Community Munchausen's by Internet (Malingerers, Munchies, Spoonies, etc) - Feigning Illnesses for Attention

Whatthefuck

kiwifarms.net

This was linked in the article above - it is a ridiculously long list of excuses about why they can't do this. I mean seriously, in the time it took to come up with all of these, they could have solved the original problem about 10 times over...

Luckily it includes a quick and easy reference chart! (Who knew single-use straws were so amazing, huh?)


Why I need a straw...
View attachment 836384

But some of it's too personal to explain...
View attachment 836387

It's dangerous to ask for one...
View attachment 836389

It goes on and on and on. I have no idea if their illnesses are legit or not but the argument is amusing all the same!
How in the eternal blue fuck is any straw of any kind a choking hazard? Using a straw is universal. It's vacuum suction. The substance used to create that vacuum means fuck all. Are these dumb bitches eating them? FFS. They are the fucking worst.
 

sootsprite

ススワタリ
kiwifarms.net
In some cases EDS can actually cause severe dental problems. From the colour of hers I wonder if she was legitimately ill as a child and her enamel didn't grow properly.

How in the eternal blue fuck is any straw of any kind a choking hazard? Using a straw is universal. It's vacuum suction. The substance used to create that vacuum means fuck all. Are these dumb bitches eating them? FFS. They are the fucking worst.
They can be choking hazards if the person using the straw is given an alternative made of say, wheat, or paper, and has no discern as to what they bite/chew on (like if they're very autistic). But most people who need straws don't have this issue.
 

Kate Farms Shill

Why kill time when you can kill yourself?
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Ah crap, I'm about to write a novel about why it's not my job to provide anyone with the tools they need in life...

I have been trying to stay off this soap box because once I start you cannot shut me the fuck up so I'm real real fucking sorry the straw thing came up.

So a big debate in my field right now is how to make historic sites that are open to the public fully accessible to people with disabilities. Previous thought was to simply not do this – at least in the US, historic properties listed under the National Register of Historic Places are not required to be ADA compliant because if they were all those beautiful historic house museums would need elevators for the relatively small percentage of wheelchair users and people who can't walk up a flight of stairs. So the solution was to make compromises. Put a wheelchair ramp up the back entrance so people could get in and at least experience the first floor but the front sight lines weren't destroyed. Sometimes a small room would be prepared off to the side of the main tour with large color photographs and a floor plan, maybe some examples of the furniture, so that people who couldn't make it upstairs could see what was up there. Some places would have a small scale model of the house/site exterior or really prominent features like, say, a monument the place was known for so that the blind could feel it and get a sense of what it looked like. These are all small things that don't unnecessarily disrupt the integrity of the site. More recently things like touch panels and interactive tables are installed to help people get a feel for the house using 3-D rendering. These new technologies are coming along really quickly and there's always some new interactive that blows everyone's mind with how it enhances the visitor's experience without diminishing the site's integrity.

With this new "everyone must cater to me" tyranny of the minority bullshit, people are getting increasingly radicalized on the idea that every single site must cater to every single disability and to hell with the site integrity. Like all things with these people, it's a moving goal post. You install a wheelchair ramp in the back and they freak out because it's making them second-class citizens who can't use the front entrance. You install it in the front and it's an argument about why there's no elevator. Put in an elevator and they'll complain the doors are too narrow to get in and out of. You can't ever make them happy. It's a mess. Pretty soon you end up with a site that no one can enjoy because the 0.5% of visitors in wheelchairs have been catered to at the expense of the site itself and everyone else. And if people can't enjoy your site for its historic value, people don't come, people don't pay to get in, the site shuts down and is bought by some developer who knocks it down for townhouses. It's the "if I can't have it neither can you!" toddler game.

And whose disabilities do we cater to? If I own a small site with almost no budget that does guided tours and one of my visitors is deaf, do I have to provide an intepreter or is that on them to come with someone who can interpret for them? Can I just hand them a pritned copy of the tour script or is that ableist too? At what point can I claim it's too expensive to keep someone who can interpret ASL on my staff just in case a deaf person walks in? Do i have to build a sensory room for autism or is it on the parents/caregivers of autistic people to remove them from the situation if it becomes overwhelming? Nursing rooms for women with babies who don't want to pop a boob out in public or feed in the restroom or should it be on them to suck it up and bring a bottle? Do I have to put up shades at my battlefield site for people on chemotherapy who can't be out in the sun too long, or should they bring sunscreen, a parasol, and appropriate clothings? If older or sick people get tired early into my tour is it my job to provide them with wheelchairs for the rest of it or should they have known in advance this was going to be too much and come with their own?

In short, because of the huge diversity of human beings and their needs, you will never make a site full accessible. There will always be people excluded.

