Category: Let's talk
A LONG TIME AGO, when I used to have a "YAHOO" account back in the early 2000's, I remember reading an e-mail of an article that was sent to me about a TOTALLY BLIND MAN who was on one of our NYC trains, that decided to walk over to a 20-20-sighted man, hand him a $50 bill, and remarked: "I'm SO SORRY for your VISUAL MISFORTUNE! May GOD, in HIS INFINITE MERCY, restore your blindness!", and calmly walked off the train at the stop that it had JUST ARRIVED at. The EMBARRASSED MAN that was handed the bill became QUITE OFFENDED and ACTUALLY went to a POLICE PRECINCT to make a REPORT (would you BELIEVE IT?) and turned in the money--HIS REPORT CLAIMED that the "BLIND MAN" was "INSUBORDINATELY MOCKING HIS VIEW" of the supposed "BLINDNESS LIFE-STYLE," and he sought legal action; OBVIOUSLY, the lieutenant thought he was COMPLETELY NUTS, and told him that if he didn't leave RIGHT THEN AND THERE, he would IMMEDIATELY be taken to be "CHECKED UP from the NECK UP," so to speak--although I'm not at liberty to say who the person is that handed out the money with words of "REVERSED SYMPATHY," I WILL SAY that I DO know him, PERSONALLY--and that's not ALL that he's done, as far as "SUBTLE PRANKS on SIGHTED PEOPLE" that he's pulled!
Now, PERSONALLY, even though I'm ALL for OVERTURNING "SIGHTED IGNORANCE," I CERTAINLY wouldn't involve MONEY, EVEN IF I COULD AFFORD to, but THAT'S just ME--the VERY FACT that it LITTERALLY PISSED the SIGHTED GUY off was just ABSOLUTELY HILARIOUS--the TOTAL MAJORITY of MY 20-20-SIGHTED FRIENDS, FAMILY, AND PARTIALLY/TOTALLY BLIND PEERS find it JUST AS AMUSING, as WELL!
Then your friends have terrible senses of humor. That's one of the most moronic pranks I've ever heard. I don't even think you can call it a prank. Think of all the good things that fifty dollars could have done. You could have bought a homeless man a steak dinner with that fifty dollars. Instead you do this? That doesn't make you funny, it makes you a twit.
Frankly I love it! Sure, arguably one could have done something better with the $50, but we do stupid things with money all the time. Who knew the guy would walk into a police station and actually seek some sort of legal redress? It makes it all the funnier. To me, it's not just about the money, it's about making a point that maybe whoever did it is kinda getting a little pissed that some people, albeit probably a small minority, come up to this guy attempting to hand him money because they're thinking they're doing him a favor when really they're insulting him. It's the poor little blind boy (or girl) routine. We blind people are not supposed to go up to total strangers handing out cash. It's only the so-called "normals" who should be doing it. We're supposed to accept charity, not dispense it. Doesn't that sound insulting to you? I venture to say that if the average blind person attempted to treat the average homeless person to a steak dinner, that homeless person might reject it thinking that while they didn't have a home, at least they could see. Also, how do we know that the original poster is the one who did the deed? Near as I can tell, he might not have done it at all, but knows the one who did it personally. In fact, I think he said so in the post.
You DEFINITELY SCORE COMPLETE BIGTIME, johndy! Got it RIGHT on the VERY HEAD--and like I said BEFORE: neither would I have "THROWN AWAY" money like that--NOT EVEN ONE PENNY of it--THAT $50 would've DEFINITELY contributed to my LAPTOP that I wanna get from TCVC (TEXAS CENTER for the VISUALLY ((CHALLENGING, NEVER "CHALLENGED)), which I was told that sells for $150, IF they're STILL in STOCK! NO 20-20-SIGHTED IGNORANT (which NOT ALL 20-20-SIGHTED PEOPLE ARE, of course) is worth ANY AMOUNT of money, let alone ANYTHING, AT ALL, in life! THEY'RE NOT EVEN WORTHY of BREATHING the VERY SAME AIR that ONLY WE "NORMALS (BLIND/SIGHTED, ALIKE) breathe! The ONLY sort of PRANKS that I'D pull would be of ABSOLUTELY NO COST to ME, EVER, IF I were gonna pull ANY!
I don't find it that funny either because of this particular scenario. Going off of what you wrote, it seems as though that particular sighted guy did nothing to offend or interfeer with the blind guy. It's something that would be comically funny, but not so much in reality. I would have personally been rather confused at the notion.
as Johndy said, sighted people hand us money, at times, so why not turn it around on them?
Maybe I'm just uglier'n you all, but nobody has tried to give this blind bat any money haha not complaining just sayin'.
But with fifty bucks, my charity target would probably be some single mom with kids there or something, hoping she's gonna spend it on the rug rats. Hoping against hope, quite possibly.
Knowing me, I'd probably give the $50 to some unsuspecting guy as was related in the story, but then I'd probably give four times that much to a worthy cause. It's how I am. It's all in how you look at the situation.
Still not seeing the humor in giving the guy fifty bucks and saying how sad it is he's cursed with sight. Just makes you look dumb, not funny.
I wouldn't even say its funny on paper. Its just stupid.
And I'm sorry, they give us money and insult us, so we should do it back to them? What are you, four?
To my mind the funny part is their reactions. As I said, we're blind, and we're supposed to be the ones that graciously accept charity, not dispense it. Here you've got a complete, as the subject line suggests, turning of the tables. You go up to some sighted person and give him charity, expressing sympathy for his sighted condition and put him in the exact same position as that which he thinks the blind person should be in. He doesn't know what to do because his entire world view is challenged. How dare this blind person upset the natural balance by giving HIM charity when HE'S not blind? After all, sight is always good and blindness is always bad. A blind person is always his inferior because after all, the blind person cannot see and it is his just due to accept charity from the so-called more fortunate. There but for the grace of God and all that.
And it's obvious the sighted person in the story is insulted, or he wouldn't have made a total ass of himself by going to the police and demanding recompense in the form of police involvement. And guess what? That kind of justice would be impossible for him to achieve. Was a crime committed? No, because the sighted man benefitted rather than lost anything except, apparently, his dignity. And what makes it funnier is that there was one very simple solution for the sighted man, and that was to simply drop the bill on the floor and walk away. What's the blind person gunna do, see him drop it and get insulted? You take the exact same position in reverse. I guarantee I'd insult some sighted person who did that to me by dropping the money on the floor and walking away, and who knows? I might even get attacked, at least verbally, for insulting that person and spitting in the face of his generosity. But what am I gunna do if some sighted person comes up to me and insults me by trying to give me charity I don't want or need, report it to the police? Because again, no crime was committed. And I might arguably be in a more vulnerable position because since I didn't see him, if I attempted to report such an incident to the police, am I supposed to describe what this person looked like? Talk about looking stupid! Maybe this blind person wasn't necessarily acting maturely, but sometimes we don't act very mature, as is sometimes evident even on these forums, but I think sometimes it's tempting to engage in a bit of tit for tat.
Read this thing carefully. If the blind person gives the man money on a train, and then leaves the train,how would he know that the man went to the police? How would he know what the lieutenant said? How would he know what the man asked for? How would he know that there was a report filed? Did he flash his ID to the man while giving him the money? Did he say, "HI, my name is Bill, I live at 248 north Wilmington place, and I'm about to pull a stupid prank on you"?
The police would have no way of knowing who this blind man was. So how does the blind man know to tell the poster that the man in question went to the police? If he left the train, how does he know the man did anything? Maybe he is now walking around with a new T-Shirt.
This is written in what an author calls third person omnipotent. That is to say there is a narrator, and the narrator knows everything. But this isn't fiction, its real life, and we have a third hand report, with an anonymous source, that if thought about logically would be absolutely impossible to ever have actually happened as told to us.
Add to that the fact that I find it incredibly improbable that you would use a fifty for this rather than a five, and the fact that I think the man would probably not have gone to the police to report a man giving him money and babbling like a moron. I'm pretty sure this is complete and utter bullshit. Which, then, if we look at the user name of the poster, becomes even more likely.
Seriously people, read the post again and really think about what the blind person would have to know in order to make it true. Do you know what the person you sat beside on a train does after you get off the train?
I hereby declare this post to be complete bullshit, and challenge the poster to prove me wrong.
by the poster saying he knows this person personally, maybe he's hesitant to say it was actually him who did it. that's what it sounds like, to me, at least.
Even if it was him who did it, there's no way he could no those things after he left the scene. If he got off the train, he could not possibly know what the man who was still on the train did afterwards.
Even if we use a bit of imagination and the man got off the train at the same station, which is doubtful given the writing, there is no way the blind man could possibly know what he did after leaving the station.
The only conceivable way, and I use that term extremely broadly, would be if the blind man followed the man. That in itself is doubtful because following anyone in new York city would be next to impossible, but then one has to wonder why the man didn't simply point to the blind man in the police station. After all, in order to know what the man and the lieutenant said, the blind man would have to be in the room with them.
That's another thing, a lieutenant would never take someone's statement. That isn't what lieutenants do. Lieutenants are a high ranking officer, they don't do paperwork like that. They'd have a desk clerk do that. So to be specific about it being a lieutenant makes it even less believable.
Perhaps the disgruntled man’s actions made local news.
It’s probable, but doubtful, that the Lt. in the story mentioned this anecdote to a journalist, since journalists and cops work hand-in-hand, and in turn the incident was published on the local news section.
Maybe the same blind man read the story, or was informed about it by close acquaintances, and was thus able to revel in what had transpired.
The only way to prove it actually happened is to provide the article which was alluded to, that is if it even appeared on a reputable newspaper.
It sounds more like an urban legend, though, invented by someone to assume the role of a kind of antihero.
And if an article is produced, I'll give it some credence, but I doubt that will ever happen.
Or maybe not the Lt. himself but one of his colleagues shared the story with a journalist. Such stories would probably never appear on a reputable newspaper though. The whole thing appears to be a complete falsehood.
ACTUALLY, I CERTAINLY WISH, SUPER-DUPER-BIGTIME, that I HAD been the PRANKSTER, but as I said in my PREVIOUS POST, NO 20-20-SIGHTED IGNORANT'S EVER CAPITALIZING off of ME, in NO WAY, WHATSOEVER--if I'm EVER gonna PRANK, which I HAVE, STILL DO, and DEFINITELY STILL WILL, it ALWAYS HAS, ALWAYS IS, and ALWAYS WILL BE at the ABSOLUTE PRICE of $0.00. THAT FIFTY BUCKS should've HELPED to FINANCE my LAPTOP, if this incident were to have happened TODAY, and my SAME FRIEND would've done the VERY SAME THING the VERY SAME WAY--I don't know if TCVC was THEN selling re-furbished computers or NOT, but REGARDLESS, THAT would've been MY "WORTHY CAUSE," NOT some 20-20-SIGHTED-IGNORANT-MISFIT "DUNGHEAP!" HELL-to-the-NO! I DEFINITELY DO SUPPORT what my friend DID, of course, and the WHOLE, ENTIRE MOTIVE BEHIND it, which WAS to BLATANTLY CHALLENGE, NOT only THAT DUDE, but the ENTIRE 20-20-SIGHTED-IGNORANT POPULATION.
