View Post
sc94597 said:
Hedra42 said:
sc94597 said:

Stating a possibility based on inductive logic is not diagnosing somebody. Please become more familiar with the word "diagnosis." 

The speech impediment is an "abnormality" because the majority of people don't have one. There is a reason why such children go through speech therapy. It doesn't mean it is any less real or any less different because it might go away some day. 

You are confounding two separate quote trees. Your original quote in this one is with regards to my quote to ArchangelMaddz. Please review it. 

I know the difference between diagnosis and stating possibilities based on inductive logic, thank you, but from the below, you seem to have taken those possibilities and turned them into a diagnosis:

sc94597 said:

The developers obviously didn't know how to answer questions from kids, and particularly the kids in the audience with disorders of various types.

Abnormal or not, speech impediments are not an indication that someone has a social disorder. The kid with the lisp had a broken tooth, ffs.

I did not refer to the original quote in one of the quote trees. I referred to my original point, which is that I don't believe that the video, or this thread had originally been made with the intention of mocking disabled children. It was part of a response to -CraZed-, who first made assumptions about those kids based on those short clips, and then used those assumptions as a basis for accusing the OP of claiming that Notch sold Minecraft because of some questions posed by 'special needs' kids. And since our discussion has been about making assumptions about special needs, it is related.

And while my original response in the quote tree to your comment to ArchangelMaddz initially misinterpreted who's reactions you were talking about, the points I made both before and after you clarified your comment are still relevant to this discussion: the video is nothing more sinister than just a compilation of awkward moments, and it isn't right to assume someone has a disability of some kind based on a few minutes' footage and then use it as an argument against others.



In any event, suggesting that someone has or could have special needs when they might not, especially in a situation where they have zero chance of defending themselves, is no better than mocking those people that do.

Since when is the discussion limited to social disorders? There are plenty of other disorders to have. The speech impediment itself is a disorder (albeit not a social one.)


Alright and I responded to your point by agreeing, but then stating that targetting children in general isn't any better. You kept focusing on the disabled end of things.

"It wasnt an attack on disabled kids. It was an attack on Minecraft fans, many of whom are kids and don't have the same filters that adults have. Having said that, there have been specific misdirections with regards to disabilities in comments (not outright attacks.) "

Regardless of whether or not the kids truly have disabilities, there have been comments made with regards to disabilities that are quite off and in some ways disgusting. The kids don't need to have disabilities for this to be an issue. For example, I find your assumption that being wrongly assumed to have a disability would be something negative to the kid who asked about autism to imply that autism is a negative thing, when in fact the kid was inquiring about the positive features. That in my opinion, is a poor way to look at the nature of the disorder, it marginalizes the individual for his/her "special needs" rather than his/her wholesome traits.

But that is a very benign example.

Here are some others:

"The kid that asked about autism is a little bitch that i would gladly punch."

"Now it's autism, everybody has 'autism'. It use to be everyone had ADD. "

"It's now socially expectable to ask people if they have autism? I don't any one member of a fandom has every been that bad."

and with regards to the kids in general

" I think I'm having aneurysm out of sheer stupidity."

"I feel so sorry for these kids."

@ the bolded, I think you missed the point when you made that statement in the first place. As I have stated numerous times already, I was targetting my point at the post I'd originally responded to. This was CrAzEd's post which first casually diagnosed these kids as being disabled, and then based on that casual diagnosis, went on to accuse the OP of shaming disabled kids. If we're talking at cross purposes, then it's probably best for you to drop it.

@ the underlined, again, you have misunderstood. If my eldest kid, who is not autistic, asked a question like that, and then people started debating whether or not he was autistic because of asking that question, he'd be very upset. Where I think you have failed to understand where I'm coming from is that for a kid to be told they have a disability when they do not have one can have a terrible impact on them. It's as bad as mocking kids in general, whether they have a disability or not.

You are right that kids don't need to have disabilities for making fun of them to become an issue, but some people in this thread have taken it upon themselves to diagnose some of these kids as having disabilities to make it into a bigger issue than it needs to be. This self-righteous attitude is what I have a problem with.

So again, if this means we are talking at cross purposes, then I would urge you to drop it.

To conclude, I refer you back to the links to my previous posts - please read them carefully if you are going to reply again, because they are quite clear as to where my arguments are directed. I have deliberately reacted with silence towards the more ignorant and egregious comments throughout this thread, (some of which you have quoted) because they speak more about the people who posted them than the people they are directed at, and I'm not going to waste my time on them.