How do you block someone on here?

[Maia]

Maia gets extra credit for not being offended though because her reader is going to read the joke in a flat inhuman robot voice and make it sound even more dreadful. Like Hawking's voice would read it: SHE PUSH-DA LAA-DY IN-A WHEEL-CHAIR, Etc.

I prefer "handicapable" meaning that although I have a handicap, I'm also perfectly capable...

if most humans were born with three or four arms, then those with two arms would be classed and called 'handicap', and 'disable', as well. Although humans with two arms are obviously 'capable', and not 'disabled'. Exactly like every human body is 'capable' of doing, different, things.

And, just like you prefer 'handicapable', I also look abilities, instead of disabilities. For example one who has been blind from birth can cross busy streets in the middle of busy cities, which is some thing that i would not do and may well never have the courage to do with eyes shut. To me those that do walk around cities without vision are what I consider the truly brave, and which far exceeds those who are called and labeled brave for just entering burning buildings or jumping into rivers to save children from death, for example.

If 'we' are going to class some with a 'disability', then add 'me' to the list as it is i who would not walk around a city if i could not visually see. Those who do, without vision, are far, far, far more 'able' than i am, or maybe ever could be.

Nah, that was a joke. Actually, the preferred euphemism in the UK is disabled. A handicap is something that horses have, in races. I never usually refer to myself as disabled, though, except for official, legal purposes, but, hypocrite that I am, one might say, I'm happy to use it of other people, including our clients at work, most of whom have a disability of one sort of another, such as having to use a wheelchair, or having dementia, or going deaf or blind, or whatever.

But, if these listed human beings are more able to do particular things, then others around them are, then who, exactly, are the so-called 'disabled' ones?

Indeed, we even force those who can walk into wheelchairs, to play wheelchair netball. Personally, I prefer plain speaking. There's an organisation here called the RNIB, which used to stand for the Royal National Institute for the Blind, but now stands for the Royal National Institute of Blind People. As I've pointed out to them, more than once, surely that should therefore be the RNIBP? And that's just the problem. If you keep changing things, then how are people expected to keep up? People often feel awkward enough, around blind people, worried about saying the wrong thing, which is really stupid, without having the extra worry of accidentally using a term that's now considered to be old fashioned or offensive. I don't see eye to eye, as it were, with the RNIB, on quite a lot of issues, and that's the very least of them, but it's emblematic, I think, of a wider dumbing down and bowdlerisation of language.

As for humour, I think you're well aware that I have no problem with jokes about blindness, and will often tell them myself. Indeed, I do it as a way of breaking the ice, if I think that someone is feeling uncomfortable around me, and if someone else tells such a joke, it shows that they are not feeling uncomfortable, or worried about offending me, or whatever it is they think might happen if they say the wrong thing. So yes, even if something is gut-wrenchingly unfunny, such as some of your own jokes, Prom, it's still perfectly obvious if something is intended as humour, or to deliberately cause offense.

Well, that was a bit of a rant, wasn't it?

I don't actually prefer handicapable, of course, that was just a bad attempt at humour, but with regard to walking around cities, and indeed, anything, it's just what one gets used to. I doubt if I give it any more thought that you do, when you have to look to see if there are any cars coming. It's obviously different for people who lose their sight, but for me, everything just feels normal and natural. Being blind is not something that's constantly on my mind, and even when I do think about it, it's not with any sense of loss or inadequacy.

People who jump into burning buildings to rescue others are definitely, genuinely brave, because they're doing something very dangerous that's out of the ordinary, and I have great admiration for them. I couldn't do that. As for rivers, well, I'm a pretty good swimmer, so maybe that's slightly less of a challenge, but only slightly.

[Age]

I prefer "handicapable" meaning that although I have a handicap, I'm also perfectly capable...

if most humans were born with three or four arms, then those with two arms would be classed and called 'handicap', and 'disable', as well. Although humans with two arms are obviously 'capable', and not 'disabled'. Exactly like every human body is 'capable' of doing, different, things.