Now, it JUST SO HAPPENED that his FATHER (CURRENTLY RETIRED) WAS THAT LIEUTENANT that the GUY ran crying to, so NATURALLY, that's how my FRIEND found out what happened LATER, so you can JUST IMAGINE the LAUGHS that he and his dad had, when it was revealed that it was HE (the son) that caused the WHOLE SCENARIO; I, MYSELF, never knew his FATHER, though--ONLY HIM, and EVEN THEN, I hadn't known HIM for too long, THEN, and although I don't REGULARLY have any ONGOING CONTACT with him, due to his HECTIC SCHEDULE, with the amount that I DO have, which happens to be on a PHONE social system, for the MOST part, he and I share stories of our "INAPPROPRIATE-BLIND (ESPECIALLY TOTAL)-BEHAVIOR-EXPECTATIONALLY-INSUBORDINATIVE PRANKS, and there was ONE OTHER "PRANKCIDENT (instead of INCIDENT)" that involved him, using money to VIOLATIVELY MOCK ANOTHER 20-20-SIGHTED IGNORANT'S IGNORANCE, but I forgot what it was--it was DEFINITELY FUNNY, though, how the "THROWAWAY IGNORANT" reacted.
I have one of my OWN: I told a 20-20-sighted that I wanted to "pray for GOD'S DIVINE HEALING," by "RESTORING THEIR TOTAL-BLINDNESS," to which, they were OBVIOUSLY OFFENDED, and although I don't remember what they SAID, EXACTLY, MY ONLY WORDS of "COMFORT (as if I WASN'T the one to cause their DISCOMFORT, INITIALLY)" was: "if I was ""VISUALLY MISFORTUNATE" like YOU, I'd CERTAINLY want someone to PRAY that SAME PRAYER for ME, TOO!", to which, THEIR reply was: "HOW DARE YOU ...!" MY RESPONSE: "OH, I DEFINITELY DO DARE, INDEED (LOL)!"
Now, as far as the behavior of such nature on the part of MINE, my FRIEND'S, and/or OTHERS', who MIGHT NOT have made such known on THEIR end as being either MATURE or IMMATURE is TOTALLY IRRELEVENT to the VERY MESSAGE of "TABLES-TURNING," which THAT MESSAGE CLEARLY STATES that "WE ""PEOPLES" are ALL EQUALS" of each other, so this ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS IDEA of OUR (the blind) having to "FIGHT to GET, FIGHT to KEEP what was GOTTEN" what we've ALWAYS HAD, and will NEVER LOSE, is EXACTLY what the 20-20-SIGHTED "IGGIES" want us to IRONEOUSLY THINK that we HAVE to DO, just so that THEY would ALWAYS CONTINUE to OVERFLOWINGLY FILL THEMSELVES WITH THEMSELVES of the VERY POWER that GROUPS, such as NFB and ACB keep giving them. For example, why should we PROOVE our "INDEPENDENCE," as according to NFB'S philosophy, or "PLEDGE our ALLEGIANCE" of COMPLIANCE/DEPENDENCE, as according to ACB'S, instead of VERY SIMPLY DEMONSTRATING our "INTERDEPENDENCE (neither group is involved, since such NEVER CONTRIBUTES to their "TUG-of-WAR" RIDICULOUS RIVALRY), by MERELY "EQUALING" THEM, just as THEY would "EQUAL" EACH of their OWN, which is DEFINITELY "BRAZEN" on OUR part, as the supposed "VULNERABLE?"
Dude, stop typing all caps all of the time... it makes your posts very hard to read!
Good God. No wonder people think blind people are weird.
LMAO
Ok, this whole story aside, which I still doubt the validity of, I have to say these few things.
First, what sighted people are you meeting that oppress you so vehemently? Sure, I've met a few that pity me, but is that really so detrimental to your life?
Secondly, how does you being a pointless ass-hat make you any better than they are? So you reverse it around on them, subjecting them to the same supposed scorn that they put you through. That makes you equal to them, not better.
Third, you're not funny. Your friends aren't funny, anyone who thinks this is funny is not funny. You're a twit, a thoughtless, unimaginative asshole with nothing better to do than to waste space and time of others, and I'll thank you to stop talking like you represent all or any of the blind community. I'd thank you to simply shut the fuck up and rid us of your stupidity, but I've had enough dealings with you to know that you're too much of a braindead moron to do that. You're the worst kind of stupid, the stupid that thinks you actually have something to say, and so you scream it at the top of your lungs (or type it inanely in all caps).
Fourth, if you're going to try to act smart, you might at least try using words that exist. Violatively? That's not a word fuckmook. Its violently, and even that doesn't fit where you used it. You used a word that doesn't exist in place of a word that doesn't work where you used it. I've read essays written by fifth graders on what they want to be when they grow up that contained more cogent thought than you seem to be able to throttle out of your minimalist vocabulary.
Finally, to all those above who agreed with this paracyte's post, what the hell were you thinking? I've seen many if not all of you prattle on at one point or another about the plight of blind people in this world. You bemourn the inequality in the world, and then you have the gaul to think this is anything other than the insane ramblings of a clueless maggot? You think turning the tables on a sighted person by saying something as stupid as what has been described here is good? You think its actually funny?
I'm gonna clue you in on something here, and it'll be a shock so sit down first. You're not in elementary school anymore. The idea of" I know you are, but what am I" doesn't fly anymore. You're not being whitty, you're not being smart, you're not even being funny or entertaining, you're being an asshole, and you're being just as hateful as the so-called ignorance you proclaim so loudly to abhore. So if you want to represent the blind community, or you have any thoughts of doing so, grow the fuck up. Or if you cannot drum up the energy and courage to do that, sit down, shut the fuck up and let those of us with a brain and social skills do the talking for you until you're no longer a child.
Cody, this is why some of us don't come out and say things: you take the cake for saying what a lot of us might be thinking, but in a witty as hell fashion. Your post had me laughing over here, and glad I work at home in an empty office as I don't have to explain to some sad sack of a cube mate what this is all about.
I still say, though, for those who seem to be getting money from strangers, maybe I'm uglier'n you all or something, but that has never happened to me. In fact, I thought that to be more an urban myth. Maybe it's just here in Portland, one of the homeless capitals of the U.S., we have so many panhandlers that nobody would dare initiate doling out pocket change for fear of being marauded. It's so bad up here, in fact, that one of the few times I did indulge and bought a scone for a beggar sitting outside the coffee shop, he said, "Actually, I was looking for something a little bit better." Lol any marks for an attempted good deed were neutralized by my immediate response afterwards.
Anyway, maybe some places people proffer pocket change to strangers who didn't ask for it, but again, I've never seen it. Maybe you all who get that from strangers are just as cute as a button or something.
I'm still laughing at your post, Cody, because I could see this being spoken and not just written.
This is the reason why I have recently taken a new stance on the blind community from a broad perspective.
You can't honestly say "all blind people are capable. All people are equal to their sighted peers", because like sighted people, every blind person is different. Not every blind person gives a damn about the impression they leave on people. Not every blind person cares, or wants to set an example, or be productive in life.
You can only show your capabilities. Don't try and speak for every blind person, because as demonstrated above, there are some rotten apples in the tree.
I will only refer to this as a half-ass story. One that lacks taste and a decent plot. One that could. One that if it was true, could potentially give blind people a bad name. But I won't go there, because this is anything but real. It is too ironic that the father just so happened to be a lieutenant. If the op is hoping to be an author of some kind, I strongly urge him to reconsider.
I've never seen that either. I've never had someone offer me fifty bucks. If they did, I'd thank them and go to lunch. I wouldn't take it as an offense.
I've had people ask to pray over me, and sure its annoying, but its not oppression. Its not like they're thinking I'm a lesser person. They're thinking that I'm someone that doesn't have sight, and that's unfortunate. Guess what morons, it is unfortunate. All in all I'd much rather have never had cancer. I don't pity myself, but that doesn't mean I don't accept that reality either.
Ryan, I don't do anything to leave an impression or set an example about the blind community. If people want to fantasize that blind people are incapable, that's their prerogative, and I would no more stand in their way than I would bar them from watching their porn.
My experience is people who want to talk about this or that incapable only want you to fulfill their fantasy in one of two ways: be as incapable as the bogeyman (possibly fictitious) person they're talking about, or live so exemplary that you create that stark contrast which adds to the scene they want in their mind. Look, I don't have problems with dogs humping, I just don't want them humping my leg. Dismissing a fantasizer is something akin to swatting away the neighbor's dog who is attempting to hump the leg.
And, like Cody, I would say this aspect can't be categorized oppression.
I guess I'm like most people most the time: live and let live, carry on, as you were, don't mind me, just passing through.
Johndy said it best. what's funny is the fact that a blind person turned it around on someone sighted, given how some people who are sighted feel that we should accept the money freely, when they'd likely never give it to a sighted person.
oh, and, for the record, I've never been given money. I've had someone buy coffee for me, and another person give me a cross, but that's it.
How is that funny? Would you bust a gut if you gave someone a cross because someone gave a cross to you?
I hate religion for what it makes people do, how would it be funny if I then went and did those things to them in return? That doesn't make any sense.
I'm going to say three things here. If I offend, well, too damn bad.
First and foremost: I sort of agree that this topic itself isn't all that funny. Ironic, sort of, but not that funny. I've been prayed over and such, though never offered money, and I was kind of uncomfortable and annoyed. I wouldn't bust a gut if I heard about someone turning the tables, though I might sort of shake my head and go "Heh, well now they know how the other half lives".
Second: Cody, your responses to this topic are the equivalent of destroying a sandcastle with an artillery barrage. Personally, I think they make you look far far worse than the topic creator could. Instead of perhaps wasting time or finding humour in things that many of us don't find funny, you instead seem to find humour in using your vocabulary to try (I say this deliberately, try) to rip people to pieces. This isn't the first time you've done it and it won't be the last, and I feel the same way about humour thus derived as I do about humour derived by the blind when they try the sort of stuff mentioned in the original post...well, minus the irony of course. It's kind of juvenile and self-serving. Grow the fuck up. You're guilty of every vice your target is because you, like they, had the temerity to do something that wasn't funny to someone else. You do it to them, and as a means of being informative, I'm doing it to you...one notable difference though. I'm trying to insult you as little as possible, because I take you as an intelligent human being with the capacity for both change and reason. That said, maybe ask yourself if the glee you seem to exhibit is going to get you anywhere when others see such posts as these, inconstant as they may be from you, for exactly what they are.
Third: just a general observation, but I do find the scenario just a trifle stretchy. It's not impossible, not at all, but it seems dubious. If itwas false (perhaps told to the topic creator by someone with a flair for the dramatic), then points for trying, I guess. If it really did happen...well, I do agree with the idea that fifty bucks is definitely a bit much to drop on a prank like this. I don't think I'd ever see myself doing this, unless it was without money and done directly to someone who had already tried it on me...and I'd be doing it not for laughs, or to fight oppression, but purely as an object lesson. Some people have to feel it before they get it, though thankfully those people are few and far between.
I understand why now. I think it partially has to do with this sociology class I've been taking and how much I've learned about society, and how people often analyze each other. We have a tendency to assert what we would do/what that person should do, and skip over the elements that play in to the actual scenario. We don't look at the entire picture a lot of time and ask questions. It's easy for me to say I look confident and I get things done instead of expecting them to happen, but that is not how every blind person is. Saying that every blind person is capable isn't always true because they don't allow themselves to be. And you know what? It's not just a blind thing either. We have people who can see, or people who have handicaps or other issues that don't try. It's like the people you mentioned above in Portland who live on the streets. It is their choice that makes their impression different from everyone else.
The difference between you and I SW, is that I'm not afraid to be completely honest like you are. You spend a good eighty percent of every post you've made trying to assure everyone else that you're not trying to be insulting, you don't mean to be rude, you don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, you're just trying to build people up. You're a pussy. Stop telling me what you're not doing, I don't give a shit about what you're not doing. Grow a pair of balls and tell me what you are doing. Until then, stop wasting all our time with these piddly little posts trying to make you feel good about yourself.
