final was taking place. The three multi-channels are a bit better, but even they are sometimes off the air whilst perfectly good non-British events go uncovered.


It's like the bad old days of nationalistic Olympic coverage. Mind you, we were spoilt rotten by the Beeb's Olympic coverage.

BB100

BB100

Posted
Posted

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Absolutely loved my day at the Excel today with my

> brother....even though team GB sitting volleyball

> ladies lost. Totally blown away by the power

> lifting too....the lady from Nigeria took gold

> with a 249kg lift!!!!! I can just about manage a

> bag of shopping!!!


I was there and saw that too. Was you the annoying person behind me that kept jumping up and getting over excited? :)

legalbeagle

legalbeagle

Posted
Posted

What an amazing paralympics this has been. And now the chatter about legacy will start. My hope for a legacy is that everyone who has been ignorant of disability gets a little closer to understanding this:


There is no such thing as disability. Just difference. These people are not broken or flawed or substandard versions of themselves. They are themselves. Look past the difference to the people.


That's a legacy worth fighting for.


oh and ps I actually love Clare Balding.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...