But this doesn't stop sites from trying to implement these changes without considering the consequences or the long-term because they want to look woke NOW because if you don't try to look woke NOW you have these little fuckwits protesting your site and putting you on blast on social media and try to "cancel" you or what the fuck ever.

This is not to say that there shouldn't be reasonable accommodations. I am all for unobtrusive "camouflaged" ramps, even on the front of the house, that allow wheelchair access. I'm all for making a large-print version of my map so that the visually impaired can get around or providing text of my tour script so that hearing impaired visitors can get the information, so on so forth. But lines need to be drawn because these people who want to identify as disabled and have some accommodation to feel special will keep pushing for more until there's nothing left. They don't really want the accommodation anyway. They want the fight. They want to look like they're being discriminated against and on a crusade to fix injustice.

They're not seeing disabled people as people but as objects they can use to get more woke points. They don't want to listen, they want to speak for everyone and make it about themselves.

tl;dr the percentage of people who need any one accommodation is small but the percentage of people who need (or just would prefer) an accommodation is large and it is not reasonable to expect every place to cater to every need.

Both sides of the straw argument are bullshit IMO. Everyone's got their panties in a twist about straws being THE WORST but don't care that everything we purchase is in cello-wrap that gets chucked in a landfill, too. This is not a problem that's getting better – I'm sure everyone saw that little social media badass who licked an ice cream and put it back in the freezer chest for internet points? Yeah, how much you wanna bet every ice cream brand is about to put plastic seals over their product? Straws are a drop in the fucking well. Yeah, avoid them if you can, but this whole debate started because a single viral video of a turtle with one stuck up its nose. What about all the photos of dead birds with bellies full of plastic bottle caps, disposable lighters, etc? No one cares about that becausE STRAWWWWS!!!! It's slacktivism at its finest. I don't want to make a big difference in my life so here's something small to make me look like I give a fuck.

On the other side, if you need a straw to drink a liquid, bring one. Or ask for one. Why should we keep handing them out with every drink by default just so that this tiny percentage of people who need one don't have to be embarrassed – I'm sorry, subject to V I O L E N C E – when they ask for one? I'm sure 99.99999% of the time if you ask for a straw the person goes 'okie dokie' and hands you one. Just like most of the time when smokers ask for ciggs at a convenience store they don't get the asshole clerk that says "you know those things will kill you." The cashier, the waitress, the barista... does not care about you. That person is thinking "I wonder what I'll watch on Netflix when I get home. I hope my asshole roommate didn't eat the last slice of pizza. Oh you want a straw? Yeah whatever, here's 20, knock yourself out."

lol aren't those the teeth you get when you suck on a pacifier for too long as a toddler/preschool aged child?
Looks like purging to me. The erosion in the front ones especially. Compare it to chronically.amy/beloved_journey_ who had normal teeth until a few years ago when they wore in the exact same way... the same time she lost weight because muh gastroparesis!!!

img_20130702_031707.jpghqdefault_live.jpg
 
Last edited:

Munchie_Minder

Bringing attention, just not the kind you desire.
kiwifarms.net

This was linked in the article above - it is a ridiculously long list of excuses about why they can't do this. I mean seriously, in the time it took to come up with all of these, they could have solved the original problem about 10 times over...

Luckily it includes a quick and easy reference chart! (Who knew single-use straws were so amazing, huh?)


Why I need a straw...
View attachment 836384

But some of it's too personal to explain...
View attachment 836387

It's dangerous to ask for one...
View attachment 836389

It goes on and on and on. I have no idea if their illnesses are legit or not but the argument is amusing all the same!
Did you see where a woman died when she tripped and a metal straw impaled her through her eyeball?!
 
Last edited:

TwoFiftyTwoPM

Now with more cat
kiwifarms.net
Ah crap, I'm about to write a novel about why it's not my job to provide anyone with the tools they need in life...

I have been trying to stay off this soap box because once I start you cannot shut me the fuck up so I'm real real fucking sorry the straw thing came up.

So a big debate in my field right now is how to make historic sites that are open to the public fully accessible to people with disabilities. Previous thought was to simply not do this – at least in the US, historic properties listed under the National Register of Historic Places are not required to be ADA compliant because if they were all those beautiful historic house museums would need elevators for the relatively small percentage of wheelchair users and people who can't walk up a flight of stairs. So the solution was to make compromises. Put a wheelchair ramp up the back entrance so people could get in and at least experience the first floor but the front sight lines weren't destroyed. Sometimes a small room would be prepared off to the side of the main tour with large color photographs and a floor plan, maybe some examples of the furniture, so that people who couldn't make it upstairs could see what was up there. Some places would have a small scale model of the house/site exterior or really prominent features like, say, a monument the place was known for so that the blind could feel it and get a sense of what it looked like. These are all small things that don't unnecessarily disrupt the integrity of the site. More recently things like touch panels and interactive tables are installed to help people get a feel for the house using 3-D rendering. These new technologies are coming along really quickly and there's always some new interactive that blows everyone's mind with how it enhances the visitor's experience without diminishing the site's integrity.