Strike that, I found another difference between the two of us, people know me. They know where I stand, what I stand for, and who I am. Yes, some of them hate me, some are even afraid of me, but they know who I am. Its not in question. No one knows you because you're too afraid to have a strong opinion on anything. Sometimes people might half-agree with you in passing, but no one really seems to care. The only thing you can be depended upon to supply for us is one of your candy-ass posts that spend ten minutes trying to keep people from realizing how you actually feel about them.
Now, to return to the subject at hand, let me clear something up. I wasn't trying to be funny. I was being scathing. I was treating the poster like a child because that's how he acts in all his posts. You want me to not treat people like children, show me people who don't act like children.
Portions of posts 20 and 29 are funny for their own reasons. To wit (and more than just slightly paraphrasing here for the sake of brevity), I'm not gunna stop having my own opinions just because someone wants to call me an ass-hat or suggests/demands that anyone who disagrees with him shut up and let the rest of those who hold opinions similar to his do the talking. Nor, by the way, am I cowed by name-calling or even the suggestion that I need to be afraid of anybody on this board. I frankly don't know any of you, so there's nothing for me to be afraid of unless you're gunna come to my house with a gun or a pit bull or something. I just think it's funny and a little sad that if you disagree with someone, you have to rant and rave like someone in Kindergarten. So, you didn't find the story funny and don't see wy some people might. Fine. True or not, I found certain aspects of it to be funny. I've explained why, and I think I did a pretty good job of it. You're welcome to disagree, but to thinkI'm gunna run screaming from this board just because you're gunna call me or anyone else on here who disagrees with you an ass-hat or moron or whatever is pretty amusing also. But you keep on doing it and show everyone what you're made of, 'kay?
Yeah. He might call you a fuckbook! Wouldn't that just be awful?
I'm cut to the quick!
M, not B, though fuckbook is kinda funny.
I really thought the joke was just stupid, I dunno, I don't find it funny. I do find it funny that a blind man can say, "your blind." of course meaning it metaphorically. But honestly, what did he accomplish? I would've gotten more amusement doing something else, but that's just my opinion. I though would take the 50 and add that to my little pile of needing. Anyone wants to play the same idea upon me?
thought not.
YOU, SilverLightning, are DEFINITELY the PRIME "ANTAGONIZED" of ALL OTHER POSTS from those that are either LESS ANTAGONIZED or NOT ANTAGONIZED, AT ALL, that I'm REALLY gonna just have a COMPLETE "FIELD DAY" with, because in ALL HONESTY, one of the TOP-PRIORITY-CHOICE WAYS to get the COMPLETE BENEFIT of ABSOLUTE, TOTAL FUN, is to "LEARN" from an "EDUCATED FOOL," such as YOURSELF, of whom I've ALWAYS had the ABSOLUTELY RELENTLESS PLEASURE of ALWAYS KNOWING (WITHOUT KNOWING) JUST WHICH BUTTONS of yours to KEEP PUSHING--AFTER ALL, YOU'RE one of my "LOYAL FANS" that "FOLLOW" me on JUST ABOUT ANY/EVERY (PERHAPS) BOARD-TOPIC that's PURPOSELY "EXTRA-CONTROVERSIAL" that I CREATE. WHY? I said it BEFORE, I'll say it AGAIN: YOU just LOVE the ABUSE, ESPECIALLY when your WORTHLESS INTELLECT is ALWAYS, WITHOUT FAIL, my PRIMARY, if NOT ONLY, TARGET for my "USELESS RAMBLINGS," as YOU might FEEBLY ATTEMPT to shut me down, by calling it as such, and ALTHOUGH ANYONE ELSE of the SUPPOSED "INTELLIGENCE" that YOU want ALL of the rest of US to COMPLETELY DENY your TOTAL LACK OF would've just SIMPLY clicked "IGNORE," which is what I'd NEVER EXPECT that that's something that YOU'RE capable of doing, OTHERWISE you would've done it, already, and you NEVER WILL, and EVEN IF YOU DO, what/who's to stop ANYONE ELSE from ANTAGONISTICLY ABUSING you, PROBABLY/POSSIBLY MULTI-TIMES WORSE?--TO BE CONTINUED
OMG.... have you tried making sense occasionally, Mygodchosenbride?
Kate
LMAO, Kate.
'Kay, now I have to admit to being confused.
Basically what he's saying is that I'm antagonized because I argue with him, and this gives him pleasure. He thinks that by getting me to argue, he's educating and antagonizing me. He's saying that he takes pleasure in outwitting educated fools such as myself.
Nothing I haven't heard before. The only people who really say something like that are the people who have nothing else to say. Its why teachers don't spend the first two months of classes telling you that they're going to teach you. They just do it. This guy doesn't have anything to say, so he just wastes time telling us that he's eventually going to say something. Its a way of making it look as if he's doing something, without actually doing something. Then later, he'll claim that he's actually educated me because I responded. Like I said, acting like children.
Anybody starting to understand why I questioned those who agree with this guy yet? Is it sinking in for anyone?
Oh, and just for the record, I'm not antagonized in the least. Haven't lost a moment of sleep over this board, or any board for that matter. You'll have to work a lot harder to actually antagonize me. IN order to antagonize me, you'll have to get me to care about whether you exist or not. At the moment, you could get kidnapped by the Russians and thrown in prison, and I wouldn't even pause in my day to day activity.
Who is more foolish the "educated fool" or the stupid @$$#*!€ who tries to antagonise him?
I mean, I get what he's saying; it's just that his last was very muddled. But I guess we all have our unique styles.
He's unique, I'll tell ya...
SilverLightning, might I recommend something COMPLETELY STRONGER than either ROLLAIDS or PEPTOBIZMAL (HOWEVER you spell them), JUST IN CASE you might've SUDDENLY CONTRACTED a SEEMINGLY-INCURABLE CASE of an ENTIRELY UNHEARD-OF VERSION of "ACUTE MENTAL INDIGESTION (AMI)," as a result of your being THAT MUCH FULL OF YOURSELF, to even THINK that JUST BECAUSE I AM "ANTAGONISTIC-PRONE," if you might, and ADMITTEDLY, YES, the ANTAGONIZED REACTIONS to my "ANTICS" DO JUST SO HAPPEN to be ONLY a CONTRIBUTION to my LIST of OTHERS that I DEFINITELY find that's JUST AS EQUALLY WORTHWHILE ENTERTAINING, IN GENERAL, that I would either SOLELY or PRIMARILY go out of MY WAY, JUST to BLATANTLY ANTAGONIZE YOU, with ABSOLUTELY NO SUCCESS, according to YOU, might I add, JUST BECAUSE you NEVER FAIL to SUDDENLY FIND YOURSELF RIGHT SMACK-DAB in the TOTAL THICK of ANOTHER ONE of my rather BRAZENLY-CHALLENGING TOPICS, because if SUCH be YOUR case, EVEN if there WAS such a medication of THAT type, even THAT couldn't help you, REGARDLESS of the DOSAGE-EXTREMITY! NOONE ELSE, but ONLY YOU, could ACTUALLY MANAGE, with SUCH INCREDIBLE SKILL, to get yourself THAT FAR-GONE! HOW the HELL do YOU DO it, just in case if ANY OTHER/OTHERS of your VERY ILK might wanna join you, if they haven't, already?
It's Rolaids [one l] and Pepto-Bismol [there's no "z," LOL]
You also can't use the word completely with a variable like stronger. You can't have something be completely stronger. It can be much stronger, or a little stronger, but as stronger has no set limit, it can't be completely strong. Also, worthwhile is not a descriptive term for entertaining, as you've used it. Something could be worthwhile and entertaining, but something can't be worthwhile entertaining. Also, saying "that much full of yourself" is incorrect. You don't need the word much there. It would just be that full of yourself, or so full of yourself. That much compares it to something else, and you haven't given another object for it to be compared to. There's also no need for you to say "solely or primarily" those are pretty much given sets of the verb you used. It just makes your sentence clumsy. You also have far too many dashes, not that many words are hyphenated in the English language, most of the time its just a compound phrased connected by a space. As for brazenly challenging, what exactly are you supposed to be challenging here, our ability to read?
Silver... I applaud your efforts to try and make Terrance understand just how wrong he is, but, as the old saying goes, you can't fix stupid.
I'd say that the best course of action is just to put his sorry, ignorant ass on ignore and be done with it and with him.
Oh I'm not trying to fix him. I'm just making sure my vocab skills are still up to par. Gotta practice you know. This is easy practice. I can't always be going up against people who know how to speak properly. Sometimes you gotta just have a little fun. That's what this is, just a little fun.
Oi!
It's not nice to pick on the less fortunate like that.
*snicker*
I'm not a nice person.
lol Cody! not everyone is gonna be nice, I think they should teach that to people during childhood, lol!
Yeah, but nice and entertaining don't always go hand in hand.
Maybe there's some part of me that's broken or something. I can see humour in some pretty silly places, but I really don't ever see humour when one person first tries to pick someone else apart, and then tries to hide behind a facade so flimsy a strong thought would rip it away. It's arrogant, it's condescending, and yeah...it's just not nice. Not everyone is going to be nice all the time, but it sort of undermines one's credibility as an honest (and thusly upstanding) individual when they engage in such behaviour.
That being said, however, I think the topic creator would honestly be wellll-advised to at least proofread his posts. They're convoluted and hard to understand, and the more that's true, the less the overall point may be made. Speak more plainly and your point may be more effective. Best advice I can give, and I do it without malice.
The sad part is that OP doesn't realise that we're mocking him.... he thinks he's mocking Cody.
Right, but I'm supposed to take it seriously and be an upstanding person. I shouldn't be mocking him for being an insufferable moron. Oops, I mean I shouldn't be mocking him for being a charmingly foolish... well fuck. I'm not supposed to mock him for being a... I give up, he's a brainless twit who doesn't deserve to be taken seriously.
I have to wonder though, and forgive me for stepping a toe off topic, I know that shoves a crab up SW's ass when I do it. Since when did honesty automatically denote upstandingness? I can be honest. Watch, I honestly think SW is a spineless ass who has been blowing pretty purple smoke up the skirt of every reader on these boards and deserves to have people tell him to shut up and become relevant. I honestly think the OP needs to shorten his fucking name. I honestly think people need to stop trying to act like they're shocked when I mock people. I honestly don't give a fuck if I hurt someone's feelings. I honestly invite people to skip over this post if they want to. I honestly invite them to go blow themselves if they can't handle what I say.
See, told you I can be honest. As for upstanding, I guess that remains to be seen.
Funnily enough, Cody the OP still wins. Know why? Because you bother to post. For someone who doesn't give a shit about anyone or anything on these boards, as you are so fond of repeating over and over, you get pretty worked up over people who are quite obviously just trying to see what you'll do. The original poster is just a troll, and as he himself says, he knows full well how stupid he seems and how odd his writing is and how ridiculous his arguments are. He knows it and he is watching to see what you'll say next. He loves the attention, and far from putting him down or proving to himself how dumb he's being, you're feeding the fire and giving him exactly what he's after. So you have to wonder who the tru fool is. I mean, the fact that you even took the time to tear the OP apart suggests you care a little; I didn't even look at this board when I saw who had posted it, and the only reason I bothered to finally read it at all was because you recommended that I do so. So if you know this guy's a troll and will do anything for attention, I wonder why you waste your valuable time.
Just being honest here...this is too good to pass up.
