Your thoughts on runners with Prosthetics.

[Thunder]

Well, we got this runner who, by all accounts is doing quite well.
Thing is he doesn't have lower legs but has been fitted with carbon fiber blades.

The article that prompted this discussion with my girlfriend :
http://www.sport24.co.za/OtherSport/Athletics/Doc-Oscar-Pistorius-has-unfair-edge-20110724

"
The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) initially banned him from competing in able bodied races after it was found that his blades gave him an unfair advantage.
He took his case to the CAS and was cleared to run shortly before the Beijing Games."


My personal feeling is augmentation , giving him an advantage is wrong, however admirable it is . (my girlfriend thinks he should be allowed to run)


My suggestion , study his running , try to find out the advantage caused by his "blades" and subtract that percentage from his finishing time.


But in thinking about it i tried to find a basic rule for things like athletics and what i thought was anything NOT artificially enhanced should be allowed to compete...


But , then the Castor Semenya story raises it head.

http://www.sportsscientists.com/2009/08/caster-semenya-male-or-female.html
Totally natural (nothing artificial)but excessive testosterone, giving her an advantage over other female athletes...



Anybody else have different ideas?

[Feuer Frei!]

Well, excessive testosterone and unfair advantage due to the blades on prosthetics are two different things.
I agree with your girlfriend, i think he should be allowed to run, since the CAS cleared him to run. I imagine they would have done their investigations and/or testing to prove no unfair advantage gained? I haven't read the article linked, so i'm going in blind in respect to that part of it.
But, if cleared, why not? Was there a protest from IAAF? If not, case closed. And case closed for future cases, probably.

[Platapus]

That is a difficult and often emotional question to answer.

There was a pro golfer who had the same issue. He had a disability that prevented him from walking long distances so he wanted to use a golf cart. Other golfers complained that walking long distances in this specific tournament was part of the competition and that all golfers had to accept the exertion of walking. To allow this golfer to ride, made him less tired and therefore gave him an advantage.

What would have been the "right" decision for this golfer. I don't know what the "right" answer is.

On one hand people with disabilities garner sympathy and can be given reasonable accommodation as a result of their disablement.

On the other hand, participating in sports is a voluntary action and if one wishes to garner the advantages of participating in a voluntary sport, they have to accept the rules.

I don't know if there is a "right" answer to quandaries like this.

Decide one way and you are a heartless bastage with no compassion for the disabled.

Decide another way and you are unfairly discriminating against non-disabled people who are following the rules of the voluntary sport.

I wish I knew the answer. :nope:

[RickC Sniper]

That is a difficult and often emotional question to answer.

There was a pro golfer who had the same issue. He had a disability that prevented him from walking long distances so he wanted to use a golf cart. Other golfers complained that walking long distances in this specific tournament was part of the competition and that all golfers had to accept the exertion of walking. To allow this golfer to ride, made him less tired and therefore gave him an advantage.



If I remember correctly, using a golf cart was against pga rules so it wasn't other golfers complaints that caused his problem. That case was decided by the courts and he was allowed to play and use a cart.

I don't think the runner should be allowed to participate in the olympics or even college sports using the prosthetic legs\feet.

I can picture a legless man/woman wearing a mermaid-like prosthetic and wanting to swim against able bodied individuals. Where do you draw the line?

And I do not believe there could be any test that could tell you EXACTLY what the advantage is.

We do already have competitions for disabled athletes, and classifying an individual's disability in order to make those competitions fair is quite difficult.

[Anthony W.]

I can answer this without emotion! I have friends with prosthetic legs!

I don't think he should be allowed to run. The spring effect alone of the carbon fiber would give him a major advantage.

Its essentially a form of powerbocking. His upper legs don't have to move as far or as fast to go as far.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powerbocking

[Tribesman]

That is a difficult and often emotional question to answer.

It is simple.
It is the wrong decision.

[Castout]

Ah when the time comes when living with a handicap gives you unfair advantage over those who do not I say that is a hell of a time. :DL

Surely now isn't it yet.