With this new "everyone must cater to me" tyranny of the minority bullshit, people are getting increasingly radicalized on the idea that every single site must cater to every single disability and to hell with the site integrity. Like all things with these people, it's a moving goal post. You install a wheelchair ramp in the back and they freak out because it's making them second-class citizens who can't use the front entrance. You install it in the front and it's an argument about why there's no elevator. Put in an elevator and they'll complain the doors are too narrow to get in and out of. You can't ever make them happy. It's a mess. Pretty soon you end up with a site that no one can enjoy because the 0.5% of visitors in wheelchairs have been catered to at the expense of the site itself and everyone else. And if people can't enjoy your site for its historic value, people don't come, people don't pay to get in, the site shuts down and is bought by some developer who knocks it down for townhouses. It's the "if I can't have it neither can you!" toddler game.

And whose disabilities do we cater to? If I own a small site with almost no budget that does guided tours and one of my visitors is deaf, do I have to provide an intepreter or is that on them to come with someone who can interpret for them? Can I just hand them a pritned copy of the tour script or is that ableist too? At what point can I claim it's too expensive to keep someone who can interpret ASL on my staff just in case a deaf person walks in? Do i have to build a sensory room for autism or is it on the parents/caregivers of autistic people to remove them from the situation if it becomes overwhelming? Nursing rooms for women with babies who don't want to pop a boob out in public or feed in the restroom or should it be on them to suck it up and bring a bottle? Do I have to put up shades at my battlefield site for people on chemotherapy who can't be out in the sun too long, or should they bring sunscreen, a parasol, and appropriate clothings? If older or sick people get tired early into my tour is it my job to provide them with wheelchairs for the rest of it or should they have known in advance this was going to be too much and come with their own?

In short, because of the huge diversity of human beings and their needs, you will never make a site full accessible. There will always be people excluded.

But this doesn't stop sites from trying to implement these changes without considering the consequences or the long-term because they want to look woke NOW because if you don't try to look woke NOW you have these little fuckwits protesting your site and putting you on blast on social media and try to "cancel" you or what the fuck ever.

This is not to say that there shouldn't be reasonable accommodations. I am all for unobtrusive "camouflaged" ramps, even on the front of the house, that allow wheelchair access. I'm all for making a large-print version of my map so that the visually impaired can get around or providing text of my tour script so that hearing impaired visitors can get the information, so on so forth. But lines need to be drawn because these people who want to identify as disabled and have some accommodation to feel special will keep pushing for more until there's nothing left. They don't really want the accommodation anyway. They want the fight. They want to look like they're being discriminated against and on a crusade to fix injustice.

They're not seeing disabled people as people but as objects they can use to get more woke points. They don't want to listen, they want to speak for everyone and make it about themselves.

tl;dr the percentage of people who need any one accommodation is small but the percentage of people who need (or just would prefer) an accommodation is large and it is not reasonable to expect every place to cater to every need.
I have literally never thought of it from this point before. Very interesting points.
 

Kate Farms Shill

Why kill time when you can kill yourself?
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
I have literally never thought of it from this point before. Very interesting points.
It’s a clusterfuck. The main site I work for is a multi story 19th c mansion (we’re using it as an office). We recently restored the back porch which would normally mean we had to add accessibility. We fought it and were ultimately given an exemption on putting in a ramp because it would have been a slippery slope: we would have had to widen the doors and make them open automatically, revamp the entire interior, and add an elevator to make the site accessible and none of that is in our budget so adding a ramp is pointless. Our site is near other spaces that are modern and already accessible and we will gladly have a meeting in one of them if you require or prefer it. But we’re not bankrupting ourselves and destroying our building in the off chance someone in a chair needs our services and demands to have a meeting in this building.

I’d worry you could identify me from this information except this is happening in every place that does adaptive reuse of historic structures all over the country. These people would rather wipe out the historic fabric of our built environment to draw attention to themselves and the horrible plight of ableism and discrimination they endure daily than to accept that not every place on earth has to cater to them. In the long run it’s going to be one of those things like the 1960s/70s slum clearance and urban renewal plans that we’re so horrified by today.
 

MunchOff

kiwifarms.net
It’s a clusterfuck. The main site I work for is a multi story 19th c mansion (we’re using it as an office). We recently restored the back porch which would normally mean we had to add accessibility. We fought it and were ultimately given an exemption on putting in a ramp because it would have been a slippery slope: we would have had to widen the doors and make them open automatically, revamp the entire interior, and add an elevator to make the site accessible and none of that is in our budget so adding a ramp is pointless. Our site is near other spaces that are modern and already accessible and we will gladly have a meeting in one of them if you require or prefer it. But we’re not bankrupting ourselves and destroying our building in the off chance someone in a chair needs our services and demands to have a meeting in this building.

