Reply #124: Wow. I Mean, Wow. Ok, Let's Have A Shot At This:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

"He is discriminating against others"

He's entitled to. Any time anyone makes a choice they're technically discriminating against something. In this case, discriminating merely means applying parameters rather than just any and all. Since this is dealing with quite a private and potentially uncomfortable situation, I don't find anything unreasonable about applying parameters to the choice whatsoever.


"and I'm sorry but disability doesn't give you a license to discriminate against qualified caregivers"

You're right... It doesn't. Being an individual human being does. Again, this is an immensely private and potentially uncomfortable situation. The person in question has every right to decide for himself who he is or isn't comfortable with. Personally, that choice is none of your business and technically isn't even up for you to judge. But he absolutely has the right to pick and choose just based on being an individual alone. You attempt to put forth a premise that as individuals we shouldn't have any choices in who we do or don't choose in different situations. A premise that says anyone at all who can technically perform the task should be acceptable no matter what. But I find that premise ridiculous. Of course as private citizens we have a choice and to expect or demand otherwise is absurd and unrealistic.


"nor does disability give you freedom to sexually harass the young girls who are looking for a job."

See, now this is where I find your attacks on this person to cross the line of disgusting. You have ZERO substance to go by to make such a character attack on someone you know nothing about. You have nothing to provide to lend credence to your claim that he has or may sexually harass anybody. I shake my head at the ability to attack someone who may be innocent with such harsh words.


"Did you not see that he implied that male caregivers would molest him? Please."

That statement is twisting reality. He implied no such thing. What he did do was state factually that he has received many sexual requests from men so now wants to exclude the group altogether thereby minimizing the chances of having to weed through those types of offers thereby wasting his time. This is also perfectly understandable. But that's not implying whatsoever that male caregivers would molest him. He's simply minimizing the frequency of which he has to deal with those types of replies by further limiting the parameters.


"I've seen many people in his position and I have actually had to find caregivers for them."

So? What does that actually mean? Anything?


"Never before have I seen such an obscene request."

Ummmmmm, alllllrighty then.


"In my experience, the majority of men in his position actually request male caregivers"

Inherent within your statement itself is the implication that some in fact didn't request men. Well, there ya go. Individuals are individuals for a reason.


"and also in my experience I have never seen throngs of young college aged girls want to do a task such as this."

At some point you must come to understand that the world is bigger than your experience alone...