SilverLightning, you're a troll. You seek attention (and often get it) by derailing topics or belittling the living hell out of people. You're an intelligent troll, but rarely is the argument you truly win. Most often, people get sick and tired of you and the topic at hand tends to die. This leaves you thinking you're the victor when in fact you're just the last one willing to listen to yourself quack. I often read your posts with the question of "I wonder what insults he'll stoop to next" foremost in my mind. I find this greatly saddening. You could be so much better than this, but you deliberately choose not to be, and you do it with full knowledge. You undermine almost all of what you profess with your attitude; it goes far beyond the limits of "I'm just telling it like it is" and launches itself deep into the territory off"I'm insulting people because it's the one thing I believe I'm good at". I'll admit that some of what you've said has made me chuckle, and some of the things you've come up with in other topics is downright useful, but the fair majority of what I see from you disqualifies you from filling the shoes you wish to.
My, how these tables have turned.
I will add, though, that in this case I don't believe the OP deserves to be treated with kindness and deserves pretty much everything coming to him. He knows exactly what he's doing and Cody's insults, though ineffectual, aren't really misdirected. This guy isn't serious; he's not actually trying to give anybody anything by posting. He's just seeking attention, and in this case I don't think even an upstanding person should have to treat him with respect he hasn't earned. Do I think it's fun to blast the living shit out of someone just because I can? No, not really; I grew out of that in junior high school. But if Cody and others think it's fun to throw rocks at someone who is neither capable of nor interested in defending himself adequately, then I guess that's their prerogative. Not my idea of fun, but there you go.
I'd just turn and walk away. Don't feed the trolls. It's common enough internet protocol. But then I suppose that everyone, self included, feeds a troll now and then. I've just proven it...and by that I don't mean you either, Meglet, because in general I agree with your last post. The topic creator is either deliberately trolling or honestly doesn't know any better, and I...have serious trouble with the ignorance argument, myself. That whole bloody thing just...hurt to read, honestly.
Post 47 Meglet.
You must have a lot more free time than I do if that's how you spend it. I envy you. But I know better: you get a kick out of this and as sad as that is, it's who you are and you're fre to embrace it.
I do, this is fun. Why does everything have to have some special point? Can't we just argue for the fun of it? I'm helpful when I need to be. This isn't one of those times.
Finding it a little fun would make some kind of sense; but you revil in this in a way that makes me wonder.
Gotta say the OP's original posting was at least halfway legible, and as I said, I did see some initial humor in turning the tables on somebody, if indeed it happened. I think I went through my reasoning as to why I saw some aspects of it to be funny. But then he lost me as time went on and his sentence structure (or lack thereof) and verbal style (or again lack thereof) frankly grew tiring. As for the rest of it, I'm kinda tired of arguing over who's the bigger ass, the OP or Cody since it's like arguing over whether a hurricane is worse than a typhoon. Overall, I'll call this one a draw.
WELL, I REALLY GOTTA ADMIT: no offense, SILVER, but JUST LIKE the "LONE RANGER'S" HORSE, for the MOST part, "YO' ASS done got RODE (LOL)!", considering the VAST MAJORITY of the JUST-AS-WORTHLESS POSTS as YOURS ALWAYS ARE, though STILL "EMPOWINGLY (to ME) ENTERTAINING," but I'm gonna quote Westcoastcdngrl in POST 46, followed by MY EARLIER-POSTED DIRECT RESPONSE: "Silver... I applaud your efforts to try and make Terrance understand just how wrong he is, but, as the old saying goes, you can't fix stupid.
I'd say that the best course of action is just to put his sorry, ignorant ass on ignore and be done with it and with him." From POST 35, which SHOULD CLEARLY EXPLAIN "SILVER'S" obstacle: "YOU, SilverLightning, are DEFINITELY the PRIME "ANTAGONIZED" of ALL OTHER POSTS from those that are either LESS ANTAGONIZED or NOT ANTAGONIZED, AT ALL, that I'm REALLY gonna just have a COMPLETE "FIELD DAY" with, because in ALL HONESTY, one of the TOP-PRIORITY-CHOICE WAYS to get the COMPLETE BENEFIT of ABSOLUTE, TOTAL FUN, is to "LEARN" from an "EDUCATED FOOL," such as YOURSELF, of whom I've ALWAYS had the ABSOLUTELY RELENTLESS PLEASURE of ALWAYS KNOWING (WITHOUT KNOWING) JUST WHICH BUTTONS of yours to KEEP PUSHING--AFTER ALL, YOU'RE one of my "LOYAL FANS" that "FOLLOW" me on JUST ABOUT ANY/EVERY (PERHAPS) BOARD-TOPIC that's PURPOSELY "EXTRA-CONTROVERSIAL" that I CREATE. WHY? I said it BEFORE, I'll say it AGAIN: YOU just LOVE the ABUSE, ESPECIALLY when your WORTHLESS INTELLECT is ALWAYS, WITHOUT FAIL, my PRIMARY, if NOT ONLY, TARGET for my "USELESS RAMBLINGS," as YOU might FEEBLY ATTEMPT to shut me down, by calling it as such, and ALTHOUGH ANYONE ELSE of the SUPPOSED "INTELLIGENCE" that YOU want ALL of the rest of US to COMPLETELY DENY your TOTAL LACK OF would've just SIMPLY clicked "IGNORE," which is what I'd NEVER EXPECT that that's something that YOU'RE capable of doing, OTHERWISE you would've done it, already, and you NEVER WILL, and EVEN IF YOU DO, what/who's to stop ANYONE ELSE from ANTAGONISTICLY ABUSING you, PROBABLY/POSSIBLY MULTI-TIMES WORSE?--TO BE CONTINUED." MY question to YOU, Westcoastcdngrl , is: PRIOR to POST 46, how well did YOU do, as far as SHOWING BY PERFECT EXAMPLE, as the poster of POST 46, who's ALWAYS practicing what SHE'S preaching, which DEFINITELY ANSWERS why SHE'S not participating in THIS, nor ANY/ALL FUTURE CREATED TOPICS from "YOURS TRULY" has SUCCESSFULLY DEMONSTRATED? ANSWER: EQUALLY AS SUCCESSFULLY as "RIDE-'IM-COWBOY"-SILVER'S done, ever since my LAST topic-post, prior to THIS--and STILL continues to be JUST AS SUCCESSFUL, and of COURSE, with perhaps my NEXT future posts of WHATEVER that's BLATANTLY CONTROVERSIAL, ALL THANKS to YOU, as his EXAMPLE ROLE MODEL, he ALWAYS WILL continue to be. CONGRATS to BOTH of you.
ANYHOW, I'M CERTAINLY looking forward to LOTS of GREAT STUFF that's DEFINITELY HEADED MY WAY, starting TODAY, during this UPCOMING WEEK, and ALL OTHER ELSE BEYOND--I have MORE PRANKS to post that even I, and a group of OTHER TOTALLY BLIND FRIENDS have ACTUALLY ASSISTED 20-20-SIGHTEDS, who HARDLY KNEW us, but YET, proved to be NORMAL, as shown by THEIR EQUAL INTERACTION, in pulling on THOSE of the 20-20-sighted-INCURABLY-IGNORANT KIND LATER in this topic, as I need to get time in to download files, before I'm out for my DAILY ROUTINE, ONLY to return MUCH LATER TONIGHT, check in, and STILL see how well that, NOT ONLY YOU TWO, but perhaps any of the rest of YOU might've followed suit, so that I can give to YOU the VERY SAME CONGRATS. Until THEN, don't let the door hit you where your mama should've kicked you!
Lol. Neither one will waver guys. It will be an ongoing battle between them until one gets bored, if that ever happens.
Practising vocabulary, were you? Sorry, but I call bullshit on that one, Cody, unless you're into euphemisms, and "practising vocabulary" is synonymous with countertrolling. So much for honesty I guess. Heh.
Topic-creator dude, whatever the heck your name is, I will say this much: what you're doing is akin to shooting fish in a barrel. Johndy pretty much hit it on the head. Whatever potentially redemptive quality your topic might have created is gone, I'm afraid.
Simple answer to all of this... put Terrance on ignore here and block him on FaceBook.
That way you don't have to be bothered by OP's senseless, misspelled, dictionally and grammatically challenged verbal diarrhea.
Bothered? Not I.
A troll? the opp who created this board is no troll. More like a kid, sorry a man of his late 40's who's seeking companionship, and seems to think he find it in writing huge words that do not make sense in his sentences. Way to go, hope you find miss right.
I must say that I think it is kind of a stupid prank. I get the message behind it but...I don't know what to say other than that it was just stupid.
Well, at least I woke up withouta headache.
Well, DEFINITELY, for ABSOLUTE GOD-SURE, it CERTAINLY won't EVER BE that I would find "MISS RIGHT," as according to who I want, how I want her, and ANY OTHER SELF-ORRIENTED SUPERFICIALITY/SUPERFICIALITIES, WHATSOEVER, of MY choosing, but that GOD, HIMSELF, would, in HIS OWN TIMING, ONLY, will DEFINITELY ARRANGE for "MISS RIGHT," as according to who HE assigns to me, would ACTUALLY FIND ME; in the MEANTIME, I will ALWAYS continue to "TROLL, ROCK-AND-ROLL, with a WHOLE LOT of SOUL," whether it's HERE on the BOARDS, or ANYWHERE on THIS SYSTEM, "FACEBOOK," or ANY OTHER SOCIALMEDIA of ANY/EVERY FORM that I should JUST SO HAPPEN to CURRENTLY/FUTURELY BE APART OF, ALWAYS making it COMPLETELY KNOWN of my TOTAL AVAILABILITY for ANY FEMALE to DEFINITELY TAKE ME COMPLETELY OVER at ANY TIME, SO BE IT! AMEN.
What the hell are you talking about? I've been taken in by the rock and roll troll.
Lmfao. That was filled with so many contradictions. But being that this was probably all ready said in other topics to lure more in for the kill, I'll just leave it be and continue to chuckle.
You should read his facebook profile... scary stuff, that.
SPEAKING of "CONTRADICTIONS," or to COMPLETELY NARROW it to the VERY PRIME EXAMPLE of such, the poster of MESSAGE 75, whose INCENUATION to have BLOCKED ME on "FACEBOOK," as she so VEHEMENTLY SUGGESTS OTHERS to do, as WELL, whether she REALIZED it or not, has ONCE AGAIN DEMONSTRATED her ABILITY to "PRACTICE" her "PREACHED" advice, by ACTUALLY AIDING and ABETTING ANY POTENTIAL FEMALE READER to "FACEBOOK"-search me that could VERY WELL BE the VERY ONE to BE MY FUTURE WIFE! WAY to GO, GIRL!SPEAKING of "CONTRADICTIONS," or to COMPLETELY NARROW it to the VERY PRIME EXAMPLE of such, the poster of MESSAGE 75, whose INCENUATION to have BLOCKED ME on "FACEBOOK," as she so VEHEMENTLY SUGGESTS OTHERS to do, as WELL, whether she REALIZED it or not, has ONCE AGAIN DEMONSTRATED her ABILITY to "PRACTICE" her "PREACHED" advice, by ACTUALLY AIDING and ABETTING ANY POTENTIAL FEMALE READER to "FACEBOOK"-search me that could VERY WELL BE the VERY ONE to BE MY FUTURE WIFE! WAY to GO, GIRL!
Dude, why do you write like this? Furthermore, why do you go out of your way to give others a hard time?
When this character had a lot of text in the profile on here a few months ago, I read quite a bit of it. I was left with the impression that if he got a hold of some chick she could end up dead in a ditch wrapped in duct tape or something.
Not only that, leo, but she'd end up breastfeeding him and changing his intentionally dirty diapers, etc. Any mommies out there looking for an overgrown, self-entitled baby? Anyone? Anyone? Anyone?
God, can you please answer this guy's prayers and send this duda mommywife whom he will smuther to death with his idiocy? Please? ah. If this guy ever finds what he's looking for, I will truly know I am in the right for being a staunch atheist. lol
Whomever God finds for Terrance had better be rich because he doesn't have a job and expects HER to be his sugar momma.
To answer your SECOND question, MARGORP, because THOSE that I DO give a "HARD TIME" to WOULDN'T be GETTING such if they NEVER REQUESTED me to do so--CASE AND POINT: "When this character had a lot of text in the profile on here a few months ago, I read quite a bit of it. I was left with the impression that if he got a hold of some chick she could end up dead in a ditch wrapped in duct tape or something," "Not only that, leo, but she'd end up breastfeeding him and changing his intentionally dirty diapers, etc. Any mommies out there looking for an overgrown, self-entitled baby? Anyone? Anyone? Anyone?
God, can you please answer this guy's prayers and send this duda mommywife whom he will smuther to death with his idiocy? Please? ah. If this guy ever finds what he's looking for, I will truly know I am in the right for being a staunch atheist. lol," and FINALLY: "Whomever God finds for Terrance had better be rich because he doesn't have a job and expects HER to be his sugar momma," EQUIVILLENTLY SCREAM for the VERY HARD TIME that they DON'T want, which they ALWAYS REQUEST. WHY? WELL, it's just GOT to be one of LIFE'S AMAZING MYSTERIES, I'd imagine--it's JUST LIKE the DERANGED NUT that DELIBERATELY SLAMS his head into a STEEL DOOR about six/seven times, runs to the doctor to complain of an EXCRUSIATING (or "EXCRUCIATING"--WHATEVER the hell it is) HEADACHE, ONLY AFTER REPORTING to him/her the VERY CAUSE of the headache, ONLY to RETURN to that VERY SAME STEEL DOOR to do it AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN ... the VERY FACT that THIS "KNUMBNUT'S" STILL AROUND to CONTINUE doing it, SHOULD be JUST AS AMUSING as it's AMAZING as it GETS, TOTALLY EQUAL to those who LITTERALLY "SERVE their OWN HEAD to me on a PLATTER," in the form of their PRIOR POSTS in THIS, as well as in PRIOR BOARD TOPICS, ONLY to BLATANTLY BITCH about the VERY ABUSE that THEY ORIGINALLY CALLED for, and will ALWAYS CONTINUE TO in any of my FUTURE INTENTIONALLY-PROVOKATIVE TOPICS that I'd happen to create. Go figure. As to your FIRST: SIMPLY JUST BECAUSE.
So are you the nut or the steel door? I can't seem to decide.
MY question SHOULD, NO DOUBT, ANSWER YOURS: since I'M the "LEADER," so speak, and YOU'RE the "FOLLOWERS," shouldn't I be the "STEEL DOOR?" If SO, how then, would YOU rank? Still can't decide?
You said speak?
Woof.
Meow
Mooooo!
Uh, chirp?
Bark. Bark bark freaking bark!
Hold it. SW says I should stop posting here because its useless, and a full twenty-seven posts after my last post, SW is now posting? Anyone else smell hippocracy?
Hypocrisy of a sort I suppose. I was responding to Leo, and the others, being silly, and was silly myself for no particular reason. It's not exactly what you'd call a real dig at the topic creator, and sure as hell isn't what I'd call articulate either. Differs in character from your own dubious contributions, but is equally unnecessary for different reasons. I'll grant you that much.
I could almost hear your glee. It's funny.
NOW, MARGORP, in case you're STILL reading this topic, but if NOT, then WHOEVER ELSE that might've had the same "So are you the nut or the steel door? I can't seem to decide" delimma: if you STILL can't decide, it's PROBABLY/POSSIBLY BECAUSE you REALLY DON'T WANT to. Go figure THAT one!
Or maybe that you could stand for either one.
1. your a nutter.
2. you seem not to get anything thrown at you, steell door.
This is certainly amusing to watch. Three guys picking at each other as though they are all in some sort of committed relationship.
Sorry, I just couldn't help it.
this piece of shit is just one of the many forms of zone STI you are likely to come across. it goes dormant for a while and then like a rash, it pops up, spewing nonsensical gibberish as if it were nothing more than millions of oozing pimples that just need a good pop. If this thing happens to be blind, I understand why after interacting with it, many would assume we're all this mentally back ass, selfish, unreasonable,and incapable as the stereotypes would indicate. Lets hope it never copulates, or for the good of its children, we'd have to get its kids taken away. Last thing i'd want is an innocent child turned in to this, pathetic rash of a being. Maybe after a while, it will realize its very presence on this sight is unwelcome and unwanted, and go back to its kind, what ever will take him as such.
Maybe they could do a daisy-chain.
WELL, I see that you "CRITTERLY CREEPNOIDS" are chompin' at the bit again, as usual--check THIS out:
How to deal with sighted persons
(www.ragged-edge-mag.com/1199/sighted.htmý) People who use their eyes to receive information about the world are called sighted people or "people who are sighted." Sighted people enjoy rich, full lives working, playing, and raising families. They run businesses, hold public office, and even teach your children.
TRANSPORTING THE SIGHTED
People who are sighted may walk or ride public transportation, but most choose to travel by operating their own motor vehicles. They have gone through many hours of training, at great expense, to learn "the rules of the road" to further their independence. Once that road to freedom has been mastered, sighted people earn a "driver's license" which allows them to operate a private vehicle safely and independently.
THE TRAGEDY OF LIGHTING
Sighted people cannot function well in low lighting conditions and are generally completely helpless in total darkness. Their homes are usually very brightly lit at great expense, as are businesses which cater to the sighted.
BARRIERS TO COMMUNICATION WITH THE SIGHTED
Sighted people are accustomed to viewing the world in visual terms. Thus, in many situations they will be unable to communicate orally and may resort to pointing or other gesturing. Calmly alert the sighted person to his or her surroundings by speaking slowly, in a normal tone of voice. There is no need to raise your voice when addressing a sighted person. Questions directed to sighted persons help them focus on verbal rather than visual and gestural communication.
HOW BEST TO ASSIST THE SIGHTED PERSON
At times, sighted people may need help finding things, especially when operating a motor vehicle. Your advance knowledge of routes and landmarks, particularly bumps in the road, turns, and traffic lights, will assist the "driver" in finding the way quickly and easily.
Your knowledge of building layouts can also assist the sighted person in navigating complex shopping malls and offices. Sighted people tend to be very proud and will not ask directly for assistance. Be gentle yet firm.
HOW DO SIGHTED PEOPLE READ?
Sighted people read through a system called "Print." Print is a series of images drawn in a two-dimensional visual plane. Because the person who is sighted relies exclusively on visual information while reading, his or her attention span tends to fade quickly when reading long texts. People who are sighted generally have a poorly developed sense of touch. Braille is completely foreign to the sighted person and he or she will take longer to learn the code and be severely limited by the dominance of his or her existing visual senses.
HOW DO SIGHTED PEOPLE USE COMPUTERS?
Computer information is presented to sighted people in a "Graphical User Interface" or GUI.
Sighted people often suffer from hand-eye coordination problems and poor memories. To compensate, people who are sighted often use a "mouse," a handy device that slides along the desktop to save hard-to-remember keystrokes. With one click on the "mouse" button, the sighted person can move around his or her computer screen quickly and easily. People who are sighted are not accustomed to synthetic speech and may have great difficulty understanding even the clearest synthesizer. Be patient and prepared to explain many times how your computer equipment works.
HOW CAN I HELP A SIGHTED PERSON?
People who are sighted do not want your charity. They want to life, work, and play alongside you. The best way to support sighted people in your community is to accept them for who they are. These citizens are vital, contributing members of society. Conduct outreach. Take a sighted person to lunch.
Now, THERE might be those of you that might've already read that, but I just HAD to laugh at THAT one! Makes it sound like the 20-20-SIGHTED, ESPECIALLY, are on the "ENDANGERED SPECIES" list. DAMN (LOL)!
Actually, it mostly makes it look like some blind person with a little bitterness and a lot of bad presuppositions wrote about sighted people in a way that was intended to be nonflattering. Some of it's true and makes a lot of sense. Some of it is pointless and deliberately showcases the negative while ignoring the positive aspects outright.
Terrance you jerk. I'm a sighted person and I object to the ignorant and condescending assumptions that you spewed at #96. Your ignorance and bitterness is just as objectionable to me as a sighted as the reverse is to the Blind/Visually Impaired community.
TRANSPORTING THE SIGHTED
It took me less than 20 hours and $250 dollars to get my driving license. That's hardly "...many hours of training, at great expense." I've had my driving license for the last 26 years but have spent more of those years using public transport/alternate modes of transportation because it's cheaper/more convenient for me to do so. In the last year, I've been behind the wheel of a car for approximately 1 week.
THE TRAGEDY OF LIGHTING
What a totally stereotypical assumption. I function just as well in darkened environments as I do in lighted surroundings... in fact, there are times when I prefer darkened rooms. My electric bill hasn't gone sky high because not only do I have the lights off a good deal of the time, I use energy saving lighting in my home... who are you to say that a sighted can't learn to do as the blind/visually impaired do and learn to do things solely by touch? In the evening, after I've washed the dishes, I put them away in the dark before going to bed (again, in the dark)... in fact, my going to bed routine (brushing teeth, getting undressed etc) is done in the dark as well... it seems pointless to me to have the lights on for something that I've done thousands of times in my life.
BARRIERS TO COMMUNICATION WITH THE SIGHTED
Another totally wrong and stereotypical assumption. My olfactory, tactile, and aural acuity is probably just as good as my husband's. I may be able to see the world around me, but I depend on my other senses just as much as I do my vision. When I'm making bread, I use my sense of touch to determine when the dough is ready to be risen and then my sense of smell to determine when it's ready to come out of the oven, because just looking at the dough is not enough to determine if I've kneaded it properly and I've come to know how the bread should smell when its time to come out of the oven.
HOW BEST TO ASSIST THE SIGHTED PERSON
Again, what makes you think that the Blind/Visually Impaired community owns this one? Sighted can learn routes based on "...bumps in the road, turns, and traffic lights.." just as easily as a blind person can. When I was in my 20's I worked in downtown Vancouver and used the commuter train and a bus to get to and from work. Most evenings, I'd fall asleep on both the train AND the bus, yet would habitually wake up just before my stop. How could I know when to wake up if I wasn't wide awake? Sure, there are station announcements on the train, but on the bus? It's the same familiarity with "...bumps in the road, turns, and traffic lights..." that you claim makes blind/visually impaired people more superior to sighted people that is the trick. Again, it's something that ANYONE can learn to do, regardless of whether they're sighted or blind.
HOW DO SIGHTED PEOPLE READ?
I call bullshit on this one because it's such an utter crock of shit. "Reading" isn't just looking at inkprint... it can come in different forms. My friend is a violin player in an orchestra. He uses touch to control his bow and the strings on the violin to play it properly. There are no guides on the violin to tell him where the bow should go or where the notes are. Having printed sheet music to refer to is all well and good, but in order to interpret the violin correctly he has to know, through touch, how far to move the bow and where to place his fingers to make the correct sound.
HOW DO SIGHTED PEOPLE USE COMPUTERS?