I’d worry you could identify me from this information except this is happening in every place that does adaptive reuse of historic structures all over the country. These people would rather wipe out the historic fabric of our built environment to draw attention to themselves and the horrible plight of ableism and discrimination they endure daily than to accept that not every place on earth has to cater to them. In the long run it’s going to be one of those things like the 1960s/70s slum clearance and urban renewal plans that we’re so horrified by today.
This is such a pet hate of mine as well. It ruins historic palaces/stately homes with all the lifts and ramps. Many historic sites already really narrow corridors that a wheelchair user takes up most of the room and ruins the experience for other people. I would also worry about them damaging the floors, which is already a challenge and expensive for many old sites to maintain as it is.

17D8C8DE-EFC6-4338-9C4B-D4D41655F8FA.jpeg
This is better idea although gives people like ninajean the room to moan about dignity or some other shit.
 

MunchOff

kiwifarms.net
Not sure if this is allowed as a one off. And honestly haven't looked into her past. But I just feel like... What. Your heart stopped for 15 seconds? And then they were like "we'll have to look into that, bye"? Maybe I'm just a jaded cynic now.
No one is off limits here mate it’s not like /r/if where you have to jump through hoops to talk about someone.

Looks like the docs saw right through this one lol
 

Munchie_Minder

Bringing attention, just not the kind you desire.
kiwifarms.net
Not sure if this is allowed as a one off. And honestly haven't looked into her past. But I just feel like... What. Your heart stopped for 15 seconds? And then they were like "we'll have to look into that, bye"? Maybe I'm just a jaded cynic now.
No that does not freaking sound normal. If someone’s heart stopped for that long, they would be admitted to do every known cardiac test. That is utter bullshit.

It’s a clusterfuck. The main site I work for is a multi story 19th c mansion (we’re using it as an office). We recently restored the back porch which would normally mean we had to add accessibility. We fought it and were ultimately given an exemption on putting in a ramp because it would have been a slippery slope: we would have had to widen the doors and make them open automatically, revamp the entire interior, and add an elevator to make the site accessible and none of that is in our budget so adding a ramp is pointless. Our site is near other spaces that are modern and already accessible and we will gladly have a meeting in one of them if you require or prefer it. But we’re not bankrupting ourselves and destroying our building in the off chance someone in a chair needs our services and demands to have a meeting in this building.

I’d worry you could identify me from this information except this is happening in every place that does adaptive reuse of historic structures all over the country. These people would rather wipe out the historic fabric of our built environment to draw attention to themselves and the horrible plight of ableism and discrimination they endure daily than to accept that not every place on earth has to cater to them. In the long run it’s going to be one of those things like the 1960s/70s slum clearance and urban renewal plans that we’re so horrified by today.
I dunno. I personally think that every mountain top should be removed because it isn’t fair to people who can’t climb them. Also, oceans should be drained since some people can’t scuba dive, airplanes should be grounded since it isn’t fair some people can’t fly. Historical places should just be demolished. Cause it just isn’t fair at all that my dead grandmother cannot be brought in in her coffin to see the place where her teenage self wrote her initials on the banister of the second floor.
 
Last edited:

Ellesse_warrior

ASBO Queen
kiwifarms.net
Ah crap, I'm about to write a novel about why it's not my job to provide anyone with the tools they need in life...

I have been trying to stay off this soap box because once I start you cannot shut me the fuck up so I'm real real fucking sorry the straw thing came up.

So a big debate in my field right now is how to make historic sites that are open to the public fully accessible to people with disabilities. Previous thought was to simply not do this – at least in the US, historic properties listed under the National Register of Historic Places are not required to be ADA compliant because if they were all those beautiful historic house museums would need elevators for the relatively small percentage of wheelchair users and people who can't walk up a flight of stairs. So the solution was to make compromises. Put a wheelchair ramp up the back entrance so people could get in and at least experience the first floor but the front sight lines weren't destroyed. Sometimes a small room would be prepared off to the side of the main tour with large color photographs and a floor plan, maybe some examples of the furniture, so that people who couldn't make it upstairs could see what was up there. Some places would have a small scale model of the house/site exterior or really prominent features like, say, a monument the place was known for so that the blind could feel it and get a sense of what it looked like. These are all small things that don't unnecessarily disrupt the integrity of the site. More recently things like touch panels and interactive tables are installed to help people get a feel for the house using 3-D rendering. These new technologies are coming along really quickly and there's always some new interactive that blows everyone's mind with how it enhances the visitor's experience without diminishing the site's integrity.

