Dear Mary

Dear Mary: Should I follow Cilla Black’s lead on disabled loos?

Plus: The local landowner’s excessive tree-planting; and when it’s fine to blank someone

20 June 2015

9:00 AM

20 June 2015

9:00 AM

Q. I was at the theatre recently and bumped into a well-known Liverpudlian crooner coming out of the disabled lavatory. She said ‘Don’t worry, luv, it’s fine to use them if no disabled people are waiting.’ Often theatre interval queues are long and in some of London’s better restaurants the ‘disabled toilet’ is closer, cleaner and more convenient. Is there a ruling on this or was Cilla correct?
— N.C., Stanton St Bernard, Wilts

A. Common sense tells us Cilla is right — but it is only correct to use disabled lavatories if you can be certain you will not thereby stymie the – possibly more urgent — need of a member of the select group for whom the facility is intended. To this end Cilla should only have used it with the door ajar.


Q. With the best of green intentions a local landowner has planted many hundreds of trees. Unfortunately a particular group of six beeches threatens to screen off the village’s view of the downs. We believe the landowner rarely approaches his house through our village. If he did, he might realise the planting has been insensitive. But how to ask him to cut them down? Many of the other affected villagers are employed by the big house or would otherwise be too shy to rock the boat by joining in a petition.
— Name and address withheld

A. A petition would strike the wrong note. Instead write to the landowner in your own name. Congratulate him on the planting he has already carried out and gush that you would like to contribute six more beeches for him to plant anywhere he wants on his own estate. Meanwhile might he consider converting the existing beech avenue into a beech hedge to restore to the village its much-loved view of the downs? Six beech saplings will cost you no more than £100.

Q. The other day I saw a young man I know through one of my daughters. He was standing across a field at a country sporting event. I am not sure whether he saw me but I realised that, were I to wave, it would mean that we would both have to lead our groups (mine of six and his of four) across a hundred yards of ploughed field and then go through the palaver of mass introductions. Did I do the right thing in pretending not to have seen him? If not, how should I make amends?
— Name and address withheld

A. As the senior person, it would have been up to you to make the first move of greeting. However, the scenario you describe, where so many would be inconvenienced by a greeting, is one where what might be called ‘benign snubbing’ is acceptable. This is also permitted at funerals, car crashes, school prizegivings, sporting contests and other events where the attention is meant to be very much focused on a specific person or activity. You can always text people later to say you caught a glimpse of them and hope to see them again soon in a more manageable context.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10


Show comments
  • blandings

    “To this end Cilla should only have used it with the door ajar.”

    Reminds me of a little place in France I came across years ago. There was a full length mirror postioned so that as the women went into the ladies they could gaze upon the chaps in the gents.
    When I returned to my table I asked the (newish) wife how to say “Wave willie for the girls” in French. She just stared at me blankly, having already decided that she’d hitched herself up to a madman.

  • Damaris Tighe

    If the regular loos are full I always use the disabled. I don’t see why someone in a wheel chair is exempt from waiting a few minutes – at least they’re sitting down.

    • Mr B J Mann

      Indeed!

      In fact, why would an “officially” disabled person have a “more urgent — need of a member of the select group for whom the facility is intended”?!

      Amazingy, those whose “disability” is that they might actually have an urgent need are officially banned from having blue badges (they used to be able to get orange ones) because officialdom, and the great and the good they get to advise them, concluded that seeing “disabled” people jumping out of cars and sprinting into buildings would bring the blue badge scheme into disrepute.

      Unlike, for example, children with ADHD or people on the Autistic Spectrum, who are allowed to leap out of cars and run around regardless in disabled parking bays, because to refuse them blue badges would deprive them of their Uman Rite to a social life and getting out of the house.

      Strange that that reasoning doesn’t apply to the other group who end up housebound!?!?!?

      • Annie

        Yes why on earth would somebody with a disability suffer from incontinence.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Was that support or sarcasm?

          If the latter, you clearly miss the point:

          Losing a leg, or a lung, doesn’t increase your need to use the toilet.

          However, people whose disability IS incontinence are actually banned from getting Blue Badges.

          Even though parents or carers of people with ADHD or on the Autism
          Spectrum can’t be deprived of one because to do so would deprive them of their “right” to mobility, freedom and a normal social live.

          Despite the fact that being disabled through incontinence leads to sufferers being housebound unless special provisions are made for them, eg access to parking close to buildings, and to disabled toilets.

      • HFC

        You are wrong. See my reply to Damaris.

        • Mr B J Mann

          You mean in your opinion you think I am wrong.

