# The handy depreciation society **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 10, 2001, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885 "2001-02-10T05:44:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Kyla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/eada6e/32.png) [@Kyla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyla)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2001, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885/101 "2001-02-15T00:38:56Z")
Although I can’t seem to find the thread for the life of me, I am fairly certain that handy has mentioned that he is not, in fact, fluent in ASL. He was talking about taking a class in ASL because he was having trouble communicating with other deaf people. So while I understand that there is a distinct deaf culture, I kinda do feel sorry for him, because he is unable to communicate with most people. I have met handy IRL and we wrote out a pleasant conversation. He is kind of full of non sequitors, but if you ever try to have a real discussion with him, you might be surprised. ---
**Author:** ![Sue\_Duhnym](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/91b2a8/32.png) [@Sue\_Duhnym](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sue_Duhnym)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2001, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885/102 "2001-02-15T01:11:14Z")
**London\_Calling** I just can’t get over how you’re arguing FOR a guy that was essentially _molesting_ me because > [@](#): > > FWIW, I think this guy has a lifetime of extreme emotional frustration locked away in his head and if he sometimes needs to be reminded of the appropriateness of his actions in the context of a world he doesn’t wholly understand, so be it. For all I know he might not have worked out the difference between sex and showing real affection for someone he clearly cares about i.e. you. But it isn’t necessary to humiliate. What would you have to say about the guy if he was acting that way towards my 2 year old daughter? And since when is “FRUSTRATION” a good excuse for inappropriate sexual behavior? Fuck, if I were a rapist, I’d hate to have you as my defense attorney. :rolleyes: I can’t believe I actually feel the need to clarify this with you, but I do. [ul] [li]He only uses about five words (I’ve actually only heard two…more and no…mostly he just grunts and points), he’s found that those are the only ones he needs to get by. He understands what you are saying, but if you told him the sky was red, he wouldn’t question it.[/li] [li]He doesn’t think about right and wrong on his own, he has to be told which is which and he forgets a lot. He has no idea what it means to do something inappropriate, only that someone told him it was “wrong.”[/li] [li]He only learns things that are directly related to him getting what he wants on a basic level. The example I used before was his foot. The reason he learned to walk in the first place was because, like any child, he was motivated by want (that toy over there…I want it!). Currently, if they do surgery to repair his foot, he would have to be in a wheelchair until it healed sufficiently. The doctors think there is a huge chance that once he realized that he could move in a wheelchair, he wouldn’t bother to learn to walk again.[/li] [li]Hi Opal![/li] [li]I went to both my MIL and Husband and asked their opinions first. THEY told me that I had to confront it. In case you missed it before, my SIL is also retarded, though not as drastically. Soooooo, I should take your word over theirs?[/li] [li]This is a 40yo man who requests that the closest available person wipes his ass after a shit, do you really think I humiliated him? Do you think he’s even _capable_ of humiliation? Probably not.[/li][/ul] I refuse to discuss this anymore with you. It’s just too mind-blowing that you would try to rationalize his actions. Sure he didn’t know better, but a quiet chat in the other room may have had worse consequences…for me. Fuck! _Anthracite and bdgr, thank you._ ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2001, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885/103 "2001-02-15T02:09:25Z")
> [@](#): > > I just figured this was as good a thread to practice my flaming in as **any**. Is this what you meant? ---
**Author:** ![Lux\_Fiat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/bc79bd/32.png) [@Lux\_Fiat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lux_Fiat)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2001, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885/104 "2001-02-15T02:56:32Z")
A’ight, a few things: KKBattousai, those handy gems you posted _aren’t_ unequivocally asshole-like. To read them as such requires that whole mind’s-ear addition of inflection that I mentioned. The first one could be matter of fact. The second, a joke not necessarily at the addressee’s expense. I got no lit-crit alternate analysis for the third one, which does seem pretty jerky to me, but that doesn’t detract from the point I’ve (clumsily) been trying to make. I’m not apologizing for him, or demanding that he be coddled like a damned puppy, as it seems Sue thinks I am (as an aside, in the name of perfect clarity, Sue, I think you’re aces, I just disagree with what you’re saying on this point). I was offering an alternate point of view on handy’s meaning. Not _the_ alternate point of view. I don’t want to be his interpreter. I _do_ want folks to maybe cut the guy some slack on his general posting style, for reasons that JTR and London\_Calling expressed far better than I. And speaking of London\_Calling: I gotta disagree with your assessment of Sue’s encounter with her husband’s cousin. Let me tell you, if I were a woman, and a big, unpredictable, poorly socialized guy rubbed his dick against me, you bet I’d want to put an end to that shit as quickly and decisively as possible. Hell, now that I think about it, let’s not even stipulate my womanhood. I’d be fairly concerned for my virtue, _ceteris_ freakin’ _paribus_. As for shaming the guy, well, shame is pretty much how we teach people social mores, innit? But that’s a whole other debate. I would submit to Sue, however, that perhaps even considering the larger point you were trying to make, the comparison of handy’s deafness informing his non-sequitur posting style, and Mr. Duhnym’s cousin’s mental retardation informing his inappropriate sexual behavior was a little bit insulting. ---
**Author:** ![Sue\_Duhnym](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/91b2a8/32.png) [@Sue\_Duhnym](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sue_Duhnym)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2001, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885/105 "2001-02-15T03:44:12Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Lux Fiat \* > or demanding that he be coddled like a damned puppy, as it seems Sue thinks I am I’m sorry Lux, I didn’t mean to single you out. I meant that as a general rule (I was actually resonding to Falcon’s quote (“If it was any other person…”) > [@](#): > > I would submit to Sue, however, that perhaps even considering the larger point you were trying to make, the comparison of handy’s deafness informing his non-sequitur posting style, and Mr. Duhnym’s cousin’s mental retardation informing his inappropriate sexual behavior was a little bit insulting. You are correct and again, my husband’s cousin was just an aside to Falcon that hijacked the OP terribly (Sorry Monfort!). I was actually using my SIL to illustrate the point that people we label as “handicapped” sometimes use our perceptions for their own good. I was trying to emphasize that handy needs to be told that his posting style is unacceptable and he should try to adapt to this society he has voluntarily joined, rather than resort to the “I’m deaf, poor me!” attitude that he falls back on when criticized. (How’s THAT for a run-on sentence?!) Um…so THERE! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Lux\_Fiat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/bc79bd/32.png) [@Lux\_Fiat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lux_Fiat)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2001, 6:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885/106 "2001-02-15T06:34:56Z")
Sue, I’d like to thank and commend you for actually taking the time to slog through and respond to that run-on, comma-laden post. I had to pause a few times for breath just rereading the damned thing in my head. One thing still bugs me: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sue Duhnym \* > **I was actually using my SIL to illustrate the point that people we label as “handicapped” sometimes use our perceptions for their own good.** I feel you, but by that specific example, you’re sort of indirectly ascribing to handy the capacity for manipulation shown by a man with the self-absorbed mind of a toddler. I just think the point could have been made more respectfully; perhaps if you’d pulled up instances of handy himself trying to manipulate people like that. > [@](#): > > (How’s THAT for a run-on sentence?!) Hah. Amateur. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Kumquat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/4491bb/32.png) [@Gary\_Kumquat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Kumquat)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2001, 7:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885/107 "2001-02-15T07:46:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sue Duhnym \* > \*\ ***London\_Calling** > > I just can’t get over how you’re arguing FOR a guy that was essentially _molesting_ me …\*\* Sue, at the risk of provoking your ire, my initial reaction to your post was the same as London Calling’s. I say this with no intent to offend you. I think that this is probably down to the inherent ambiguity of typed conversation - it’s possible to visualise your description of the person as being a big, shy, disabled person with severe relational difficulties, where you’re trying to describe a hulking, sinister and domineering person with dangerous tendencies. A person who receives the first impression would find your actions fairly nasty. A person who sees the second would find your actions totally justified. If you see what I mean 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Gozu\_Tashoya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/7993a0/32.png) [@Gozu\_Tashoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gozu_Tashoya)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2001, 8:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885/108 "2001-02-15T08:08:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Lux Fiat \* > \*\*KKBattousai, those handy gems you posted _aren’t_ unequivocally asshole-like. To read them as such requires that whole mind’s-ear addition of inflection that I mentioned. The first one could be matter of fact. The second, a joke not necessarily at the addressee’s expense. I got no lit-crit alternate analysis for the third one, which does seem pretty jerky to me, but that doesn’t detract from the point I’ve (clumsily) been trying to make. > > I’m not apologizing for him, or demanding that he be coddled like a damned puppy, as it seems Sue thinks I am (as an aside, in the name of perfect clarity, Sue, I think you’re aces, I just disagree with what you’re saying on this point). I was offering an alternate point of view on handy’s meaning. Not _the_ alternate point of view. I don’t want to be his interpreter. I _do_ want folks to maybe cut the guy some slack on his general posting style, for reasons that JTR and London\_Calling expressed far better than I. > \*\* Okay, **Lux** , I’ll grudgingly concede that I _may_ have been adding intonation where there was none intended. On the other hand, one thing that got me particularly pissed was that a reply to the thread in which the third quote was posted asked what it is about the Internet that makes people so mean. That post included, IIRC, that line of handy’s, and the person posting was obviously offended. Granted, nobody here is _obligated_ to apologize for offending anybody (indeed, if that were so, the boards would be filled to the brim with apologies, probably even if one did exclude the pit), but I’m tempted to say that most of us would have seen where the line could have been seen as decisively derisive and asshole-ish and apologized. handy did not. (Though, OTOH, handy didn’t post to that thread again, so there’s no way of telling if he ever read it again. OTOOH, you don’t get to the number of posts he has by not rereading threads, and given the fact that it was a computer related thread - one of handy’s favorite kinds - the odds are that he did.) And, **Lux** , for the record, that’s not the handy quote I wanted lit crit analysis for anyway. That would be the aforementioned _fourth_ quote that still makes absolutely no sense to me. handy tried explaining it, but his response was barely less cryptic than his original post. Oh god, the agitation! 😕 And speaking of agitation, yes, **dropzone** , that is what I meant. ---
**Author:** ![London\_Calling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@London\_Calling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/London_Calling)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2001, 1:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885/109 "2001-02-15T13:13:29Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by London\_Calling \* > There seems little point in exploring this (to me) for a couple of reasons. The first is that we have a different view that probably won’t alter through this debate. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sue Duhnym \* > I refuse to discuss this anymore with you. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Gary Kumquat \* > I think that this is probably down to the inherent ambiguity of typed conversation - it’s possible to visualise your description of the person as being a big, shy, disabled person with severe relational difficulties, where you’re trying to describe a hulking, sinister and domineering person with dangerous tendencies. A person who receives the first impression would find your actions fairly nasty. A person who sees the second would find your actions totally justified. > \*\* Thanks, Gary. Yes it is difficult. Nuff said. ---
**Author:** ![bdgr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a87d85/32.png) [@bdgr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bdgr)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2001, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885/110 "2001-02-15T13:33:56Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Gary Kumquat \* > \*\* > I think that this is probably down to the inherent ambiguity of typed conversation - it’s possible to visualise your description of the person as being a big, shy, disabled person with severe relational difficulties, where you’re trying to describe a hulking, sinister and domineering person with dangerous tendencies. A person who receives the first impression would find your actions fairly nasty. A person who sees the second would find your actions totally justified. > > If you see what I mean 🙂 \*\* Sorry, I disagree. Evan with the first scenario, it comes down to whether or not he is capable of learning that that is inapropriate behavior. He clearly is, so the unacceptability of his actions must be made clear to him. Often, people will make exceptions for disabled people because they assume that they can’t help themselves, when in reality, they can. If he were unable to understand what she was saying, then he would have continued what he was doing. I imagine its not the first time he had done this, and he should have been corrected before, but that is not Sue’s fault. ---
**Author:** ![Balduran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cc9497/32.png) [@Balduran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balduran)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2001, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885/111 "2001-02-15T14:01:34Z")
Just because it was brought up originally, it looks like the Gualladet murders have been [solved](http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/Gallaudet_MesaCharged010214.html). ---
**Author:** ![BoBettie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4af34b/32.png) [@BoBettie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BoBettie)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2001, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885/112 "2001-02-15T14:30:44Z")
I’d just like to say that just because someone is mentally disabled doesn’t mean that he is not also a grown man, sexual wants and needs and all. We have no idea what Sues situation entailed, except what could be interpreted by her post, and I stand by her actions **100%**. I have a brother in law who is mentally disabled, and I hate being alone with him. It’s not because he’s mentally disabled, it’s because he stares, unblinking at me. For a long, long time. Up close. If I’m wearing shorts, he’s staring at my ass and legs. If it’s a tank top, he won’t take his eyes off my tits. Frankly, it’s an extremely uncomfortable situation to be in. Over time I believe people got tired of telling him to stop staring, and now he thinks it is OK. I have calmly told him to stop, letting him know it makes me uncomfortable, but it does no good. Let me just tell you, when you are 5’4" and not strong, and a much bigger, stronger man is leering at you for hours and/or hugging/groping you, your defenses go up big time. It’s a very hard thing to deal with. Reserve judgement until you are in a similar position. Zette ---
**Author:** ![soulsling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@soulsling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/soulsling)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2001, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885/113 "2001-02-15T14:52:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mr. Cynical \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Caliban \* > > \*\*Well, hell. I _like_ handy. He’s like that old friend whom you always know will show up at the party sooner or later. \*\* > > Yeah, if that friend has diarrhea and likes to fuck your cat when you’re not looking. \*\* [hijack of praise] I am truly impressed. This by far one your best replies of wit 😃 [/hijack of praise] ---
**Author:** ![Montfort](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Montfort](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Montfort)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2001, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885/114 "2001-02-15T15:18:57Z")
I give up. **handy** has no intentions of coming in here, and this thread’s been hijacked enough. I believe that I, and several others, have aired our complaints about handy in a sufficient manner. His refusal to acknowledge them in here renders this thread with no useful purpose, in my eyes. Would a mod please come in here and lock this baby up? ---
**Author:** ![Sue\_Duhnym](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/91b2a8/32.png) [@Sue\_Duhnym](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sue_Duhnym)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2001, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885/115 "2001-02-15T16:12:02Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Montfort \* > Would a mod please come in here and lock this baby up? Thank GOD! Sorry about the hijacking. ---
**Author:** ![Montfort](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Montfort](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Montfort)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2001, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885/116 "2001-02-15T16:15:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sue Duhnym \* > \*\*Sorry about the hijacking. \*\* No, don’t be sorry. It was your hijack (btw, you did the right thing) that kept this thread on the first page for handy to see for a few days. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-handy-depreciation-society/53885.md?page=5)