Well considering my mother in law who works with the developmentally disabled, and a close friend of mine whose daughter is developmentally disabled, both use the word “retarded” with greater frequency than I could ever hope to aspire to, you’ll forgive me if I don’t give a flying fuck about your thinking it’s in poor taste.
I don’t know what the fuck you are talking about but I have never done such a thing. You really fucking suck. I just wanted to say that.
Um, wait, are you seriously denying that you’ve done that?
Huh. I’ve got a crazy crush on colander.
Anyway, we just want to come and go as we please, just like you do. We don’t want to feel like victims or be excluded, just like you. And people are mostly awesome and respect the words no, and don’t park here, so we are reluctant to give up equality and autonomy just because a few jerks abuse privilege.I know you get this.
I think you’re thinking of that Jamie guy.
I have confronted people, yes. I also admitted upthread that it isn’t the safest, nor most effective method of standing up for my rights. As I get more experienced as a disabled person living in the world, I can recognize that my confrontational ways are more about my anger (justifiable, imo) about the situation in the moment than they are actions towards a long term goal. My passion for disability rights is much better channeled through more structured, organized, legislative and yes safer means.
And I didn’t know that this instance of MOL letting a guy inside her apartment was ‘standing up for her rights’. And ‘I’ sure as hell didn’t say she deserved “no sympathy” for what happened. Not at all. Just offered my opinion as to what, that was within the power of the OP, would prevent such disasters from occurring. And yes, I know now that such advice was not asked for nor welcome. I am aware now.
When I’ve confronted people parked illegally, the law has already been broken. So advising me to just “recognize that people will do that” and ignore it to be safe, while similar, is not akin to the situation here. Because here, by advising someone the “recognize that people will do that” (as in not listen to a woman’s ‘no’), they simply help them AVOID being a part of a crime that hasn’t yet been committed. It’s similar but I’m being asked to directly ignore a crime (albeit a minor one) on a routine basis in order to better ensure my physical safety, i.e. a larger crime like assault.
Wait by a parked car until the driver comes back to confront them? No, I’ve never done that. If you’d like to bring some past thread or post of mine up that says otherwise to refresh my memory, please do so. I’ll eat my humble pie if so; because I honestly can’t remember ever doing such a thing.
I’m already anticipating someone bringing up the time I parked behind the car parked illegally at PlanetFitness. That was NOT an example of me confronting anyone. I parked the way I did because I had nowhere else to park. I simply parked behind the illegally parked vehicle, called the cops, got out and went on with my day. I never even saw the driver.
That’s an interesting retelling of this post: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=13947400&postcount=4
You argued with guy and blocked him for the purpose of preventing him from leaving. Or was that a different incident?
There’s no retelling here. :smack: That was the HHFC incident that got me banned. And even there I didn’t wait outside a parked car for the driver to come back.
No, you confronted him at the moment and blocked him in on purpose- really, a distinction with no difference for such a categorical denial that you gave ladyfoxfire. Her point stands.
Wait, are you saying you just blocked them in with your car and left? Because that is actually a good deal less defensible than waiting by their vehicle.
If that’s not what you’re saying, then I regret to inform you that I am not a physician and am quite frankly completely stumped as to the nature of the brain damage that you must have recently sustained. Have you been doing neck lifts without a stroke squatter or something, maybe?
That’s utter horseshit, pardon my French. Parking behind the empty car and waiting there for him to return is NOT at all the same thing as, after the man (who pulled into the spot right next to the one I was parked in) acknowledged his illegal status and refused to move, parking behind the occupied car so that I could obtain the proper authorities. In the first, my motivation is solely to confront. In the second, my motivation is having the proper authorities be able to handle the matter. Not-the-same.
Sure.
You know how you could avoid the inconvenience of driving somewhere only to find that the handicapped parking space is illegally occupied by another vehicle? Stop driving. This wouldn’t prevent illegal parking from happening, but it wouldn’t affect you at all.
If this solution doesn’t strike you as reasonable, practical, and convenient, then perhaps you could rethink your advice to women about how we could avoid unwanted sexual advances by never allowing anyone into our homes unless we intend to have sex with them:
Bingo.
Aha. Um, ok. Because not driving is just on par with not letting strange men with whom you don’t want sex into your home alone at night out of a concern for your personal safety. Not driving to avoid the inconvenience of handicapped parking abuse would only lead to much, much greater inconveniences (and worse) caused by that not driving. What horrible pains are you suffering by not letting strange men into your home at night, at least when you don’t want sex?
It’s an absurdist argument to point out the flaw in the logic. It’s a form of rhetoric. It’s ludicrous to suggest that to protect a women’s safety she should never let a guy in unless she wants sex. It’s the argument radical Islamists use to defend the burqa and such.
Not never. Just in certain contexts, such as late at night, after both have been drinking and it’s been a romantic date. Then a woman should exercise some caution. A bit of a difference from what you are trying to paint.
Emphasis mine.