          Do you mean this reply:

          >>”Perhaps you might see that somebody who is forced to use crutches because they have difficulty and suffer pain walking and standing (in a queue) and has need of a urinal because they have intermittent bladder urgency all due to a compromised central nervous system might find it irritating to be kept waiting by an ‘I was only in there for a minute, sorry’ lying, selfish, thoughtless able-bodied person?”

          Perhaps you might see that somebody who is forced to use a disabled accessible toilet because they have difficulty and suffer pain waiting and standing (in a queue) and has need of a urinal (or WC) because they have intermittent (or permanent) bladder (or bowel) urgency all due to a (temporarily or permanently) compromised system might find it (medically) irritating (or harmful) to be kept waiting just in case someone in a wheelchair who isn’t in pain, and isn’t in urgent need of a toilet might turn up in the next minute, or, worse, some know it all do-gooding il”liberal” might turn up whinging about people in desperate need saying ‘I was only in there for a minute, sorry’ lying, selfish, thoughtless able-bodied person”.

          “Disabled” accessible toilets, unlike ‘disabled’ parking spaces, are part of the provision for all of the buildings occupants, but they are required to be DESIGNED to be ACCESSIBLE to those with (ALL kinds of) “disabilities”.

          They are NOT exclusively for people in wheelchairs.

          They are NOT exclusively for blue badge holders.

          And they are NOT exclusively for those that the disabled loo police like you choose to give permission to use them.

          Would you like to confirm that if you worked in a building with just one single toilet that was designated Male/Female/Disabled you would insist that no one use the toilet at work unless they were disabled?

          How about if you worked in a large company, or visited a major public building, where ALL the toilets were “Disabled” *ACCESSIBLE*:

          Would you stand guard insisting NO one used ANY of them just in case a “disabled” person turned up, and, anyway, even if *NO* “disabled” person turned up, they are “DISABLED” toilets??!?!

          Do you also tell parents who try to use baby changing facilities combined accessible/baby-changing facilities that they can’t go in unless they are in a wheelchair or on crutches?!?!?

          I bet you’re the kind of person who insists that people who see a CARER struggling to get a wheelchair up some steps ask the person BEING wheeled if THEY would like some help.

          If you see a mother struggling to get a pushchair up some steps:

          Do you insist on asking the child in the wheelchair if THEY would like some help?!?!?

          No, HFC:

          It’s YOU who are wrong.

          And not only are you wrong, but you bring disabled people into disrepute.

          • HFC

            Not just wrong, silly too.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Well, with a counter argument as strong as “not just wrong” backed up with facts like, errrrm, “silly too”, I’ll have to hold my hand up and admit victory, I suppose!

    • Carmin R. Myrick

      ☯✰☯.I can see what your saying… Martin `s blurb is cool, yesterday I bought a great Ford Mustang from making $8309 this-last/five weeks and-also, ten k lass-month . this is definitely the best-job Ive had . I actually started six months/ago and right away started to bring home more than $82 per-hr ..

      you can see more info this link …

      ➞➞ http://www.DollersBucket/AtHomeIncome.com

      ☰☲☱☰☲☰☱☰☰☱☰☱☰☰☲☰☲☱☰☱☰☲☲☱☰☲☱☰

    • Bertie

      Wow, what a selfish inconsiderate twat you are. You dont see why someone in a wheel chair is exempt from waiting a few minutes whilst you, non disabled, using their toilet facilities.

      Absolutely beggars belief. Clearly you are bereft of manners.

      And no, I’m not disabled before you cast incorrect aspersions

      • Mr B J Mann

        If you lived in a world without disability, went to the toilet, and saw there was only one cubicle unoccupied, would you refuse to use it on the grounds that if you did, despite being the next in the queue, you would be “a selfish inconsiderate tw!t” if you made anyone who might, or might not, turn up while you were in there wait a few minutes?!?!!

        • Bertie

          Eh – your scenario isnt even in the same vein. Of course one would use the unoccupied cubicle, assuming one was next in the queue.But this is predicated, as you say, on living in a world without disability.

          We don’t – so you’re using a cubicle you are not entitled too.
          ie You’re being a selfish twat.

          It’s irrelevant whether someone disabled might, or might not, turn up whilst you are there. You arent entitled to use it.

          Ergo lacking in etiquette. You clearly dont know how to behave.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Perhaps you’d like to demonstrate your grasp of etiquette, your understanding of how to behave (apart from minor matters such as showing respect, refraining from vulgarity, arguing without descending to ad hominem attacks, showing people the courtesy of actually reading their contributions, and maybe even considering their points……..).