With this new "everyone must cater to me" tyranny of the minority bullshit, people are getting increasingly radicalized on the idea that every single site must cater to every single disability and to hell with the site integrity. Like all things with these people, it's a moving goal post. You install a wheelchair ramp in the back and they freak out because it's making them second-class citizens who can't use the front entrance. You install it in the front and it's an argument about why there's no elevator. Put in an elevator and they'll complain the doors are too narrow to get in and out of. You can't ever make them happy. It's a mess. Pretty soon you end up with a site that no one can enjoy because the 0.5% of visitors in wheelchairs have been catered to at the expense of the site itself and everyone else. And if people can't enjoy your site for its historic value, people don't come, people don't pay to get in, the site shuts down and is bought by some developer who knocks it down for townhouses. It's the "if I can't have it neither can you!" toddler game.

And whose disabilities do we cater to? If I own a small site with almost no budget that does guided tours and one of my visitors is deaf, do I have to provide an intepreter or is that on them to come with someone who can interpret for them? Can I just hand them a pritned copy of the tour script or is that ableist too? At what point can I claim it's too expensive to keep someone who can interpret ASL on my staff just in case a deaf person walks in? Do i have to build a sensory room for autism or is it on the parents/caregivers of autistic people to remove them from the situation if it becomes overwhelming? Nursing rooms for women with babies who don't want to pop a boob out in public or feed in the restroom or should it be on them to suck it up and bring a bottle? Do I have to put up shades at my battlefield site for people on chemotherapy who can't be out in the sun too long, or should they bring sunscreen, a parasol, and appropriate clothings? If older or sick people get tired early into my tour is it my job to provide them with wheelchairs for the rest of it or should they have known in advance this was going to be too much and come with their own?

In short, because of the huge diversity of human beings and their needs, you will never make a site full accessible. There will always be people excluded.

But this doesn't stop sites from trying to implement these changes without considering the consequences or the long-term because they want to look woke NOW because if you don't try to look woke NOW you have these little fuckwits protesting your site and putting you on blast on social media and try to "cancel" you or what the fuck ever.

This is not to say that there shouldn't be reasonable accommodations. I am all for unobtrusive "camouflaged" ramps, even on the front of the house, that allow wheelchair access. I'm all for making a large-print version of my map so that the visually impaired can get around or providing text of my tour script so that hearing impaired visitors can get the information, so on so forth. But lines need to be drawn because these people who want to identify as disabled and have some accommodation to feel special will keep pushing for more until there's nothing left. They don't really want the accommodation anyway. They want the fight. They want to look like they're being discriminated against and on a crusade to fix injustice.

They're not seeing disabled people as people but as objects they can use to get more woke points. They don't want to listen, they want to speak for everyone and make it about themselves.

tl;dr the percentage of people who need any one accommodation is small but the percentage of people who need (or just would prefer) an accommodation is large and it is not reasonable to expect every place to cater to every need.

Both sides of the straw argument are bullshit IMO. Everyone's got their panties in a twist about straws being THE WORST but don't care that everything we purchase is in cello-wrap that gets chucked in a landfill, too. This is not a problem that's getting better – I'm sure everyone saw that little social media badass who licked an ice cream and put it back in the freezer chest for internet points? Yeah, how much you wanna bet every ice cream brand is about to put plastic seals over their product? Straws are a drop in the fucking well. Yeah, avoid them if you can, but this whole debate started because a single viral video of a turtle with one stuck up its nose. What about all the photos of dead birds with bellies full of plastic bottle caps, disposable lighters, etc? No one cares about that becausE STRAWWWWS!!!! It's slacktivism at its finest. I don't want to make a big difference in my life so here's something small to make me look like I give a fuck.

On the other side, if you need a straw to drink a liquid, bring one. Or ask for one. Why should we keep handing them out with every drink by default just so that this tiny percentage of people who need one don't have to be embarrassed – I'm sorry, subject to V I O L E N C E – when they ask for one? I'm sure 99.99999% of the time if you ask for a straw the person goes 'okie dokie' and hands you one. Just like most of the time when smokers ask for ciggs at a convenience store they don't get the asshole clerk that says "you know those things will kill you." The cashier, the waitress, the barista... does not care about you. That person is thinking "I wonder what I'll watch on Netflix when I get home. I hope my asshole roommate didn't eat the last slice of pizza. Oh you want a straw? Yeah whatever, here's 20, knock yourself out."


Looks like purging to me. The erosion in the front ones especially. Compare it to chronically.amy/beloved_journey_ who had normal teeth until a few years ago when they wore in the exact same way... the same time she lost weight because muh gastroparesis!!!