[Skybird]

My grandfather had lost one leg in the war, so I am used to that kind of sight. However, I admit that it violates my natural desire for "normal" sights and paired, balanced limbs, my biologically programmed sense of natural beauty, no matter what the intellect expects me to express in opinion. It will never be a normal sight for me tzo see somebody with one missing eye, I wioll always empotionally react to that breaching of the norm. I will always prefer to see a beautiful womán having two breasts instread of one, and I will allways prefer to see runners running on two legs, not on protheses or using wheelchairs. However, this does not mean I wish to kick them from society or dfiscriminate them. It'S just that the expection from the norm aslways triggers attention and reaction, often an emotionally negative one - and sometimes (though not in this case maybe), such a negativity in empotions is serving vital interests, espoecially from a communal level (think of ancient tribes and primitive people).

I just do not wish to see people with crippled limbs being that obviously displaying themselves to the public. Also, there is an implication, that politically is wanted of course, but to which I object, that is that it does not make a difference whether you have two, one, or no legs. It makes, you can twist and turn that and call "injustice" as long as you want - take away his two items called protheses, and then see what a difference it makes. The lack of difference between being "halthy" and "crippled", is true for other qualkities. Intellectual ones, for example. Loosing a leg does not automatically make oyu dumb, or bright. On empotions, I already would be careful, for loosing a liomb can have an emotional impact on a person for sure that maybe will last and chnage his behaviour or character for the better or worse.

The point is to accept the presence of differences, but not to deny them neither to discriminate against them. If crippled atheletes want to compete, then let them, but I do not wish to see their disability being raised to the level of the design-by-norm, nor their competition being mixed with that of "full-membered", "normal" people.

I said that on the homosexual debate, and I say it again here: accept them, let them fit into normal life and do not discriminate against them - but stop making a hassle over them as if by their special characteristic they had turned into something m ore special than those people that in a natural-statistical understanding simply are normal. The guy in this example went to court for his right to compete with normal atheletes. To me, he could as well sue somebody over that he has no wings to fly with, or that he has had an event in his life that costed him two legs. It is kind of absurd to me.

And the one guy this thread started about, obviously he is a different kind of runner than is somebody with two biological legs. Two artifical legs of the kind he uses, are not what two biological legs are. If you compare two such atheletes to each other, you compare two different things to each other. This of course should be rejected - that is why interest groups make it such a big thing. But if you allow this, you can start to introduce formulas by which to calculate in what way the time swom by an athlete in the bassin compares to the time run by another athlete on the track. Then you can have hurdle runners, mid range runners, sprinters and swimmer all compete with each other in just one race! Great, eh?! In the end it becomes a competition of pocket calculators - and then the background anaylsis, and finally the court proceedings over what analysis and expertise is valid and which ine is not, and why...

No doubt atheletes making it to international competitions have trained formidably and show some formidable physical performances. The guy here probably runs the track much fastetr than I was able to do, ever. But that means nothing. He is better in this, in another discipline I probably am better than he is. He did and trained his thing, I learned and practised other things. So what? Where is the surprise? Leave the audience the choice what it wants to see and what not, and do not start to compare apples with opranges. And the hell, leave political correctness and interest groups' sociological agendas out of it. Want to see wheelchar races and ball games, and runners with one or no legs, then go to such a sporting event. But do not push it down people'S throat that they have to watch it when they go to a normal sporting event, no matter whether they want to see that or not. It is two different things.

[Skybird]

Ah when the time comes when living with a handicap gives you unfair advantage over those who do not I say that is a hell of a time. :DL

Surely now isn't it yet.
There are quota rules in place or under preparation in Germany, I am not certain, wehre if you search for a job and talk to an employer you can have a better qualification than somebody else, but you lose to him because he has a handicap that falls under that kind of legislation.

We also are getting women quotas, and migrant quotas. The latter is already decided and practiced in at least one German federal state since shortly, the first is practically decided as well. And the EU wants all that anyway, so if the German attempts fail, the people say no or the parliament rejects it (unlikely anyway), it will be imposed upon us anyway.

Quotas are discrimination. Always. And not against just the one, but against all.

[Castout]

There are quota rules in place or under preparation in Germany, I am not certain, wehre if you search for a job and talk to an employer you can have a better qualification than somebody else, but you lose to him because he has a handicap that falls under that kind of legislation.

We also are getting women quotas, and migrant quotas. The latter is already decided andpracticed in at least one German federal state, the latter is practically decided as well. And the EU wants all that anyway, so if the German attempts fail, it will be imposed upon us anyway.