And, just like you prefer 'handicapable', I also look abilities, instead of disabilities. For example one who has been blind from birth can cross busy streets in the middle of busy cities, which is some thing that i would not do and may well never have the courage to do with eyes shut. To me those that do walk around cities without vision are what I consider the truly brave, and which far exceeds those who are called and labeled brave for just entering burning buildings or jumping into rivers to save children from death, for example.

If 'we' are going to class some with a 'disability', then add 'me' to the list as it is i who would not walk around a city if i could not visually see. Those who do, without vision, are far, far, far more 'able' than i am, or maybe ever could be.

Nah, that was a joke. Actually, the preferred euphemism in the UK is disabled. A handicap is something that horses have, in races. I never usually refer to myself as disabled, though, except for official, legal purposes, but, hypocrite that I am, one might say, I'm happy to use it of other people, including our clients at work, most of whom have a disability of one sort of another, such as having to use a wheelchair, or having dementia, or going deaf or blind, or whatever.

But, if these listed human beings are more able to do particular things, then others around them are, then who, exactly, are the so-called 'disabled' ones?

Indeed, we even force those who can walk into wheelchairs, to play wheelchair netball. Personally, I prefer plain speaking. There's an organisation here called the RNIB, which used to stand for the Royal National Institute for the Blind, but now stands for the Royal National Institute of Blind People. As I've pointed out to them, more than once, surely that should therefore be the RNIBP? And that's just the problem. If you keep changing things, then how are people expected to keep up? People often feel awkward enough, around blind people, worried about saying the wrong thing, which is really stupid, without having the extra worry of accidentally using a term that's now considered to be old fashioned or offensive. I don't see eye to eye, as it were, with the RNIB, on quite a lot of issues, and that's the very least of them, but it's emblematic, I think, of a wider dumbing down and bowdlerisation of language.

As for humour, I think you're well aware that I have no problem with jokes about blindness, and will often tell them myself. Indeed, I do it as a way of breaking the ice, if I think that someone is feeling uncomfortable around me, and if someone else tells such a joke, it shows that they are not feeling uncomfortable, or worried about offending me, or whatever it is they think might happen if they say the wrong thing. So yes, even if something is gut-wrenchingly unfunny, such as some of your own jokes, Prom, it's still perfectly obvious if something is intended as humour, or to deliberately cause offense.

Well, that was a bit of a rant, wasn't it?

I don't actually prefer handicapable, of course, that was just a bad attempt at humour, but with regard to walking around cities, and indeed, anything, it's just what one gets used to. I doubt if I give it any more thought that you do, when you have to look to see if there are any cars coming. It's obviously different for people who lose their sight, but for me, everything just feels normal and natural. Being blind is not something that's constantly on my mind, and even when I do think about it, it's not with any sense of loss or inadequacy.

That was my point, exactly.

What 'we' are born with is perfectly normal, and adequate.

Just like with emotions, whatever one 'we' are having is perfectly normal, and adequate. Although what one is feeling might be the exact opposite to another one in the exact same situation.

People who jump into burning buildings to rescue others are definitely, genuinely brave, because they're doing something very dangerous that's out of the ordinary, and I have great admiration for them.

But, as an older human being who is capable it is just normal to rescue another in trouble, 'without any second thought at all', as some would say.

I couldn't do that.

And, I hope you would never even think of doing it.

As for rivers, well, I'm a pretty good swimmer, so maybe that's slightly less of a challenge, but only slightly.

But, you would have to first know which way the current was going, if there is one, and would have to be able to hear when they are, exactly, among other things.

[Maia]

if most humans were born with three or four arms, then those with two arms would be classed and called 'handicap', and 'disable', as well. Although humans with two arms are obviously 'capable', and not 'disabled'. Exactly like every human body is 'capable' of doing, different, things.

And, just like you prefer 'handicapable', I also look abilities, instead of disabilities. For example one who has been blind from birth can cross busy streets in the middle of busy cities, which is some thing that i would not do and may well never have the courage to do with eyes shut. To me those that do walk around cities without vision are what I consider the truly brave, and which far exceeds those who are called and labeled brave for just entering burning buildings or jumping into rivers to save children from death, for example.

If 'we' are going to class some with a 'disability', then add 'me' to the list as it is i who would not walk around a city if i could not visually see. Those who do, without vision, are far, far, far more 'able' than i am, or maybe ever could be.



But, if these listed human beings are more able to do particular things, then others around them are, then who, exactly, are the so-called 'disabled' ones?

I don't actually prefer handicapable, of course, that was just a bad attempt at humour, but with regard to walking around cities, and indeed, anything, it's just what one gets used to. I doubt if I give it any more thought that you do, when you have to look to see if there are any cars coming. It's obviously different for people who lose their sight, but for me, everything just feels normal and natural. Being blind is not something that's constantly on my mind, and even when I do think about it, it's not with any sense of loss or inadequacy.

That was my point, exactly.

What 'we' are born with is perfectly normal, and adequate.

Just like with emotions, whatever one 'we' are having is perfectly normal, and adequate. Although what one is feeling might be the exact opposite to another one in the exact same situation.

People who jump into burning buildings to rescue others are definitely, genuinely brave, because they're doing something very dangerous that's out of the ordinary, and I have great admiration for them.

But, as an older human being who is capable it is just normal to rescue another in trouble, 'without any second thought at all', as some would say.

I couldn't do that.

And, I hope you would never even think of doing it.

As for rivers, well, I'm a pretty good swimmer, so maybe that's slightly less of a challenge, but only slightly.

But, you would have to first know which way the current was going, if there is one, and would have to be able to hear when they are, exactly, among other things.

If there was someone in a burning building, especially a loved one, I hope I would try my best to get them out, but who really knows what we would do under such circumstances? With regard to rivers, or water in general, we've practiced life saving in the pool at work, and part of our job is to hold the clients up while they do exercises in it, so I'm pretty confident around water. A river is very different, of course, but it doesn't quite hold the same sort of trepidation, for me, as a burning building would.

[Age]

I don't actually prefer handicapable, of course, that was just a bad attempt at humour, but with regard to walking around cities, and indeed, anything, it's just what one gets used to. I doubt if I give it any more thought that you do, when you have to look to see if there are any cars coming. It's obviously different for people who lose their sight, but for me, everything just feels normal and natural. Being blind is not something that's constantly on my mind, and even when I do think about it, it's not with any sense of loss or inadequacy.

That was my point, exactly.

What 'we' are born with is perfectly normal, and adequate.

Just like with emotions, whatever one 'we' are having is perfectly normal, and adequate. Although what one is feeling might be the exact opposite to another one in the exact same situation.

People who jump into burning buildings to rescue others are definitely, genuinely brave, because they're doing something very dangerous that's out of the ordinary, and I have great admiration for them.

But, as an older human being who is capable it is just normal to rescue another in trouble, 'without any second thought at all', as some would say.

I couldn't do that.

And, I hope you would never even think of doing it.

As for rivers, well, I'm a pretty good swimmer, so maybe that's slightly less of a challenge, but only slightly.

But, you would have to first know which way the current was going, if there is one, and would have to be able to hear when they are, exactly, among other things.

If there was someone in a burning building, especially a loved one, I hope I would try my best to get them out, but who really knows what we would do under such circumstances?

One of the first things that are taught when rescuing is 'access the area', first, so if it was safe for you to do so, and you 'know the area', then all well and good.

Why would you put some ahead or before others?

With regard to rivers, or water in general, we've practiced life saving in the pool at work, and part of our job is to hold the clients up while they do exercises in it, so I'm pretty confident around water. A river is very different, of course, but it doesn't quite hold the same sort of trepidation, for me, as a burning building would.

Okay.

To me, I still consider thinking about doing some things like you do everyday, when unable to visually see, far more terrifying than just, instinctively, rescuing some one without thinking. To me what you do is real bravery, which obviously to you is just normal, and natural.

[Maia]

That was my point, exactly.

What 'we' are born with is perfectly normal, and adequate.

Just like with emotions, whatever one 'we' are having is perfectly normal, and adequate. Although what one is feeling might be the exact opposite to another one in the exact same situation.




But, as an older human being who is capable it is just normal to rescue another in trouble, 'without any second thought at all', as some would say.



And, I hope you would never even think of doing it.