View attachment 836531View attachment 836532
Some really great points here. I work in a building that was built in the early 1800's and we have the same issues. There are newer parts which were built onto it in the last 10 years or so as a museum because there are tours through it every day so they added in the wheelchair access, wider walkways etc but it is not actually possible for a person who is in a wheelchair to access the offices in the building. Everything is stairs, even to get to the elevator there are a few steps of stairs. The doors and hallways are really narrow too. Basically if an employee got hit by a bus or something and ended up in a wheelchair they would not be able to return to work. We probably get less complaints about access from the public than most historical sites but it's an employee relations nightmare.
 

Whatthefuck

kiwifarms.net
It’s a clusterfuck. The main site I work for is a multi story 19th c mansion (we’re using it as an office). We recently restored the back porch which would normally mean we had to add accessibility. We fought it and were ultimately given an exemption on putting in a ramp because it would have been a slippery slope: we would have had to widen the doors and make them open automatically, revamp the entire interior, and add an elevator to make the site accessible and none of that is in our budget so adding a ramp is pointless. Our site is near other spaces that are modern and already accessible and we will gladly have a meeting in one of them if you require or prefer it. But we’re not bankrupting ourselves and destroying our building in the off chance someone in a chair needs our services and demands to have a meeting in this building.

I’d worry you could identify me from this information except this is happening in every place that does adaptive reuse of historic structures all over the country. These people would rather wipe out the historic fabric of our built environment to draw attention to themselves and the horrible plight of ableism and discrimination they endure daily than to accept that not every place on earth has to cater to them. In the long run it’s going to be one of those things like the 1960s/70s slum clearance and urban renewal plans that we’re so horrified by today.
I imagine the building I work in must have some kind of permit like that. We have a tiny ramp, but the entrance is still over a step. There are no elevators. There's no handicapped accessible bathroom stall. It's a converted college dormitory. It's older than the hills. It's got a lot of character, but I've always wondered how we skirted around those issues.
 

thirsttrap12345

kiwifarms.net
New poster, have lurked here since LC got shut down, hate IF mods, yadda yadda yadda.

Anyways. I’ve got a new subject I’d like to bring up. Her name is Moe, legal name Megan, and she’s got that hEDS (while showing 0 hypermobility)/POTS (so bad she needs saline infusions multiple times a week. Never tried PT, florinef, midodrine, beta blockers. Doctor shopped her way into this port, and she shows it off every chance she gets... see attached)

Anyways. No clue how to work this website, have been conversing with KFS about how to work it + stuff but I’m totally a noob.

This one personally infuriates me as we used to be friends. She recently went viral for that thread on twitter about being denied a straw at a restaurant in her town and crying because the mean waitress couldn’t see that she was CLEARLY DISABLED and needs that straw because she’s got sooper severe EDS and POTS and can’t hold a drink. She went private on twitter after that but I’m sure someone has screenshots. If not, I’ll try and get it again.

Also wanted to ask if anybody’s got updates on Abby/Abbie and her service mop Chloe while I’m here. She’s a special one + I’ve always been fascinated with her in that weird “exotic animal at the zoo” wayView attachment 835508View attachment 835508View attachment 835509View attachment 835510View attachment 835511View attachment 835512View attachment 835513View attachment 835515
I came across this one with her viral straw restaurant situation. Can someone please clarify how this girl can semi function in life yet can’t
lift a drink off the table/to her mouth without her wrists dislocating? The whole thing just seemed extremely OTT and I had to run the fuck away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wish a nigga would

Dr. Celery MD

I know how youse kids like 'em sloppy.
kiwifarms.net
I came across this one with her viral straw restaurant situation. Can someone please clarify how this girl can semi function in life yet can’t
lift a drink off the table/to her mouth without her wrists dislocating? The whole thing just seemed extremely OTT and I had to run the fuck away.
I don't understand it either. She keeps claiming her spine is crumbling and deteriorating but her MRI showed mild lumbar facet arthritis.
 
I came across this one with her viral straw restaurant situation. Can someone please clarify how this girl can semi function in life yet can’t
lift a drink off the table/to her mouth without her wrists dislocating? The whole thing just seemed extremely OTT and I had to run the fuck away.
Apparently she's also so disabled she can't go to the Dollar Store and buy a pack of 100 straws to throw in her purse like the rest of us that live in cities with r.etarded straw rules.
 

Redandvino

kiwifarms.net
The whole thing just seemed extremely OTT
Ding ding ding! We have a winner!

Also... her whole page is a mess of contradictions. Latest one is claiming cat allergies so bad she needs a (I believe the scientific term is a fuckton) lot of IV Benny and an ER trip so she doesn’t go into anaphylaxis from her MCAS while also holding multiple cats on her IG stories. Pick one, please.
 