Quotas are discrimination. Always. And not against just the one, but against all.

Ah. State sanctioned discrimination. Sounds horrific.

[THE_MASK]

The guy has no lower legs for god sakes . Let him run with the able bodied runners and beat them all :yeah:

[Tribesman]

The guy has no lower legs for god sakes .
so what?
Let him run with the able bodied runners and beat them all
If a person with no legs at all can easily beat the time of the fastest Kenyan in a marathon should he be in the same race category?


There are quota rules in place or under preparation in Germany, I am not certain, wehre if you search for a job and talk to an employer you can have a better qualification than somebody else, but you lose to him because he has a handicap that falls under that kind of legislation.

You are not certain because it is bull, it works the other way round you cannot employ a person if the other candidate is better qualified for the job but but disabled......unless of course it comes under the many loopholes where you can turn the better qualified but disabled person down.
There is of course another aspect which you are obviousy confusing into your imaginary one, and that is where under certain terms and conditions there are two equally qualified candidates and only one position.

Ah. State sanctioned discrimination. Sounds horrific.
Skybird is on about the EU and evil german government....as a basic rule when you get those words together it is time stop and think a minute before you swallow it Castout as 9 times out of 10 it isn't really going to be true.

[Thomen]

You are not certain because it is bull, it works the other way round you cannot employ a person if the other candidate is better qualified for the job but but disabled......unless of course it comes under the many loopholes where you can turn the better qualified but disabled person down.
There is of course another aspect which you are obviousy confusing into your imaginary one, and that is where under certain terms and conditions there are two equally qualified candidates and only one position.



I am not certain which is more amazing.. you utter lack of knowledge, your ignorance, or your hate for Skybird.

Sky, btw is correct when he said that there is a quota for disabled persons, and that these have to be given first consideration. The state of Westphalia has these rules (based on federal law) in place for over 20 years. The addition of migrant workers is just an addendum to what already is in place.

[Skybird]

Sky, btw is correct when he said that there is a quota for disabled persons, and that these have to be given first consideration. The state of Westphalia has these rules (based on federal law) in place for over 20 years. The addition of migrant workers is just an addendum to what already is in place.
The red-red senate in Berlin also has put or wants to put into effect a migrants quota for public services in Berlin, something that the Greens and most of the lefts/socialists want to do on national level, too, even parts of the CDU.

A women quota is being openly threatened by even the current government, consisting of comedians from the former conservative and libertarian parties CDU and FDP.Many successful business women nevertheless speak out against such quotes, calling them counterproductive, discriminating (against women!, because it implies that as women they cannot qualify by themselves for offices), and damaging to companies who may be forced to accept second choice personell for key offices only, due to quota demands.

Especially insane Green politicians like Roth and Ströbele also occasionally demand (repeatedly until today) that Turkish becomes second official language of Germany, equally beside German. Two or three years ago he even demanded the national anthem shall be sung in German and in Turkish, too. While isolated on the second demand, he has quite some support from the Greens and Reds for his first proposal. Green chief demagogues Trittin and Roth also declared that for their party, pushing foreign migrants into germany is just a weapon to win elections by importing their electorate from foreign countries, and that once that they have consoldiated their power that way they want to use iot to destroy the Germaness of Germany. "The more Germany becomes less German, the more I will like it", said either Roth or Trittin on a public appearance. - They never were confronted or challenged about their calls for the deconstruction of Germany. Both are members of the >German< parliament.

[Alex]

"The more Germany becomes less German, the more I will like it"

And you have that in your government ? :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o

[Tribesman]

I am not certain which is more amazing.. you utter lack of knowledge, your ignorance, or your hate for Skybird.

Since you just demonstrated your ignorance and lack of knowledge that is very funny.
Looky....
Sky, btw is correct when he said that there is a quota for disabled persons
Well done:har::har::har::har::har:
that isn't what he said.

So Thomen are you going to show knowledge and a lack of ignorance and deal with what was really written?
When you are talking about "quota" and employment laws then spot the word which sky used which is wrong, then spot the word I used which is really the case.

The state of Westphalia has these rules (based on federal law) in place for over 20 years.
Really? show the law which says you have to select the least qualified candidate?