Again, a crock of shit. I can understand VoiceOver on my husband's iPhone and on my MacBook just as well as he can... obviously he has his phone and laptop set to speak faster than I do on mine, but even so, I can understand the synthesiser just as easily as he can and with some practice, which is what he has had more of than I, I believe that I will eventually be able to set my phone and laptop to the same speed setting that my husband has his set at.
On behalf of the more understanding sighteds in the world, I'm truly sorry if you've had a shit time of it as a blind person as far as sighted condescention goes but, as Stormwing says at 97, your tirade at number 95 makes you no better than the people you're condemning.
I think a good deal of post 96 was a re-quote of something I've seen before in other instances. As such it seems more like satire than anything to be taken seriously, so I didn't.
Yeah, while I didn't find this the least bit amusing, this is just satire. When people make fun of political figures or celebrities in this way, even when the information is exaggerated beyond credibility, people don't chalk it up to bitterness; they laugh and move on. So why should this be any different really?
I know it's satire, but O P seems to take it at face value.
That's because OP wouldn't know satire if it jumped up and bit him in the ass. I think a lack of social skills is the very least of his problems.
Westcoastcdngrl, just to show you how UTTERLY and USELESSLY RIDICULOUS you ALWAYS ARE, LET'S COMPARE what I said PRIOR to your LAST TWO RESPONSES: " Now, THERE might be those of you that might've already read that, but I just HAD to laugh at THAT one! Makes it sound like the 20-20-SIGHTED, ESPECIALLY, are on the "ENDANGERED SPECIES" list. DAMN (LOL)!" WHERE, OH WHERE, is there ANY INDICATION of ANY SUPPOSED BITTERNESS, due to some so-called "SHIT TIME" that YOU, YOURSELF, presume that I was SUPPOSED to have had with the general 20-20-sighted public? WHERE, OH WHERE, do YOU EVER SEE MY NAME as being the AUTHOR of the "ARTICLE," or WHATEVER you wanna call it? Without ANY DETAILED FEEDBACK, WHATSOEVER, other than my saying: "WELL, I see that you "CRITTERLY CREEPNOIDS" are chompin' at the bit again, as usual--check THIS out:" and " Now, THERE might be those of you that might've already read that, but I just HAD to laugh at THAT one! Makes it sound like the 20-20-SIGHTED, ESPECIALLY, are on the "ENDANGERED SPECIES" list. DAMN (LOL)!", you've ONCE AGAIN displayed YET ANOTHER AMAZING SKILL of how to make EVEN MORE of the ABSOLUTE IDIOT of yourself that you've ALWAYS have been, ORIGINALLY, for as long as I'VE board-posted with you--NICE GOIN'! DEFINITELY KEEP UP the AWESOME WORK, and don't you DARE EVER CHANGE! THANKS to YOU, YOU'VE just added an ENTIRELY NEW MEANING to the proverb: "WHEN YOU ASSUME, you make an ""ASS" out of ""U," INSTEAD of ""ME."" YOU GO, GIRL!
As someone with sighted family and friends, I see no point in making fun of sighted people. Nobody wants satire about us, so we shouldn't about them either. Also, like it or not, blindness is not a heritage, it's a physical defect, a hardware issue no more and no less.
I know many military types who can do plenty in pitch darkness that neither sighted nor blind outside the military could do in broad daylight.
Anyway, as any man 40s and up can attest to, reverse discreimination is patently unfair. It's not fair to blame sighted people for having sight, or to belittle things they can do, just as it was unfair in the schools for teachers to tell us boys we were responsible for the pain and difficulties of pregnancy or the discomfort associated with a mammogram, just because we are males.
To the original poster, I'll say this:
You're in the demographic where you should know better. Both blind and a male, and old enough to have been brought up hearing that shit about men. So you ought to know better than to be acting out reverse discrimination.
I don't know or care about words like the social skills or what have you, you're just being a dick. You should be ashamed of yourself, picking on sighted people like that. And as I said, you know better: you're old enough to have been through the crazy 70s where in the schools just for being a boy you were blamed for everything. Did that ever fix the ills against women? No, not at all. So why would you picking on sighted people or doing reverse discrimination, fix the ills against you? It's the coward's way out, is what it is. Maybe they can't call chicks cowards for how those who acted out against us were, but you're a dude, and one with a big yellow stripe down your back, pal, if that is how you are. It's patently unjust to just react out of reverse discrimination, as unjust as what was done to you as a boy by the schools and society. If you or anyone wanted justice for what was done you wrong, you'd go after the individuals that did you wrong rather than take out your wrath on a whole target group via reverse discrimination.
I will always defend sighted people, just as there are women who defend us men against reverse discrimination.
People who reverse discriminate are one of many reasons Lady Justice is now a woman scorned. Go look it up, peapod!
Two wrongs don't make a rite. This society does not live by the Code of Hammurabi, which if you are familiar with the term eye for an eye, this term was originated by a man named Hamurrabi. If a man was caught stealing, he would have a hand cut off. If a man was found to have raped a woman, his penis would be castrated. When you discriminate against people because they discriminated you, you are acting like a child who is mad at his brother for taking your toy after you told him not to. It does not make things better or worse. It does not inform people that it is wrong to discriminate. If anything, it gives the person more reason to discriminate and stereotype. Maybe you don't care what people think of you and the impression you leave on people, but you should certainly expect people to get angry when you come across as superior because you are a member of a certain group. I'm sure this is what you want, though. It's a shame you don't have better things to do. If you are able to accomplish this you could do other things. But who am I to tell you what to and what not to do?
LeoGuardian, and ANYONE ELSE who might be confused as to who the author of this satire ISN'T, visit www.ragged-edge-mag.com/1199/sighted.htmý (PLEASE FORGIVE any PROBABLE/POSSIBLE MISTAKES with my writing the URL). BESIDES, HERE'S a DEFINITE KICKER: are you ACTUALLY SAYING that JUST PERHAPS a (IMAGINE-or-NOT) 20-20-SIGHTED PERSON, HIM/HERSELF, WOULDN'T/COULDN'T'VE EVER have written such? IF, and ONLY IF, you ACTUALLY ARE, how so? JUST for ARGUMENT'S SAKE, LET'S SAY that such WAS, INDEED, the case that he/she ACTUALLY DID, would you so much as DARE EQUALLY CHARGE him/her the VERY SAME WAY you charge any of the BLIND, TOTALLY or NOT, for the VERY SAME SUPPOSED OFFENSE? IF, and ONLY IF NOT, how so?
Also, you're gonna be ABSOLUTELY SHOCKED to OFFICIALLY LEARN that I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU in having said: "like it or not, blindness is not a heritage, it's a physical defect, a hardware issue no more and no less." Do you wanna know WHY I ACTUALLY DO AGREE, WHATSOEVER, with ABSOLUTELY NO HIDDEN DISPUTE, AT ALL? VERY SIMPLE: although it IS, IN FACT, TRUE that BLINDNESS, IN-AND-OF ITSELF, IS "A physical defect," the ONLY CONTRAST CONCLUSION to this IRREVERSABLE TRUTH, no doubt, is that IT AIN'T MINE. LIKEWISE, 20-20-SIGHT is EQUALLY as such "A physical defect," as WELL, but it's NOT NECESSARILY ANY ONE'S, INDIVIDUALLY, EITHER.
I find it amusing, op, that you write in such a way that makes you seem so uneducated yet you turn around and insult everyone else. Do to the fact that I am not in the best of moods, you are now my target. Congradulations. And, I almost forgot, fuck you you sorry sack of nuclear fall out!
Two wrongs don't make a right, but two Wrights made an airplane! Har har har!
rofl take that!
It's EQUALLY AS AMUSING how "YOUR TARGET" AUTOMATICALLY becomes the PREDITOR that ACTUALLY MAKES YOU ITS PREY, which was the BLATANT OVERSIGHT that you were COMPLETELY SELF-ABSORBED in your OWN REGURGITATED BRAIN MATTER to REALIZE that, weren't you, MUDCRAP, or WHATEVER you call yourself--DON'T WORRY! I just felt like havin' a little FUN there, as a play on USELESSNAMES (I mean: USERNAMES), such as YOURS, dude!
NOW, I PERSONALLY KNOW someone that IS 20-20-sighted that decided to ACTUALLY, on HER OWN, with ABSOLUTELY NOONE TALKING HER into doing it, AT ALL, WHATSOEVER, be COMPLETELY BLINDFOLDED for ONE SOLID YEAR, TOTALLY AGAINST the APPROOVALS of LOTS OF FOLKS, INCLUDING her BOSS at WORK, who ACTUALLY THREATENED to FIRE her; what DID save her job was that in addition to all of the OPPOSITION that she was getting, were an EQUAL AMOUNT, or what SEEMED like, of SUPPORTERS--ranging from the 20-20-SIGHTED to the TOTALLY BLIND, who ALL BANDED TOGETHER on HER BEHALF and came to whatever settlement that THEY, meaning her EMPLOYEE/EMPLOYEES, THEMSELVES, were ACTUALLY FORCED to agree to, otherwise, LEGAL ACTION would've been IMMEDIATELY IMPOSED.
Now, before I continue, whether or not HER STORY is TRUE remains a MYSTERY that needs ABSOLUTELY NO SOLVING, WHATSOEVER, but it CERTAINLY DOES DEMONSTRATE the ALREADY-PROOVEN FACT that NOT ALL SIGHTEDS that are 20-20 are IGNORANT, which I ALWAYS KNEW, ALL MY LIFE. It ALSO demonstrates the WELL-PROOVEN FACT that IGNORANCE, REGARDLESS of the DICTIONARY'S DEFINITION, is the BLATANT BEHAVIOR of one that CHOOSES to "IGNORE" the VERY RECOGNITION that's INTRUDING in on THEIR "COMFORT ZONE" that to THEM, would've NEVER proven to be subjected to ANY CHALLENGING CIRCUMSTANCE that could/would be a TOTAL THREAT to its remaining intact, PRIOR to the "UNEXPECTED ARRIVAL" of such recognition that, SINCE, is DEFINITELY HERE to STAY for LIFE, which SUCH is CERTAINLY IRREVERSABLE, which ABSOLUTELY EXPLAINS their "PROVOKED" RESPONSE/RESPONSES to who THEY COULD'VE SWORN that ONLY COULDN'T "EQUAL" them, ACTUALLY DOING SO.
As far as OUR interaction with each OTHER, we're not CLOSE, BUT we STILL, at various times, whether in person, on "FACEBOOK," on each other's "TIME-LINE," and on "PHONEWORLD"-distribution lists, engage in enough conversations that enable US to LEARN FROM EACH OTHER--in FACT, SHE'S the VERY INSPIRATION behind the "PRANK" that I pulled on the 20-20-sighted person that I posted about EARLIER in THIS topic: "I told a 20-20-sighted that I wanted to "pray for GOD'S DIVINE HEALING," by "RESTORING THEIR TOTAL-BLINDNESS," to which, they were OBVIOUSLY OFFENDED." OBVIOUSLY, it isn't JUST BLIND folks (TOTALLY, ESPECIALLY) that "BITCH-FUCK" the (IGNORANT, ONLY) 20-20-SIGHTED. SHE, ALSO, isn't the ONLY 20-20-SIGHTED "NORMAL" that I interact with on an ongoing basis, EITHER, and NOT ALL with whom I DO INTERACT, are either RELATIVES, FRIENDS, those of the "TRAINED" kind, etc., ONLY, which ALSO COMPLETELY RULES OUT the ABSOLUTE MYTH that either "EDUCATION, SHORT/LONG-TERM-EXPOSURE to those that ARE, etc." is the ONLY REALISTIC WAY that a 20-20-SIGHTED could "INTERFUNCTION" with the blind (TOTALLY, ESPECIALLY) through.
NO, I DON'T know what JOB she mentioned that she PROBABLY STILL WORKS at, although I'm not SURE, but IF I remember to ASK her, and she TELLS me, I'll post it, either HERE or perhaps in ANOTHER topic, but it ALL SUMS UP that ALL PRANKS PULLED that were mentioned in THIS TOPIC, ALONE, are ABSOLUTELY RESTRICTED to ONLY BLIND people (TOTALLY, ESPECIALLY) pulling them on the 20-20-SIGHTED IGNORANT.
ONE LAST ACCOUNT before I'm done for NOW: I don't know the ORIGIN of this, however, but I heard of a situation that SOMEWHERE, there was a department store where EVERY NOON, AROUND LUNCH TIME, a 20-20-sighted ACTUALLY MANAGED to toggle a SINGLE SWITCH that turned off ALL of the lights, causing ABSOLUTE CHAOS, and THIS continued for about a MONTH, but then it STOPPED, EVEN THOUGH THIS PERSON was NEVER CAUGHT, and to this VERY DAY, INVESTIGATIONS CONTINUE into solving THAT mystery.
I think it's unfair to expect a sighted person to go blindfolded for a time.
I have not gone without arms and legs, as many war veterans must for the duration of their lives. That doesn't make me ignorant. I have not gone without sound as many on this site are compelled to by necessity.
You make it sound as though lack of sight were some sort of superior state. There is no practical basis for this: any sighted person who needs to function in the total absence of light can do so, as evidenced by tunnel rats in Vietnam, modern examples of rain forest hunters at night, and others.
But I would certainly caution a sighted person against an attempted life under blindfold, not without proper measures taken, because they don't have the lifetime's experience to navigate a complex and adult world without access to light.
Let's say for sake of argument that you original poster, are as I am: a lifer, totally blind for the duration of your existence. So, every thing you learned to do, be it crawl, walk, write you name in the snow as a boy, set off the occasional firecracker as a teenager, sow your many wild oats, settle down, pay taxes, chain yourself to the humdrum endless existence we call working life, all of it we have done without sight. For each stage we simply did it.
But to nab a fully grown sighted person out of his or her universe and don a blindfold would be cruel, in my opinion. This person isn't a baby and so can't take the time to relearn those things. This person isn't a careless young fool full of piss and vinegar anymore and so can't take the time to learn what we all did then, nor take all the youthful risks that ultimately caused us to cut our teeth on life itself. In fact, if this one falls, she or he will fall as a full grown adult not a child. As you might well know, falling as an adult hurts a lot more than it did when you were a kid. Same goes for running into things.
Now I understand that people lose sight all the time as adults, but their life then changes, and they are forced to relearn a lot of things, take time out of what they were doing, go get training that as lifers we have probably just taken for granted because of Nature and Circumstance. Those people have no choice, and would often, before given some slice of dogma, prefer to return to their former life. So why commit an otherwise innocent bystander to such an existence? It is not at all what ours has been. They have no advantages that we have had. They are only hampered if you merely blindfold them and expect them to carry on with their day.
This also assumes that it is somehow the sighted people's fault that you or I are blind. That is as stupid as the feminist teachers of our schools who claimed it was males' fault that women suffered pain during childbirth or were having to go through the ordeal of mammograms and other exams. Assigning blame to another group of people for something Nature itself accidentally conferred on you is no less than primitive superstition. It's like any other faith-based beliefs who claim ridiculous notions about all people being responsible for the actions of one, or people carrying around 'negative energy' or pick your useless slander that can never be proven.
I'm all for adventure, ballsiness, bad-ass life, but taking sight away from a sighted person is not that. It is pointless, cruel and unusual.
I agree. I do know a couple people who wanted to see what it was like to be blindfolded and asked to try and do things, so I gave them the opportunity. The one girl kind of freaked out when she put it on and stood up, so she took it off and changed her mind. The guy put it on and tried using the cane as I instructed him to. We didn't go far; we were in a building as well so it wasn't as though I forced him to cross a busy lit intersection, but it was certainly a bold start on his part. I like the opportunity to give people a first-hand experience of what it's like, but that isn't to say if a person didn't expect what happened and freaked out, I would make them proceed. I have been partially blind since birth, and have had experience traveling, cooking, etc. with no vision, and I have seen the adjusting process that those who lose vision have to go through. It's tough for some, because not everyone looks at this change from the same point-of-view. when you have a choice, though, and you take the extra step to get the experience, that is cool.
Well, ACCORDING to the woman that I told you about, SHE, without ANY PROMPTING from ME, ACTUALLY HAS SAID that she JUST MIGHT do it AGAIN, and THIS time, make it LONGER--remember: SHE'S the one, HERSELF, that TOLD ME that THIS is what SHE decided to do--although I listened, attentitively, PERHAPS asked whatever question/questions, NEVER ONCE did she EVER ask MY opinion of what she did, NEITHER was it EVER ONCE that I ever VOLUNTEERED to give such, UNLESS she would've asked for it, and HAD she, all I would've told her is that ONLY IF she's comfortable with doing it, for as much as she chooses to, for as long, GO for it. If OTHERWISE, DON'T. So, ALTHOUGH I DO AGREE with POST 112 that it IS CRUEL, UNFAIR, and all, to ACTUALLY FORCE a sighted (20-20, ESPECIALLY) person to wear a blindfold, at ALL, let alone for ANY LEGNTHY PERIOD, if there IS one, such as the woman that GENUINELY DOES wanna do it, whether she's seeking anyone's "CONSENT," so to speak, or NOT, she's DEFINITELY gonna do it, REGARDLESS, and it's JUST AS MUCH up to WHOEVER, THEMSELVES, to either decide that THIS is what they wanna CONTINUE doing, or it's NOT.
Leo, I sincerely hope you keep contributing to these boards and visiting this site for a very, very very long time, because your posts are so thought-provoking and so fair and rational, that you even got this dimwit OP to sort of agree with you. When he's never agreed with anyone before! My hat's off to you. Awesome, awesome, awesome!!!
Hey OP, seems like this sighted lady you speak of is, uh, one of a kind. A bit coocky, just like you. Maybe she's your god chosen bride and you dont' even know it. Huh? How 'bout that? Tell ya what? Why don't you both ride off into the sunset together, you blind by default and crazy as ever, and she, with her idiotic self-inflicted blindness, you two can be the new odd couple. She can take her blindfold off of course, when it's time to breastfeed you or change your poopy diaper. lol.
Yes. ride off into the sunset, join a circus, and we'll pretend like we miss you and your garbled posts.
Why not, huh?
WELL, write away, such WOULD'VE been EXACTLY what MIGHT'VE happened (MINUS, of course, the DISCONTINUATION of my "PROUD-OF-BEING-FOREVER-PROVOKATIVELY-OBNOXIOUS" TOPIC-POSTS HERE), but she's ALREADY MARRIED, living in a LARGE MULTI-FAMILY HOUSE, with her children and grandchildren ... and PROBABLY STILL WORKING, if not for ANYONE, CERTAINLY for HERSELF (but THAT'S neither here nor THERE).
ANYWAY, JUST to give you a "REALITY-ZAP," MINE was a PARTIAL, not a FULL, agreement, which you OBVIOUSLY failed to MENTALLY REGISTER, but SUCH FAILURES are ALWAYS what I expect of THOSE of YOUR kind, ANYHOW--I ONLY AGREE with NOT MAKING ANYONE do, which ABSOLUTELY NOONE CAN, what they are ABSOLUTELY, DEFIANTLY, DETERMINENTLY (if there's such a WORD, but if NOT, fuck it) NOT EVER-IN-LIFE, GONNA DO, which CERTAINLY INCLUDES any SIGHTED person (20-20, ESPECIALLY), that has EVERY AUTHORITY that's GOD-GIVEN to HIM/HER to NOT EVER wear a BLINDFOLD, end of THAT discussion; what I DON'T agree with, and I ABSOLUTELY NEVER WILL, is DISCOURAGING her from DOING it, EVEN IF she were to tell me that ALTHOUGH SHE, ALONE, would decide, ULTIMATELY EITHER WAY, about ANY of the NEGATIVE RESPONSES to her BEHAVIOR-CHOICE, and she were to ask me what I would do in HER situation, and I, of course, would've DEFINITELY told her that I, MYSELF, being the RELENTLESS ANTAGONIST that I was NATURALLY-BORN to BE, would ALWAYS CONTINUE to PUSH the ENVELOPE, EVEN BEYOND the edge, and LAUGH in the VERY FACE of WHATEVER CONSEQUENCE/CONSEQUENCES, MULTI-DARINGLY-CHALLENGING ANY/ALL OPPOSITION, THEREOF. Would I aid and abet her, ONLY if she asked me to, if I COULD, in how to decide either way, TOTALLY REGARDLESS of the INTENSITY of ANY BLIND/SIGHTED OPPOSITION, no matter the risk, IF ANY? ABSOLUTELY!
I don't agree that it's cruel to encourage sighted people to do things under blindfold, especially if they want the experience.
and, Ryan, I must say that I'm surprised you agree that it is, given the fact that you went to a training center where the sighted instructors who work there, had intense training under blindfold, for several months.
Thanks Bernadetta.
And Chelsea, the difference is, at your center, they were required to do so in order to be a field instructor for teaching people how to get around without sight. That makes sense. You wouldn't have a field instructor of night patrols in the military who couldn't disassemble, field repair, and reassemble his weapon in pitch blackness, or who couldn't use other aids like night vision goggles.
But outside of being an instructor, it's totally unnecessary. You have a leg injury, my wife has a knee injury now, and I can be understanding or compassionate of each without having to first ram my own leg and injure myself. This is one of those new fluff concepts where people think everyone has to suffer exactly as everyone else is suffering from something in order to be truly enlightened.
I'm glad many people don't get the migraines I do. I'd rather they remained quite unenlightened on a personal level, even if I do appreciate them being sympathetic when it's bad.
lol i might try it nesxt time i am on a train but with a one dollar bill lol
There's a restaurant in Vancouver where sighted diners are served by blind and visually impaired servers, all in the dark.
http://darktable.ca/about.html
leo, in my post, I said, "if sighted people wanna have experiences under blindfold, there's nothing wrong with that." in fact, I, personally, welcome that.
I didn't say, "whether a sighted person wants to be blindfolded or not, we blind people should push them to do so, just to get them out of their comfort zone, and hope that they get a taste of what life is like for us," so I don't see what the fuss is about.
That's what I meant as well. I don't mean I agree with making people wear a blind fold. I might encourage, but not try to force someone to do so.
EXACTLY! The WHOLE MESSAGE is THIS--ANY 20-20, or ANY OTHERWISE-SIGHTED, for this matter, DOES HAVE the VERY ABSOLUTE AUTHORITY to CHOOSE to BLINDFOLD him/herself, and it can JUST for the One-and-only SAKE of JUST to be DOING it--MY BROTHER, for example, who's 20-20-sighted, who my parents adopted when he was EIGHT (going on NINE), and I was TWELVE (going on THIRTEEN), ALREADY CLICKED with ME from DAY 1, because EVER SINCE he was about either five or six, he told us that he used to "PLAY BLIND!" WE encouraged him to KEEP DOING it--whenever the mood moved him to do so, he'd blindfold himself, I gave him my cane--at THAT time when I was JUST BEGINNING to receive O&M in SCHOOL, whatever instructions I was shown, I taught HIM. YEARS LATER, I had asked him if he EVER MET anyone that was blind, prior to our having ADOPTED him, and he said NO, but he was watching a movie that he couldn't remember the name OF, that INSTANTLY gave him the MOTIVATION to IMPROVIZATIONALLY SELF-TRAIN at a very young age, NEVER KNOWING that he'd SOME DAY be RELATED to ME. HE EVEN SAID, HIMSELF, which he's ALWAYS SAID, since the DAY that WE GOT him, that if he had ONLY THREE WISHES, his NUMBER ONE, EVEN to this VERY DAY, has ALWAYS BEEN, and NO DOUBT, will ALWAYS BE FOR LIFE, is to SUDDENLY be IRREVERSABLY TOTALLY BLIND, because TO HIM, HE feels that WAY TOO MUCH is MISSING from his life--now, MIND you, he's JUST as EQUALLY HAPPY as a 20-20-SIGHTED, but that if HIS SIGHT were to EVER lessen OVER TIME, which doesn't seem LIKELY, at whichever point, OR were he to SUDDENLY, like I earlier mentioned, be TOTALLY BLIND, INSTANTANEOUSLY, it wouldn't even phase him--and he STILL "PLAYS BLIND" with his WIFE, CHILDREN and ONE GRANDCHILD, so far, and they ALL are PERFECTLY COOL with it.
I wanna DEFINITELY APPOLOGIZE for the mistake that I made in my immediate-prior post--I SHOULD'VE written: "and it can be JUST for the ONE-and-ONLY SAKE of JUST to be DOING it."
You make It sound like being blind is a prize, that sighties are not gifted. And blindies are. Hmm, sounds retarded.
Well, I did recently hear about a person who felt, much the way a transgender person might feel about becoming the opposite gender, that she was meant to be blind. She did lots of research, lived under blindfold for a time, learned Braille, how to use a cane, and how to use a screen reader. Then she made herself blind, deliberately. I don't know how, but apparently this is a genuine phenomenon. It sometimes manifests itself as people feeling they should be amputees, or paraplegics, and so do things to themselves to make this happen, or try to get doctors to perform amputations when there's no medical need for them to be done.
I consider myself a pretty open-minded person, but this whole concept of disability being glamorous truly baffles me. It apparently gives self-esteem to those who have achieved their desired body image. It's not that there's anything wrong with being blind, but I have to ask myself why a person would willingly complicate their lives? To me, being transgendered makes a certain amount of sense. Both genders have definite strengths and weaknesses that can be agreed on by most people. But what strengths are there in being disabled? I guess that some would argue that having lifelong challenges and facing discrimination might make you more resilient, more accepting of others, and more sensitive to the needs and struggles of disabled or disadvantaged people. To which I say, there are a lot easier ways to achieve that.
I've been pondering this since I read the woman's story I'm speaking of just a few days ago. Until then, I had never heard of such a thing. I hope that my ignorance isn't perceived as intolerant or insensitive, but I've been trying to understand what would drive a person to think their life with a disability was better than their life without one. Unless, of course, it's not a decision based on logic at all, but rather, some kind of primal instinct?
Overall, I have to say that I’ve had a pretty good life, and I doubt I would change things now if I could. By this, I mean that if total sight were possible, which it simply won’t be, I wouldn’t take up the opportunity. That said, I can’t deny that my life would’ve been easier had I been born sighted, and that’s because there are certain privileges that sighted people have that we as blind people don’t. One of these is the right to be inconspicuous. And that’s because blindness is an anomaly; it is not “normal” by the world’s definition. The overwhelming mass of humanity doesn’t even have to think about how to do things as a blind person because they’re sighted. Things are considerably easier for blind people than they were when I was born in the early 60s, but that’s only largely true in the Western world. There are still vast portions of the world in which blindness is seen as not just merely unfortunate, but as a tragedy of epic proportions. I worked with someone from Africa, for instance, who marveled at how much easier it was to be a blind person here than there. And while that’s true, there are still things that really gall me. When you’re blind, for instance, you still can’t be the only blind person in your class at grad school and be accepted as an equal. You very often get a standing ovation even though it’s not deserved. When you’re blind, you can’t, in the minds of many, simply walk down the street and be a very competent traveler without someone accusing you of faking it because you’re not stumbling around and looking pathetic. And when you’re out and about and again minding your own business and some stranger wants to get your attention for whatever reason, sometimes that stranger won’tjust politely walk up to you and say: “Excuse me, sir.” It’s “Hey, blind man!”
All this is to say that if the story about the woman permanently blinding herself is true, I don’t get it. Maybe she gets blind people and how we operate. Maybe she won’t have trouble adapting. But she’s given up the right or privilege or whatever you wanna call it, to be left alone and do things easier as a sighted person than we blind people have to. I mean, I can cook and I can travel independently, but the reality is there are still limits because the world still isn’t as adapted for blind people as it is for the sighted. I still can’t just get in my car and go to the grocery store anytime I want. And when I get to the grocery store, as independent as I am, I still have to get sighted assistance to find the things I want. And that means walking into the store and getting someone’s attention, which sometimes isn’t that easy. I could point to a myriad other examples here, but frankly I don’t wanna waste space or sound like I’m whining, which I’m decidedly not doing. I’m just saying that by willingly becoming a blind person, this woman has made her life more of a pain than it was before. And what I wonder is this: When the average sighted person finds out what she’s done, isn’t she gunna be viewed as a total crackpot at the very best? It just doesn’t make sense.
Also bear in mind that the only reason for providing us with any accommodation at all is because we cannot do differently. If someone chooses to blind themselves, that certainly makes blindness an alternative lifestyle, if you will.
And when we are often accused of taking advantage, though we work hard and pay taxes like anyone else, I can't see the honor in someone blinding themselves like this. It sounds like one of those fluff bunny "Identify with those people" activities like some rich kids do who eat out of garbage cans like the homeless, only to return to the full ride scholarship and their parents' credit cards.
Only on steroids.
WELL, GANG--HERE'S the ABSOLUTELY COMPLETE TRUTH that's TOTALLY a GOD-BREATHED-PROOVEN-DEMONSTRATED FACT against ALL of the MISCONCEPTED/MISCONCEIVED/PRE-CONCEPTED/PRE-CONCEIVED-WORLD-NORM/ABNORM-MANKIND (ONLY)-DISTORTED BELIEF SYSTEMS, UNIVERSALLY: if you've already read my having said this BEFORE, as well as you're JUST ABOUT to RE-READ NOW, as THIS ETERNAL FACT that'll ALWAYS BE, is simply this: BLINDNESS, in-and-of ITSELF, is JUST AS MUCH as a TOTAL "NON-DISABILITY" as SIGHT is, which CLEARLY CONCLUDES that BOTH "LIFE-STATUSES" that are CLEARLY VISUALLY-DEFINED in THEIR INDIVIDUALLY-UNIQUE NATURE, are DIVINELY EQUAL COUNTERPARTS that COMPLETELY INTERFUNCTION, NOT AS, but WITH EACH OTHER, which OBVIOUSLY clarifies that BOTH GROUPS of folks that COMPLETELY FUNCTION as ONE UNIT, are (in response to POST 125) NO MORE/LESS GIFTED in THIS AREA, as ONE SUCH "EQUALITY EXAMPLE" than the OTHER. It's ONLY BECAUSE of the VAST IGNORANCE of (NOT ALL OF) MANKIND that SUCH SO-CALLED "ADVERSITIES," as above-posted, that OBVIOUSLY HAVE, of course, SELF-CREATED these UTTERLY RIDICULOUS "BELIEF SYSTEMS" that FOLKS, GLOBALLY, have ALLOWED THEMSELVES to be either PARTIALLY or COMPLETELY GOVERNED BY, which SOLIDLY EXPLAINS how SUCH BULL SHIT, KNOWN/UNKNOWN, derived, THUS making one to believe that "if we're NOT the SAME, we're NOT EQUAL," which FURTHER EXPLAINS this COMPLETE, UTTERLY USELESS DESPERATION to "FIGHT" to be SOMETHING that we NEVER, EVER WEREN'T, by ABSOLUTELY/TOTALLY/UNNECESSARILY "PROOVING OURSELVES" to the "IGNORANTS" that WE'VE ALLOWED OURSELVES to DILLUSIONALLY AFFIRM THEM as having such "POWER of CONTROL" of our ENTIRE LIVES, from the TIME that we're either BORN or BECOME BLIND (PARTIALLY/TOTALLY), either until SUCH TIME that our CURRENT/FUTURE LIFE-STATUS (SUDDENLY/GRADUALLY) REVERSES or we DIE, which FINALLY CONCLUDES how ABSOLUTELY POWERLESS these systems ACTUALLY ARE, and ONLY WHEN WE COMPLY with the STATUS QUO of SUCH BULL SHIT, as I earlier called it, is when and where such gets its POWER, to the VERY POINT that CAN make, and HAS made us (PARTIALLY/TOTALLY) OBLIVIOUS to what the SOLID TRUTH IS, that DEFINITELY COMPLETELY EXPOSES SUCH IGNORENCE, as well as the VERY IGNORANTS, for WHAT/WHO such REALLY IS/ARE, with THEIR "TRUTH," which DEFINITELY/DIRECTLY CONTRASTS the above, THUS, REVEALING the ONE and ONLY FACT that ALTHOUGH the "SOLID TRUTH" and "THEIR TRUTH" are BOTH CHALLENGEABLE, INEVITABLY, MY ABSOLUTELY DARING QUESTION for YOU is: why is it that "THE TRUTH" is SOLIDLY-FOUNDED, ETERNALLY, and "THEIR TRUTH" ISN'T? ANOTHER QUESTION of BLATANT DARE is: what's the NFB/ACB'S take on this?
someone, please, sell him to a circus and split the shares. We'd get a ton oh dough for this one. lol
There's only ONE MATTER, though: I ate the circus for dinner.
ANOTHER ANTAGONISTICALLY JOYFUL MOMENT: I was on either the train or the bus, one day during this past weekend, and someone overheard me mention something about downloading music, and APPARENTLY were OFFENDED, because after my call ENDED, they asked: "WHAT GIVES YOU the OBLITERATED GALL to FUNCTION JUST LIKE the REST of us, BLIND MAN?" "YOU tell ME." "PERHAPS YOU'RE not EVEN BLIND--how do you know that I'M not an UNDERCOVER COP?" "SO, you might as well JUST BE. AND ...?" ""AND," WISE-ASS, I could have YOUR ASS ARRESTED for FRAUD, you PRICK!" "CAN YOU ACTUALLY DO THAT with ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE?" THAT ended our little "TITH," so to speak--he was ACTUALLY SHUT COMPLETELY DOWN for the rest of my ride, as I went on to my NEXT call, discussing downloading and other computer stuff, as though such dialogue NEVER EVEN HAPPENED.
WELL, NOW that I REALLY THOUGHT about it, SUCH wasn't what I should've called any "ANTAGONISTICAL MOMENT," but JUST MERELY another one of those "FLY/IGNORANTS" that needed a GOOD SWATTING, that's all.
Good lord. There's 2 minutes of my life I'll never get back.
Seriously dude, get back on your meds.
There ain't enough circus for that freak... just sayin'.
WELL, POSTS 134 and 135, it's ONLY BECAUSE of YOU, along with ANY/ALL OTHERS of YOUR VERY OWN ILK, that I JUST SO HAPPEN to ACTUALLY OWN the VERY CIRCUS that YOU "CIRCUS ANIMALS" are FOREVER CONTROLLED by, so if there's to EVER be ANY SALE conducted, the ONLY SALE ITEMS INVOLVED would be YOU, but I can't even GIVE your asses away--YOU ALWAYS PROOVE THAT, don't you (LOL!)?