Kate Farms Shill

Why kill time when you can kill yourself?
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
I imagine the building I work in must have some kind of permit like that. We have a tiny ramp, but the entrance is still over a step. There are no elevators. There's no handicapped accessible bathroom stall. It's a converted college dormitory. It's older than the hills. It's got a lot of character, but I've always wondered how we skirted around those issues.
In the US, preservation and disability access laws are complicated as all hell but there are plenty of ways to skirt them.

At a national level the following laws apply:

The Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 states that if you're using federal funds to build or alter a building it must be accessible and buildings owned by the federal government must be made accessible as determined by the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards. However, there are provisions for historic buildings that would be destroyed by full access. So like a colonial building administered by the national park service doesn't have to be accessible because you would have to completely gut it in order to bring it up to UFAS.

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 extended that to anyone who is receiving federal funding whether or not that is going towards construction or alteration, but also made provisions where you do not have to meet UFAS if you can provide an alternative. This is kinda where we fell into because we do get some federal funding. We argued that we would move activities off-site to someplace accessible or teleconference with our clients without providing a lesser quality of services and therefore there was no reason it was absolutely necessary that a disabled person access our building.

The big one is the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 which says that all historic buildings that are open to the public whether or not they have federal funding have to be, within reason, as accessible as non-historic buildings. But that "within reason" is really vague and you can argue pretty easily that the building's historic fabric would be destroyed if you made it fully ADA compliant. In these cases, you have to have a consultation with local preservation and disability officials, usually the State Historic Preservation Office and the Office of Disability Services, to come up with solutions and alternatives. This can include a store that offers home delivery/online shopping, an office that will Skype you in if you need to meet with them, etc.

On top of these is a patchwork of state and municipal laws. It's a giant clusterfuck of a headache. For example, where my parents live their municipal law almost forced them to install hand rails on their sweeping front entrance of their private residence because of accessibility issues for the mail carrier. The town was worried because he would have to go up the front steps to reach their mail box or leave a package and that's dangerous without a hand rail. They had to argue that since there's no railing around their porch at all and it wraps around two sides of the house, he could just place the mail and packages on it without having to go near the stairs.

I'd be willing to bet what happened in your case was your building was cleared by ADA compliance because it was too historic to make fully accessible without tearing it down, but then some dumb state or municipal law required a ramp anyway, probably when the entrance was being repaired or replaced. You know, so people in wheelchairs can get up to your front door and be disappointed!

The problem is that the internet weakened things like the ADA. If I can skype in someone from Dubai why do I have to build a ramp so your ass can get in here? If you can order this stuff on my website is it really necessary for you to get into my building? At the same time the internet empowered a bunch of perfectly able-bodied or mildly achy people to buy wheelchairs and identify as disabled and then bellow that THE FUTURE IS ACCESSIBLE!!!! And yes, some of the people who are saying "it would be really nice if I could get into that historic house museum" are actually disabled but the loud ones are the Nina Jeans of the world.

One last OT before I shut the fuck up and move on but I recently went on a tour of historic houses that included interior access to some that were private residences, all arranged by a historic preservation group I belong to. There was a young woman with a service dog there, n/s as to whether it was a real one (although she did seem to have some significant issues) but it behaved super well and didn't ever look stressed, so at the very least it was trained for public access appropriately. At every single house that had interior access this woman asked the owner "would you prefer if the dog stays outside?" and if the owner said yes, she had the person she was traveling with FaceTime the interior portion of the tour for her. I was really worried she was going to be one of those MUH SPOONIE DISABILITY types but nope. She found a workaround. Like a normal person who finds a barrier in this age where you can send information across the internet in real time.

Speaking of Nina Jean and demanding service she doesn't need for a wheelchair she shouldn't be in that she paid for out of pocket, she posted this a while ago and I meant to post it but then the IF bullshit distracted me. Here she is complaining because the railway company employee hasn't arrived early to get her a ramp to get onto her train. IDK about PipPip Cheerio-land but the local railway company here doesn't have a special ramp person. One of the conductors gets off at the stop and puts the bridge plate down if someone in a chair needs to get on or off the train.

Screen Shot 2019-07-02 at 00.26.47.pngScreen Shot 2019-07-02 at 00.26.53.png
 

Whatthefuck

kiwifarms.net
In the US, preservation and disability access laws are complicated as all hell but there are plenty of ways to skirt them.

At a national level the following laws apply:

The Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 states that if you're using federal funds to build or alter a building it must be accessible and buildings owned by the federal government must be made accessible as determined by the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards. However, there are provisions for historic buildings that would be destroyed by full access. So like a colonial building administered by the national park service doesn't have to be accessible because you would have to completely gut it in order to bring it up to UFAS.