But hey I am being generous since you have already shown your ignorance and lack of knowledge.
lets make it really simple, spot the difference
1.better qualification than somebody else.
2.two equally qualified candidates.
Then see under which condition the pick the disabled or pick the woman out of the two candidates option come in:yep:

For good measure would you like to quickly run through the conditions where you can legally reject the person because of their disability even if they are equally qualified for the job as the other candidate

[Thomen]

Since you just demonstrated your ignorance and lack of knowledge that is very funny.
Looky....

Well done:har::har::har::har::har:
that isn't what he said.

So Thomen are you going to show knowledge and a lack of ignorance and deal with what was really written?
When you are talking about "quota" and employment laws then spot the word which sky used which is wrong, then spot the word I used which is really the case.


Really? show the law which says you have to select the least qualified candidate?

But hey I am being generous since you have already shown your ignorance and lack of knowledge.
lets make it really simple, spot the difference
1.better qualification than somebody else.
2.two equally qualified candidates.
Then see under which condition the pick the disabled or pick the woman out of the two candidates option come in:yep:

For good measure would you like to quickly run through the conditions where you can legally reject the person because of their disability even if they are equally qualified for the job as the other candidate

If I would just play it like you, I would tell you to bugger off and to look it up for yourself since I do not need to prove anything to you. Isn't that what you said or implied some while ago, that you can talk out of your ass because you do not have proof anything?

However, since I am in a good mood today, I will give you at least something to start at (http://tinyurl.com/2c9np) :O:

And with that, I will take my leave and let you do your usual trolling. :yeah:

[Tribesman]

If I would just play it like you, I would tell you to bugger off and to look it up for yourself since I do not need to prove anything to you.
Awww wassamatter was the spot the difference too hard for ya:har::har::har::har:
I do understand that equal and better are very hard concepts for some to tell apart:03:

And with that, I will take my leave and let you do your usual trolling.
Hey Thomen, it was you who jumped into the topic throwing around accusations of ignorance
Just because you plainly demonstrated that you didn't have the faintest idea what you were talking about is no need for you to get all stroppy:rotfl2:

I will give you at least something to start at (http://tinyurl.com/2c9np)
yoohoo the answer was already given, the law is really very simple and you clearly didn't know it at all :yep:

[RickC Sniper]

There IS discrimination going on here, but I'm not referring to the disabled.

My friend's son a few years back tried to get into medical school....a very, very difficult thing these days. During the process, he learned he needed to score 10% higher on the exams or his slot would be given to a minority individual. Quotas do exist.
The family, in desperation, did a family history trace in an attempt to find just a small percentage of American Indian in their bloodline. If it had existed, the school would have accepted him. He was white and male, and discriminated against.


=============
@ Skybird. I am sorry your grandfather lost a leg in the war, bit I am afraid I must be the political correctness police and call you out on these:
The lack of difference between being "halthy" and "crippled", is true for other qualkities.The terms are "able bodied" and "disabled" You are bright enough to know that a disable individual can be a VERY healthy person.

If crippled atheletes want to compete, then let them, but I do not wish to see their disability being raised to the level of the design-by-norm, nor their competition being mixed with that of "full-membered", "normal" people.Crippled athletes again......the term is disabled.
and...it is not "full-membered", or "normal" people. They are "able bodied" people. AB is the commonly used abbreviation.

<--------removes PC police hat.

[RickC Sniper]

As for the man in the OP.

He has been in and out of court since 2008 in an attempt to compete against able bodied athletes.

He needs to take the gold medals he won at the paraolympics and enjoy them or compete in the next paraolympics and win some more medals. That is the venue where he should compete.

From Wickipedia
At the 2008 Summer Paralympics, he took the gold medals in the 100, 200 and 400 metres (T44) sprints.

[Skybird]

There IS discrimination going on here, but I'm not referring to the disabled.

My friend's son a few years back tried to get into medical school....a very, very difficult thing these days. During the process, he learned he needed to score 10% higher on the exams or his slot would be given to a minority individual. Quotas do exist.
The family, in desperation, did a family history trace in an attempt to find just a small percentage of American Indian in their bloodline. If it had existed, the school would have accepted him. He was white and male, and discriminated against.


=============
@ Skybird. I am sorry your grandfather lost a leg in the war, bit I am afraid I must be the political correctness police and call you out on these:
The terms are "able bodied" and "disabled" You are bright enough to know that a disable individual can be a VERY healthy person.

Crippled athletes again......the term is disabled.
and...it is not "full-membered", or "normal" people. They are "able bodied" people. AB is the commonly used abbreviation.

<--------removes PC police hat.
:DL Two things.

First, my grandfather called himself a cripple (one leg, one lung, one eye), and referred to himself as "Huckepeter". Let a more capable translator than me explain what that term means, but I can tell you despite his fate he was a man of great humour and good heart.

Second, as former psychologist and when working for limited time in a psychiatry, I learned one thing: disabled people, mentally or physically, often do not want at all a special way of being dealt with: with special care, special foresight in wording, special respect - to them right this often appears as not dealing normally with them, but to sort them out by treating them "special". My grandfather also did not want that, he said "I'm a cripple, so why shouldn'T I called like that?" This political "sensitivity" about different words for the obvious thing is like psychology'S attempt to heal the hysteric by stopping to use the term"hysteria " in diagnostics (today it is called "histrionic", since that is less discrminative, they argue - but it means the same thing.)

I mean you can use most terms in a "normal" and in a "derogatory" way, it depends on the rest of your behaviour, your voice, the situation.

To me, somebody with two lost legs, is disabled, or a cripple, and I use both terms and do not think twice about it. And the PC crowd certainly can kiss me where the sun never shines.

BTW, what is currently the politically correct term to refer to Americans of African skin-colour, to put it this way (no offence meant)? Is it negro? Black? Coloured? Afro-American? It seems terms change with fashions, and get phased in and out. The only thing I am certain of is to not call somebody "******", for historic reasons the connotation with that one is obvious. But the other terms I mentioned - I see no problem with them at all. But some do. Well - who am I to need to understand everything...?:D My master, mentor and trainer often referred to me as "der Freak", and often called me a "Raufbold" (ruffian). Was that an offence - or a compliment? He continued to train me. I call a cripple a cripple - and continue to deal with him and talk to him like to any other. So what? I once called a German gay not "Schwuler" (=gay), but homosexual. He took offence from that, and insisted to be called "schwul" (gay). Oh dear, heaven save me please!

I think the intellectually handicapped people that claim moral superiority in political issues these days are a much bigger problem than this issue of which terms and labels are acceptable, and which not. And if "cripple" is understood to be derogatory - then what to t hink of people who politically correctly call them "handicapped" or "disabled" or whatever - and still mean the other term, and deal with them accordingly, sorting them out - and by that preventing the normality that they insist should be installed?

Words. Ha!

[RickC Sniper]

And if "cripple" is understood to be derogatory - then what to t hink of people who politically correctly call them "handicapped" or "disabled" or whatever - and still mean the other term,

Words. Ha!

Yes, words. You do so much debating here in GT and much of the time the discussions are over exactly that....words or semantics. You know of their subtle importance.

It does not matter what you think in your head that no one can control, know, or comment on. It matters what you put on paper or type in a forum for all to see.





My salutes to your grandfather. I think I would have liked him had I met him.

[RickC Sniper]

then what to t hink of people who politically correctly call them "handicapped" or "disabled" or whatever - and still mean the other term, and deal with them accordingly, sorting them out - and by that preventing the normality that they insist should be installed?


Normal hurdles the disabled community struggles to overcome and change on a daily basis.

[BossMark]

Think I need to go to spec savers, when I first saw the title of this thread I thought it said your thoughts on runners with prostitutes :oops: :doh:

[RickC Sniper]

Think I need to go to spec savers, when I first saw the title of this thread I thought it said your thoughts on runners with prostitutes :oops: :doh:


:rotfl2::rotfl2::rotfl2::rotfl2::rotfl2::rotfl2:

[Growler]

Rick, on this topic in particular, I wonder if anyone else noticed your signature.

Here's the thing with anyone who's suffered a disabling injury, or is born with a disabling condition: Your life is, by the very nature of that disability, now different from what the able-bodied consider "normal" living. That's just the way it is; things are going to be different for you for the rest of your life. That statement, in and of itself, is not discriminatory, it's just reality.

I'm not saying this well, because I'm not finding the words well. It's the difference between skill and innate ability. I can throw a ball, and so can a major league pitcher. For both of us, a casual toss is just that, a casual toss. But that pitcher has a skill I don't have - since I don't have the practice to develop the skill he has, he will always be able to throw better than I, even though we both share the same innate ability (the act of moving our arm to propel a ball.) For a disabled person, the loss of the limb (the dominant arm, in this example) limits or eliminates the innate ability (moving the arm to propel a ball - without the arm, you just can't throw a ball with it), to replace it solely with a learned skill (manipulating the prosthetic to throw a ball).

If the prosthetic is capable of more than the limb replacing it was capable of, then learning to use it grants an unfair advantage, the same as cork in a baseball bat provides an unfair advantage to a hitter.

If the prosthetics were, on a point-by-point basis, identical to and on par with the limbs replaced, then he should be allowed to run wherever he wishes. But if the limbs are, in any manner, superior to the ability of a healthy, developed limb, then they're No-Go.

It's a tribute to the man's skill that he can run on prosthetic limbs, and he provides great hope for disabled people worldwide. But that doesn't change anything about the fact that he is disabled. He has learned to live with his disability remarkably well, better than some able-bodied people, for sure. That fact does not confer upon him the right to any special advantages.

[RickC Sniper]

Well said Growler.

Please see my post #20.

[Tribesman]

There IS discrimination going on here, but I'm not referring to the disabled.

yes, but is the process in Colorado the same as the EU one or the german one or Skybirds fictional one:03:

I learned one thing: disabled people, mentally or physically, often do not want at all a special way of being dealt with: with special care, special foresight in wording, special respect - to them right this often appears as not dealing normally with them, but to sort them out by treating them "special".
Spot on.

[Thunder]

Rick, on this topic in particular, I wonder if anyone else noticed your signature.

Here's the thing with anyone who's suffered a disabling injury, or is born with a disabling condition: Your life is, by the very nature of that disability, now different from what the able-bodied consider "normal" living. That's just the way it is; things are going to be different for you for the rest of your life. That statement, in and of itself, is not discriminatory, it's just reality.

I'm not saying this well, because I'm not finding the words well. It's the difference between skill and innate ability. I can throw a ball, and so can a major league pitcher. For both of us, a casual toss is just that, a casual toss. But that pitcher has a skill I don't have - since I don't have the practice to develop the skill he has, he will always be able to throw better than I, even though we both share the same innate ability (the act of moving our arm to propel a ball.) For a disabled person, the loss of the limb (the dominant arm, in this example) limits or eliminates the innate ability (moving the arm to propel a ball - without the arm, you just can't throw a ball with it), to replace it solely with a learned skill (manipulating the prosthetic to throw a ball).

If the prosthetic is capable of more than the limb replacing it was capable of, then learning to use it grants an unfair advantage, the same as cork in a baseball bat provides an unfair advantage to a hitter.

If the prosthetics were, on a point-by-point basis, identical to and on par with the limbs replaced, then he should be allowed to run wherever he wishes. But if the limbs are, in any manner, superior to the ability of a healthy, developed limb, then they're No-Go.

It's a tribute to the man's skill that he can run on prosthetic limbs, and he provides great hope for disabled people worldwide. But that doesn't change anything about the fact that he is disabled. He has learned to live with his disability remarkably well, better than some able-bodied people, for sure. That fact does not confer upon him the right to any special advantages.


This was basically the crux of my argument.

[Anthony W.]

This almost takes us into the debate of cyborgism. When humans and robots are combined to extend the ability of the body to fit it with the fullest extent of the mind.

[Lord Justice]

to fit it with the fullest extent of the mind.Is there such? :03:

[Skybird]

Rick,

actually I am uncertain whether or not you have an argument with me or not!? Might be my English as foreign langauge, I am not sure. I have noted your sig for sure, already longer time ago, but still I said what I said, and in the way I did. Hope this tells you something about me in case you see a problem. To me you are a voice on the web like all the others in this forum - not more, not less, not better, not worse. Period. I make no knot in my tongue for any of them - and not for you.

Hope this is normality and equality enough!? It's either the full deal, or none. Special deals ask somebody else for.

Nichts für ungut! ;)

[RickC Sniper]

I have no issues with you Sky, none at all. I stated my case the best I could to you and you did not agree. I accept that fact and now move on. I am 60 years old and experienced enough to retreat from a battle that cannot be won. :ping:

I don't discuss my disability openly here in the forums because it is irrelevant here.