But, you would have to first know which way the current was going, if there is one, and would have to be able to hear when they are, exactly, among other things.

If there was someone in a burning building, especially a loved one, I hope I would try my best to get them out, but who really knows what we would do under such circumstances?

One of the first things that are taught when rescuing is 'access the area', first, so if it was safe for you to do so, and you 'know the area', then all well and good.

Why would you put some ahead or before others?

With regard to rivers, or water in general, we've practiced life saving in the pool at work, and part of our job is to hold the clients up while they do exercises in it, so I'm pretty confident around water. A river is very different, of course, but it doesn't quite hold the same sort of trepidation, for me, as a burning building would.

Okay.

To me, I still consider thinking about doing some things like you do everyday, when unable to visually see, far more terrifying than just, instinctively, rescuing some one without thinking. To me what you do is real bravery, which obviously to you is just normal, and natural.

I think instinct would take over, if it was a loved one, or even one's own child, for example, and anyone would rush in, regardless of the danger.

But with regard just walking around the city, and normal everyday things like that, bear in mind that I have something that sighted people don't have, or at least, that they hardly consciously use, and that is, the ability to echolocate. That's how I manage not to bump into things, for example. It's not a superpower or anything, but combined with my cane, just listening in general, and, indeed, smelling things (see my posts on the rotting piles of rubbish in my home city, if you're wondering what I mean there), it's enough.

[Age]

If there was someone in a burning building, especially a loved one, I hope I would try my best to get them out, but who really knows what we would do under such circumstances?

One of the first things that are taught when rescuing is 'access the area', first, so if it was safe for you to do so, and you 'know the area', then all well and good.

Why would you put some ahead or before others?

With regard to rivers, or water in general, we've practiced life saving in the pool at work, and part of our job is to hold the clients up while they do exercises in it, so I'm pretty confident around water. A river is very different, of course, but it doesn't quite hold the same sort of trepidation, for me, as a burning building would.

Okay.

To me, I still consider thinking about doing some things like you do everyday, when unable to visually see, far more terrifying than just, instinctively, rescuing some one without thinking. To me what you do is real bravery, which obviously to you is just normal, and natural.

I think instinct would take over, if it was a loved one, or even one's own child, for example, and anyone would rush in, regardless of the danger.

But with regard just walking around the city, and normal everyday things like that, bear in mind that I have something that sighted people don't have, or at least, that they hardly consciously use, and that is, the ability to echolocate.

Yes I was already aware of this, and that is why I hinted before about how it is 'us' who is so-called 'disabled', here.

That's how I manage not to bump into things, for example. It's not a superpower or anything, but combined with my cane, just listening in general, and, indeed, smelling things (see my posts on the rotting piles of rubbish in my home city, if you're wondering what I mean there), it's enough.

Again, it is 'us' who is, really, disabled, compared to 'you'.

[Maia]

One of the first things that are taught when rescuing is 'access the area', first, so if it was safe for you to do so, and you 'know the area', then all well and good.

Why would you put some ahead or before others?



Okay.

To me, I still consider thinking about doing some things like you do everyday, when unable to visually see, far more terrifying than just, instinctively, rescuing some one without thinking. To me what you do is real bravery, which obviously to you is just normal, and natural.

I think instinct would take over, if it was a loved one, or even one's own child, for example, and anyone would rush in, regardless of the danger.

But with regard just walking around the city, and normal everyday things like that, bear in mind that I have something that sighted people don't have, or at least, that they hardly consciously use, and that is, the ability to echolocate.

Yes I was already aware of this, and that is why I hinted before about how it is 'us' who is so-called 'disabled', here.

That's how I manage not to bump into things, for example. It's not a superpower or anything, but combined with my cane, just listening in general, and, indeed, smelling things (see my posts on the rotting piles of rubbish in my home city, if you're wondering what I mean there), it's enough.

Again, it is 'us' who is, really, disabled, compared to 'you'.

Perhaps you're right, hehe.

[Phil8659]

"Re: How do you block someone on here?"

Same way as you do in football. Pay some talented individual, a great deal more than he is worth, and teach him how to listen to the coach.