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 extended that to anyone who is receiving federal funding whether or not that is going towards construction or alteration, but also made provisions where you do not have to meet UFAS if you can provide an alternative. This is kinda where we fell into because we do get some federal funding. We argued that we would move activities off-site to someplace accessible or teleconference with our clients without providing a lesser quality of services and therefore there was no reason it was absolutely necessary that a disabled person access our building.

The big one is the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 which says that all historic buildings that are open to the public whether or not they have federal funding have to be, within reason, as accessible as non-historic buildings. But that "within reason" is really vague and you can argue pretty easily that the building's historic fabric would be destroyed if you made it fully ADA compliant. In these cases, you have to have a consultation with local preservation and disability officials, usually the State Historic Preservation Office and the Office of Disability Services, to come up with solutions and alternatives. This can include a store that offers home delivery/online shopping, an office that will Skype you in if you need to meet with them, etc.

On top of these is a patchwork of state and municipal laws. It's a giant clusterfuck of a headache. For example, where my parents live their municipal law almost forced them to install hand rails on their sweeping front entrance of their private residence because of accessibility issues for the mail carrier. The town was worried because he would have to go up the front steps to reach their mail box or leave a package and that's dangerous without a hand rail. They had to argue that since there's no railing around their porch at all and it wraps around two sides of the house, he could just place the mail and packages on it without having to go near the stairs.

I'd be willing to bet what happened in your case was your building was cleared by ADA compliance because it was too historic to make fully accessible without tearing it down, but then some dumb state or municipal law required a ramp anyway, probably when the entrance was being repaired or replaced. You know, so people in wheelchairs can get up to your front door and be disappointed!

The problem is that the internet weakened things like the ADA. If I can skype in someone from Dubai why do I have to build a ramp so your ass can get in here? If you can order this stuff on my website is it really necessary for you to get into my building? At the same time the internet empowered a bunch of perfectly able-bodied or mildly achy people to buy wheelchairs and identify as disabled and then bellow that THE FUTURE IS ACCESSIBLE!!!! And yes, some of the people who are saying "it would be really nice if I could get into that historic house museum" are actually disabled but the loud ones are the Nina Jeans of the world.

One last OT before I shut the fuck up and move on but I recently went on a tour of historic houses that included interior access to some that were private residences, all arranged by a historic preservation group I belong to. There was a young woman with a service dog there, n/s as to whether it was a real one (although she did seem to have some significant issues) but it behaved super well and didn't ever look stressed, so at the very least it was trained for public access appropriately. At every single house that had interior access this woman asked the owner "would you prefer if the dog stays outside?" and if the owner said yes, she had the person she was traveling with FaceTime the interior portion of the tour for her. I was really worried she was going to be one of those MUH SPOONIE DISABILITY types but nope. She found a workaround. Like a normal person who finds a barrier in this age where you can send information across the internet in real time.

Speaking of Nina Jean and demanding service she doesn't need for a wheelchair she shouldn't be in that she paid for out of pocket, she posted this a while ago and I meant to post it but then the IF bullshit distracted me. Here she is complaining because the railway company hasn't arrived early to get her a ramp to get onto her chair. IDK about PipPip Cheerio-land but the local railway company here doesn't have a special ramp person. One of the conductors gets off at the stop and puts the bridge plate down if someone in a chair needs to get on or off the train.

View attachment 836997View attachment 836998
The hell is a ramp person? You mean to tell me that there are people specifically hired to load and unload these folks? I mean, that's a fine gig I suppose, but imagine if you get a Hamber or Chantal and have to load them in. Yikes.
 

Kate Farms Shill

Why kill time when you can kill yourself?
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
The hell is a ramp person? You mean to tell me that there are people specifically hired to load and unload these folks? I mean, that's a fine gig I suppose, but imagine if you get a Hamber or Chantal and have to load them in. Yikes.
Here is a list of complaints Miss Grant has about London public transport's accessibility including the fact that their "turn up and go" service, which is meant to allow you to have assistance without arranging anything in advance, doesn't always run as smoothly as she would like and they suggest she arrange something in advance in the future. Heaven forfend.
 

Redandvino

kiwifarms.net
Here is a list of complaints Miss Grant has about London public transport's accessibility including the fact that their "turn up and go" service, which is meant to allow you to have assistance without arranging anything in advance, doesn't always run as smoothly as she would like and they suggest she arrange something in advance in the future. Heaven forfend.
Funny that the website isn’t able to be read by a screen reader on my phone due to all the menu options... but she only cares about accessibility when it affects her personally. Since she’s not low vision she doesn’t care.
 
Tags
spoonies

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

BTC: 1DgS5RfHw7xA82Yxa5BtgZL65ngwSk6bmm
ETH: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
BAT: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
LTC: LSZsFCLUreXAZ9oyc9JRUiRwbhkLCsFi4q
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino