Your original post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by flip
I sort of agree with HP here.
One thing I'd add is that you probably should have just got up, walked out and asked for a refund and explained why. Even tickets to another showing of the same movie could have been arranged.
Personally I don't think you should have to just sit there and "put up with it" because the guy lives a harder life than you, but clearly you can't turn around and tell him to STFU.
By getting an exchange/refund you let the guy moan during the movie and you can see the movie without being distracted.
Live and let live. No one should "have" to put up with anything but there are nicer ways of not putting up with it than telling the guy to STFU.
I 100% agree. The helper should not be putting this person in a situation where he will be (unintentionally) ruining the movie for numerous other patrons who payed full price in a full theatre on opening night. This particular case sounds fine though.
Everyone has the right to enjoy a movie in silence. Generally I believe the onus lies with the disrupter to find a solution where they can enjoy the movie without ruining it for everyone else. In the OP's case I think the helper did that. (ie took the ######ed guy to a cheap theatre, presumably sat at the back etc)
Personally, even though it sounds kind of cold and heartless, I don't want to be grossly inconvenienced by anyone, be they lesser abled or not. I'll use an example for context. There is a wheelchair "nazi" at the U of C. This lady will seriously run you over if you don't move out of the way for her and she'll literally yell at people who don't promptly make way for her. Her scooter moves quite quickly and as such goes faster than people walk. For some reason she feels that we should make way for her but I disagree and have had a few run-ins with this monster in the last 6 years. Clearly this lady thinks that the fact she is crippled means that she is entitled to something. I of course, completely disagree. I believe all people should be treated with the SAME courtesy regardless of physical or mental abilities. That is to say if someone is polite I'll let them pass me no matter who they are. For some reason this sad excuse of a woman believes that the fact that she is crippled entitles her to have the unique right of treating people like s*** just because her life is harder than mine (presumably her life is harder than mine because she can't walk)
Since most ######ed people aren't choosing where they go I generally blame the helper if I feel they've put the person in a position where their enjoyment is put front and center at the cost of the enjoyment of other patrons (especially when paying $$ is involved). I know it sounds insensitive but sometimes I don't buy the whole "their life is so hard, we should have to make sacrifices so that they can enjoy things too". Well I agree with the equal treatment of all patrons so regardless if the distraction is a compulsion or not, I believe all people have the right to enjoy something they payed for.
That being said, I'm talking about MAJOR distractions only and in many cases, like the one the OP mentioned, moving or asking for a refund is easily done.
I think consideration for others should always be considered. Whether that means moving from a moaning ######ed guy or making a point of renting movies instead of frequenting a theatre if the persons actions can disrupt the entire theatre and ruin their experience.
As always I should add I don't believe in euphamisms. I believe crippled people are cripples, ######ed people are ######ed. I use straight forward terminology in all of life. People don't pass away, they die. My grandfather didn't have a drinking problem he was a f***ing alcoholic.
If my use of these words offends you then you should consider this: I think I'm a pretty good human being, but I use words that YOU determined might be offensive to YOU. I don't mean them to be offensive because like I said I think I'm generally a pretty good guy.
If you'd rather I pay lip service and use your politically correct words but treat ######ed people and cripples like outcasts...
My point is that my words aren't hurting anyone, however my actions certainly could. What matters is actions, not my vocabulary.
|
Your current question:
Quote:
Originally Posted by flip
See you guys are avoiding the question.
FLAMES GIMP AND ROUGE UNDEROOS ALREADY CHANGED MY MIND.
How many friggin times do I have to spell it out for you? Check out the Flames Gimp post that says that he'd rather I think of him without a label and just as a person than any stupid word.
And then go look at Rouge's post.
So again, I'll ask, CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHAT IS WRONG WITH MY ORIGINAL POST EXCEPT THE VOCAB?
Seriously Hab, I said pretty clearly that OTHER THAN THE VOCAB, what is wrong with my original post? Are you ignoring that on purpose? Or by accident?
C'mon, no one? All one person has to do is have the balls to say I'm not a bad person, I just use culturally insensitive words and that despite this I still treat disabled people with all the respect that all of you have so adamantly proclaimed you do.
|
It was a problem not just with your vocabulary, but your tone as well. Your whole message comes across as though you're looking for an argument. It seems to me that you are insinuating that all of us who use politically correct language are sheep or something, while you in your infinite wisdom are above such pandering. That was bound to piss people off, especially in light of the topic.
IDK, if you had just let it go about 40 posts ago, people probably wouldn't even know who the hell you are. Now we all do. lol
Do I think you're a bad person? No. I think you thought you were making a relevant/important/brave statement with your poor choice of language but you were wrong. Don't worry about it though, we're not going to hate you for it.
