Special needs user

[Luna Bliss]

11 minutes ago, Drake1 Nightfire said:

You have no right to correct anyones child other than your own.

Absolute rules don't usually exist. What if said child was banging their head against a wall severely, or hitting another child violently. The only issue is how severe a child's behavior needs to be before another should step in if the mother is neglecting her childcare duties.

Edited September 11, 2019 by Luna Bliss

[Robin Kiyori]

Here's a tip on how to help me n this situation free of charge from a "speical needs" person.

 

Unless you know the person personally innrl: stay the ***** out of their business and do not patronise them by assuming you know what is best for them.

 

If they can handle a computer unsupervised, then their spending is none of our business.

[Luna Bliss]

4 minutes ago, AylinVali said:

Here's a tip on how to help me n this situation free of charge from a "speical needs" person.

 

Unless you know the person personally innrl: stay the ***** out of their business and do not patronise them by assuming you know what is best for them.

 

If they can handle a computer unsupervised, then their spending is none of our business.

I'd surely respect your wishes.   

However it appears the OP does know the person with special needs -- she certainly knows lots of details about him. 

I agree about the patronizing....don't just assume you know what's best for someone but instead think about it carefully, and asking another what they need is always good too.  If a person is self-destructive however things get a bit more complicated.

Edited September 11, 2019 by Luna Bliss

[Amina Sopwith]

13 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

 I can only tell you that sometimes what is offensive to one isn't offensive to another, even if they both have the same disability. This is why I honor the individuals preference over the majority's. 

I get that, as a person with depression who doesn't mind being called a depressive. And as the UK government website stated, not everyone will agree on everything. But if you don't know an individual's preference, or you're speaking about people as a class, it's best to stick to the accepted guidelines where they exist. I would be unimpressed with anyone who thought it was fine to continue using a term that's offensive when they know better.

[Luna Bliss]

6 minutes ago, Amina Sopwith said:

I would be unimpressed with anyone who thought it was fine to continue using a term that's offensive when they know better.

Yes most likely they have an adolescent mindset where they can't stand any restriction. Or...I have known some that were vilified so badly in a crazed forum for using the wrong term that they now insist on having the right to use it whenever they please.

[Amina Sopwith]

21 minutes ago, Drake1 Nightfire said:

Yes it does. she is giving out personal information about a user of SL. Without their permission and without any proof. that is called a libelous statement and is illegal in the US. 

It's only libellous if it's untrue...

Would it be against TOS to share details in confidence with LL, in good faith? I haven't read them for a long time, don't know. 

At any rate, I agree that there isn't really anything concrete OP can or even should do.

[Amina Sopwith]

2 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Yes most likely they have an adolescent mindset where they can't stand any restriction. Or...I have known some that were vilified so badly in a crazed forum for using the wrong term that they now insist on having the right to use it whenever they please.

I suppose I can see that, but I'm still not impressed with someone who values venting their spleen over not causing harm and hurt to vulnerable people. They could quietly change their use without telling the forumites they're going to do it, if it's that hard for them.

[Luna Bliss]

18 minutes ago, Amina Sopwith said:

22 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Yes most likely they have an adolescent mindset where they can't stand any restriction. Or...I have known some that were vilified so badly in a crazed forum for using the wrong term that they now insist on having the right to use it whenever they please.

I suppose I can see that, but I'm still not impressed with someone who values venting their spleen over not causing harm and hurt to vulnerable people. They could quietly change their use without telling the forumites they're going to do it, if it's that hard for them.

Indeed, not impressed either. I just consider mitigating circumstances when determining if someone is like a major ash-hat or a minor one...lol.    Doesn't excuse them at all, of course, from that behavior -- I just understand better where they're coming from and tolerate it a little better knowing they're 'going through something'.

[Amina Sopwith]

Just now, Luna Bliss said:

Indeed, not impressed either. I just consider mitigating circumstances when determining if someone is like a major ash-hat or a minor one...lol.    Doesn't excuse them at all, of course, from that behavior -- I just understand better where they're coming from and tolerate it a little better knowing they're 'going through something'.

You're a kind person. Knowing nothing more about it than what I've heard from you, my line of thought is more, "That person chooses hateful, personal spleen venting over being respectful to vulnerable people who had nothing to do with their little spat. Perhaps that internet vilification was more justified than they think."

[Selene Gregoire]

31 minutes ago, Amina Sopwith said:

I get that, as a person with depression who doesn't mind being called a depressive. And as the UK government website stated, not everyone will agree on everything. But if you don't know an individual's preference, or you're speaking about people as a class, it's best to stick to the accepted guidelines where they exist. I would be unimpressed with anyone who thought it was fine to continue using a term that's offensive when they know better.

I agree. I just take it one step further and ask the individual what they prefer. Only once has anyone gotten offended over my asking. I found out later it wasn't so much my asking (or the way I asked) as it was that I'm Lakota, not white. Yep. The disabled person was prejudiced. How's that for tossing a monkey wrench into the works. 

[Kyrah Abattoir]

1 hour ago, Drake1 Nightfire said:

You have no right to correct anyones child other than your own. 

If you're not going to teach your kids how to behave in society, society will.

[Bitsy Buccaneer]

4 hours ago, Alyona Su said:

I never use the word "disabled" to describe another person, that is insulting. It's not a hate words, but is a demeaning word. Physically-challenged may be more appropriate, perhaps?

I'm disabled. Neither I nor any of the other people with disabilities I know find the word itself insulting or demeaning. Sometimes it's said with an insulting or demeaning attitude, but that attitude tends to come through whatever language is used.

Things like deciding on our behalf what is insulting or demeaning is itself demeaning.

[Robin Kiyori]

1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

I'd surely respect your wishes.   

However it appears the OP does know the person with special needs -- she certainly knows lots of details about him. 

I agree about the patronizing....don't just assume you know what's best for someone but instead think about it carefully, and asking another what they need is always good too.  If a person is self-destructive however things get a bit more complicated.

But do they know everything that  person in  real life would? From the sounds of  Nope. But then again  I am  deeply suspicious of anyone who would use the r word..and  treat this as something worth asking  on a  public forum for all and sundry to see.

Shopping/spending addictions are a terrible thing, that affects anyone, neurotypical, disabled  or abled,  neurotypical.  anyone can gain an addiction and indeed loved ones and professionals should try to help. Bringing it to a  public forum  isn't helping. I mean just look at how people have turned  it  into a debate  on another person's agency.  Or as  Bitsy pointed out.. Abled folk  trying to decide what is and isn't offensive on our behalf.

[Beth Macbain]

2 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

I was at the dentist office and an adolescent boy proclaimed "oh that's so gay" when his game on a hand-held device didn't have the desired outcome. I almost corrected him but his mother was sitting beside him and I feel an aversion to correcting another mother's child unless something terribly extreme happens.  Unfortunately, because of where I live, there's a good chance his mother thought it was fine to equate 'gay' with 'bad'. 

So you're only a white knight on the internet? Because an adolescent isn't a small child, and knows damn well he shouldn't be saying something is "gay" in a derogatory manner. And perhaps, as you were sitting in that dentist office, there was someone else in the room who is gay, and was left feeling awful after both hearing what the kid said, and seeing no one even so much as side-eye the little twerp. 

I don't think I'm a white knight at all, but if some bratty kid sitting next to me is calling things "gay" or using the n-word or the r-word or something else horribly offensive, and Mom and/or Dad is doing nothing, I'm going to tell the kid to shut it because I don't want to hear his crap much less anyone else.  

As for this particular thread, if the OP knew the guy as well as some here want to assume she does, she would not only know for certain whether or not he was disabled, but also know the exact nature of the disability. 

There is something that smells incredibly off about her post, and her responses, and I'm pretty tempted to call BS on all of this.

Is there really any argument to be had, though, when it comes to freaking not using words that are broadly considered offensive? The R word. The N word. Calling things or people gay as an insult, or *****, or *****. Any of the words and phrases Selene posted that refer to Indians? The K word, the S word, the B word... almost every group of people who have ever been marginalized have words or phrases that have been used as insults, derogatory slang, etc., and we all know what those words or phrases are.

How can anyone argue that any of those things aren't offensive, when they absolutely offend large groups of people?

[Luna Bliss]

55 minutes ago, AylinVali said:

But do they know everything that  person in  real life would? From the sounds of  Nope. But then again  I am  deeply suspicious of anyone who would use the r word..and  treat this as something worth asking  on a  public forum for all and sundry to see.

Shopping/spending addictions are a terrible thing, that affects anyone, neurotypical, disabled  or abled,  neurotypical.  anyone can gain an addiction and indeed loved ones and professionals should try to help. Bringing it to a  public forum  isn't helping. I mean just look at how people have turned  it  into a debate  on another person's agency.  Or as  Bitsy pointed out.. Abled folk  trying to decide what is and isn't offensive on our behalf.

That's a good debate in itself -- how much do we need to know about someone in RL before we can make accurate decisions about matters related to them in SL. There's no easy answers to this, unfortunately.
I only hope that if the OP evaluated her experiences with him and determined that he is behaving self-destructively to such a degree that it should be stopped, that she sends a support ticket to LL so they can decide the seriousness of the matter.
If LL won't get involved, the most she can hope for is to gently persuade him to take care of himself better in SL.

You're probably right in that it's not best to discuss some of these topics on a forum.  I only hope that some people learned a few things.  I know I did.

It's great that we have some people on the thread such as yourself that can speak from experience!

[Drake1 Nightfire]

2 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

However it appears the OP does know the person with special needs -- she certainly knows lots of details about him. 

I agree about the patronizing....don't just assume you know what's best for someone but instead think about it carefully, and asking another what they need is always good too.  If a person is self-destructive however things get a bit more complicated.

No, she "thinks" he is mentally challenged, she doesnt know he is. He told her he inherited a house, that is the extent of her RL knowledge of him. 

2 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

Nobody is putting down the abilities of mentally challenged people here. My advice is always to determine to the best of one's ability what another actually needs before offering help -- to give someone what they don't truly need is insulting and encourages dependence. But if we're fairly sure we can help in some way then why not?

How exactly are we fairly sure he needs help? Has he asked for any? If buying people gifts is an indicator of needing help we all should just quit SL as i am sure we have all bought something for someone at some point. Again, she has no factual info about his RL income. She has no factual info about how much he actually spends in SL. What someone chooses to do in SL is none of anyone elses business unless they are a family member and those actions will harm the RL person of someone else.

Lets ask again.. @Annabell Wandsworth How much is he spending? How much land does he own? Who is he spending money on? What is his RL income, monthly? What is he allowed to spend in USD a month in SL? Do you have any RL connection to this person? 

[Luna Bliss]

18 minutes ago, Beth Macbain said:

3 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

I was at the dentist office and an adolescent boy proclaimed "oh that's so gay" when his game on a hand-held device didn't have the desired outcome. I almost corrected him but his mother was sitting beside him and I feel an aversion to correcting another mother's child unless something terribly extreme happens.  Unfortunately, because of where I live, there's a good chance his mother thought it was fine to equate 'gay' with 'bad'. 

So you're only a white knight on the internet? Because an adolescent isn't a small child, and knows damn well he shouldn't be saying something is "gay" in a derogatory manner. And perhaps, as you were sitting in that dentist office, there was someone else in the room who is gay, and was left feeling awful after both hearing what the kid said, and seeing no one even so much as side-eye the little twerp. 

I don't think I'm a white knight at all, but if some bratty kid sitting next to me is calling things "gay" or using the n-word or the r-word or something else horribly offensive, and Mom and/or Dad is doing nothing, I'm going to tell the kid to shut it because I don't want to hear his crap much less anyone else.  

I have helped and do help others in RL too. I've always been involved in activist causes for disadvantaged groups whether inside or outside work settings.  Perhaps we should do away with the 'white knight' stuff -- I didn't bring it up -- somebody else always does whenever I try to help someone I feel is disadvantaged in a debate.

But to the dental appointment incident, I'm reluctant to interfere in the business of a family simply wanting to complete a dental appointment, especially with another small child present who does not need to hear adults arguing.  Eliciting big emotional blowouts in a public space can be more destructive than the scenario you described where another gay person could be present and feel offended.  Sometimes you simply have to pick what's best, or what you determine would do the least harm.

 

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

51 minutes ago, Beth Macbain said:

So you're only a white knight on the internet? Because an adolescent isn't a small child, and knows damn well he shouldn't be saying something is "gay" in a derogatory manner. And perhaps, as you were sitting in that dentist office, there was someone else in the room who is gay, and was left feeling awful after both hearing what the kid said, and seeing no one even so much as side-eye the little twerp. 
 

 Anyone can type words on the Internet.

[Love Zhaoying]

1 hour ago, Beth Macbain said:

The R word.

The new R-word is “racist” according to recent news.

[Beth Macbain]

Just now, Love Zhaoying said:

The new R-word is “racist” according to recent news.

Don't know what news you're reading, but does it start with an F and end in an ox?

Because I wouldn't give much weight to that particular news...

[Love Zhaoying]

1 minute ago, Beth Macbain said:

Don't know what news you're reading, but does it start with an F and end in an ox?

Because I wouldn't give much weight to that particular news...

Funny but no. NPR.

[Rhonda Huntress]

1 minute ago, Beth Macbain said:

Because I wouldn't give much weight to that particular news

The Onion is the only news source you can trust

 

[Love Zhaoying]

49 minutes ago, Rhonda Huntress said:

The Onion is the only news source you can trust

 

I miss the editorials by the fictional founder. Oops, Publisher. Found one!

https://www.theonion.com/a-message-from-the-publisher-only-hoover-can-get-ameri-1819583226

Edited September 11, 2019 by Love Zhaoying

[Selene Gregoire]

1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I miss the editorials by the fictional founder. Oops, Publisher. Found one!

https://www.theonion.com/a-message-from-the-publisher-only-hoover-can-get-ameri-1819583226

Huey Long?  OH HELL NO! Louisiana has never recovered from that POS.

[Hunny Bunny]

I have special needs, rent and stuff. Let your friend know if he's feeling generous.