            And actually answer the first point?!

            If the disabled toilets are vacant, there are queues for the able bodied and ambulant disabled cubicles, and someone whose disability is incontinence (which, perversely, is uniquely unrecognised for the purposes of Blue Badge issue) turns up with an urgent and disabling emergency need to use a toilet, please outline the argument you would use to persuade them they were not entitled to use the disabled facility, even in the absence of later arriving “disabled” people.

            Please also include your definition of “disabled” people that, in your expert opinion, ARE “entitled” to use the facility, and WHY that definition grants them entitlement.

            Over to you, you Bert, you!

          • Bertie

            Interesting comments and quite non sequitorial to your prior scenario of a world without disability..

            My grasp of etiquette and sense of manners is obviously far superior to yours as I wouldnt dream of using the disabled toilets – whether they were empty or not, whether there was the likelihood of a disabled person turning up or not…for the simple reason, that you seem unable to grasp, I am not disabled and therefore do not qualify for the right to access said disabled toilets.

            “(apart from minor matters such as showing respect, refraining from
            vulgarity, arguing without descending to ad hominem attacks, showing
            people the courtesy of actually reading their contributions, and maybe
            even considering their points……..).”

            A tad rich coming from the person who doesn’t give a damn that he might be inconveniencing a disabled person by using their toilet facilities because he cant wait his turn as the rest of us do!

            ie selfish twat.

            Nothing ad hominem about them.

            more a case of “Res ipsa loquitur”

            As to your claim I didn’t answer the first point –

            Which first point would that be???

            The one with your false analogy pertaining to a world without disability?? I believe you’ll find I did answer it!

            Having incontinence is not a recognisable disability for the simple reason that it is merely an inconvenience that can be worked around – hence it’s not,as you say, recognised for purposes of blue badge holders. These blue badge holders have far more debilitating disabilities. If you have incontinence suggest you invest in some of these….

            https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=incontinence+pads&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=pm2IVaP4JoKgsAH3haeQAg

            As to your request for outlining the argument to persuade them they are not entitled – it’s pretty simple. You aren’t. Your incontinence isn’t recognised as a bona fide disability because it is an inconvenience that can be easily worked around …those with true disabilities are not so fortunate.

            The argument is simple….

            To compare your incontinence with the disabilities that those with far more significant ones is yet more evidence of what a selfish twat you are.

            As to who should qualify – suggest you do some reading. it’s pretty clear.

            As is the definition of disability.

            For your edification , clearly you need it.

            Disabled….

            http://www.pluss.org.uk/what-disability-0

            it’s not difficult – being incontinent doesnt count.Obviously.
            Inconvenient yes.Disability No.

            Personally I wouldnt include aspergers or dyslexia in that definition – Autism and Downs yes, obviously. The Physical disabilities definitions are pretty straight forward, epitomising common sense.

            *Substantial
            Quite simply this means it must be more than minor or trivial*

            Afraid being incontinent doesnt qualify here either.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Errrrmmmmmmmmm…..

            >>”quite non sequitorial to your prior scenario of a world without disability”

            Is your disability visual impairment?

            I had posted three contributions to the discussion.

            >>”My grasp of etiquette and sense of manners is obviously far superior to yours….”
            >>”…..selfish twat”
            >>”Nothing ad hominem….”

            Or learning difficulties?!?!

            >>”I wouldnt dream of using the disabled toilets – whether they were empty or not, whether there was the likelihood of a disabled person turning up or not…for the simple reason, that you seem unable to grasp, I am not disabled and therefore do not qualify for the right to access said disabled toilets”

            So if you were in a place with only a single, shared use, toilet you wouldn’t ever use it?

            Because it’s a “Disabled” one (does that mean the mains feed to the cistern has been turned off, or that the waste has been blocked off?!?!).

            How about the “Disabled” seats on a bus or tube with no disabled passengers, and no other free seats, would you not use them either, because they are “Disabled” (seat removed?!?!?!)?!?!

            Oh, and by the way, do you understand what the terms “equality” and “equal treatment” mean?!?!

            >>”A tad rich coming from the person who doesn’t give a damn that he might be inconveniencing a disabled person by using their toilet facilities because he cant wait his turn as the rest of us do!”
            >>”ie selfish twat.”
            >>”Nothing ad hominem about them.”

            Or is it a case of “Res ipsa loquitur”?

            (By the way, where did I say I didn’t give a damn that I might be inconveniencing a disabled person, or that I cant wait my turn – visual impairment or educationally challenged?!).

            >>”Having incontinence is not a recognisable disability…….”

            Where in your google link did it say that?

            >>”for the simple reason that it is merely an inconvenience that can be worked around”

            Or that?

            It would also appear that you don’t actually understand the term incontinent. I’m beginning to suspect it’s learning difficulties rather than visual that is your problem.

            >>”hence it’s not,as you say, recognised for purposes of blue badge holders.”

            No, I didn’t say that.

            I said it’s not recognised because “seeing “disabled” people jumping out of cars and sprinting into buildings would bring the blue badge scheme into disrepute”.

            Not because it’s not a disability, nor because it’s “only” an “inconvenience”.

            >>”These blue badge holders have far more debilitating disabilities.”

            No, as even some of your links demonstrate, some of those who do qualify for Blue Badges would hardly even be inconvenienced without one, in sharp contrast to many who can’t “work round” not having one.

            However that was an aside, there is no direct link between Blue Badges, “Disability” and “Disabled” toilets.

            >>”If you have incontinence suggest you invest in some of these….”
            >>https://www.google.co.uk/searc…”

            I didn’t say I had, but I have now said you don’t understand what incontinence means.

            >>”As to your request for outlining the argument to persuade them they are not entitled – it’s pretty simple. You aren’t……. isn’t recognised….. argument is simple….”
            >>”what a selfish twat you are.”
            >>”suggest you do some reading. it’s pretty clear.”

            You’re a tr0ll, aren’t you?

            Not a clue, and just trying to wind people up!

            >>”As is the definition of disability.”
            >>”For your edification , clearly you need it.”
            >>”Disabled….”
            >>http://www.pluss.org.uk/what-d

            Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

            No exhaustive or complete definition there, is there.

            Just other examples.

            Get mum to explain where your childish logic fell down.

            For your edification, clearly you need it!

          • Bertie

            I think you’ll find I answered your first point – so it’s not me that is visually impaired, or has learning difficulties.

            For your edification…

            Your comment.
            >>Mr B J Mann
            3 days ago
            If you lived in a world without disability, went to the toilet, and
            saw there was only one cubicle unoccupied, would you refuse to use it on the grounds that if you did, despite being the next in the queue, you would be “a selfish inconsiderate tw!t” if you made anyone who might, or might not, turn up while you were in there wait a few minutes?!?!!

            My answer –

            “Eh – your scenario isnt even in the same vein. Of course one would use the unoccupied cubicle, assuming one was next in the queue.But this is predicated, as you say, on living in a world without disability.”

            Answers it no?

            You subsequently ask –

            >>So if you were in a place with only a single, shared use, toilet you wouldn’t ever use it?

            So it’s a shared one,not a exclusive disabled one,as most disabled toilets around the country tend not to be. ie They are for exclusive use of disabled people.You wouldnt be changing the parameters YET AGAIN!

            If it’s a shared one,not for the exclusive use of the disabled,I would consider using it.

            If it was disabled only I would not.

            >>Because it’s a “Disabled” one (does that mean the mains feed to the cistern has been turned off, or that the waste has been blocked off?!?!).”

            Eh? Relevance? No need to be facetious.

            >>How about the “Disabled” seats on a bus or tube with no disabled passengers, and no other free seats, would you not use them either, because they are “Disabled” (seat removed?!?!?!)?!?!”

            No, I would stand so that should a disabled person be waiting at the next stop they wouldn’t be inconvenienced.

            With regard to your

            >>(By the way, where did I say I didn’t give a damn that I might be inconveniencing a disabled person, or that I cant wait my turn – visual impairment or educationally challenged?!).”

            It’s implicit by your very action – it’s more important for you to use the disabled toilet than it is the fact you might be inconveniencing someone actually disabled.

            There you go passing factually incorrect aspersions as to my being visually impaired or possessing of learning difficulties.

            As to your

            >>It would also appear that you don’t actually understand the term incontinent. I’m beginning to suspect it’s learning difficulties rather than visual that is your problem.”

            I actually have an elderly parent with that very issue –

            Perhaps you should invest in some of these then you might not be so selfish…(Using disabled Only toilets)

            http://www.ageukincontinence.co.uk/incontinence-shop/disposable-incontinence-products.html?gclid=CLir362JqcYCFQQUwwodYDsChw

            And you claim I’m visually impaired – I gave you a link to how they define disability – the fact there is no mention of incontinence means implicitly that it isn’t recognised as a disability!!!!

            Read the site again.

            http://www.pluss.org.uk/what-disability-0

            Do you really need it spelled out for you in black and white?

            It’s not difficult – being incontinent doesnt count. Obviously. Inconvenient yes.Disability No.

            For someone who professes to be so so smarter you seem exceedingly dense…

            Why should incontinence be deemed a disability worthy of entitlement of special treatment? Just buy some incontinent pads and get on with it.

            >>You’re a tr0ll, aren’t you?
            Not a clue, and just trying to wind people up!

            Not at all. I’m fed up of inconsiderate twats such as yourself who don’t give a damn about people less fortunate,who are justifiably entitled to certain services, by using thew whenever you feel entitled..

            >>No exhaustive or complete definition there, is there.
            Just other examples.

            It’s pretty explanatory though – the fact incontinence isnt mentioned at all (I only quickly perused the site whereas given your personal incontinence issue I’d expect a closer examination is in order)

            So – do you get benefit for your disability then??

            >>Get mum to explain where your childish logic fell down.”

            Eh? You haven’t proven you aren’t a selfish twat, nor that incontinence is a disability. Tad irrational & premature to claim victory.

            Why do you deem it a disability and not an easily dealt with inconvenience then?

          • Mr B J Mann

            Except my first point wasn’t:

            >>Mr B J Mann
            3 days ago

            For your edification…

            It was:

            >>Mr B J Mann Damaris Tighe • 5 days ago
            Indeed!
            In fact, why would an “officially” disabled person have a “more urgent — need of a member of the select group for whom the facility is intended”?!

            Which I don’t think you have addressed.

            As for:

            >You subsequently ask –
            >>So if you were in a place with only a single, shared use, toilet you wouldn’t ever use it?
            >So it’s a shared one,not a exclusive disabled one,as most disabled toilets around the country tend not to be. ie They are for exclusive use of disabled people.You wouldnt be changing the parameters YET AGAIN!

            Where am *I* changing the parameters?

            I was trying to get you to reason logically, but apologies if I failed.

            Feel free to show me the Legislation, Primary or Regulation, Code of Practice, Approved, or otherwise, British, or other, Standard, or even any official recommendations, advice, or guidelines, indicating that any of the toilet facilities that are required to be *designed* to be ACCESSIBLE to ALL with ANY kind of “disability” are to be reserved exclusively for the use of the “disabled”.

            And should you manage to find anything that you think fits the bill, then you will also need to provide the relevant related regulation or guideline or whatever that that stipulates who or what constitutes “disabled” for the purposed of the regulation or guidelines or whatever.

            Put up, or shut up.

            Because you clearly haven’t got a clue.

            By the way, regarding your parent, do you take them into the ordinary loos?

            Or do they go in by themselves?!

            And flush the adult nappy down the loo?!?!?

            And as to your links, I don’t recall them taking me to a .gov site.

            Though if you weren’t so visually impaired (or blinkered) you might have spotted a link from your link to more examples.

            eg:

            Appendix
            An illustrative and non-exhaustive list of factors which, if they are experienced by a person, it would be reasonable to regard as having a substantial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities. Whether a person satisfies the definition of a disabled person for the purposes of the Act will depend upon the full circumstances of the case. That is, whether the substantial adverse effect of the impairment on normal dayto-day activities is long term. In the following examples, the effect described should be thought of as if it were the only effect of the impairment.
            • Difficulty in getting dressed, for example, because of physical restrictions, a lack of understanding of the concept, or low motivation;
            • Difficulty carrying out activities associated with toileting, or caused by frequent *MINOR* incontinence;
            •………
            [*MY* emphasis]
            As you struggle, the word after the EMPHASISED ONE is:
            I_N_C_O_N_T_I_N_E_N_C_E

          • Bertie

            Actually your first point to ME was:

            “Mr B J Mann

            Bertie
            •7 days ago

            If you lived in a world without disability, went to the toilet, and saw there was only one cubicle unoccupied, would you refuse to use it on the grounds that if you did, despite being the next in the queue, you would be “a selfish inconsiderate tw!t””

            Which was in response to my calling “Damaris Tighe
            ” a selfish twat for using the disabled toilets and it was this message that I directly responded to despite you claiming I didn’t.

            And your scenario is completely irrelevant to the initial situation,and to the real world, where we do indeed have disability and disabled only toilets.

            As to changing the parameters you clearly asked

            “So if you were in a place with only a single, shared use, toilet you wouldn’t ever use it?”

            Eh – we’re talking disabled only toilets – which is what the original poster referred to. Nowhere were “Shared disabled toilets mentioned”

            Ergo , bu now referencing them as “Shared disabled toilets” you are changing the parameters of the discussion!!!!

            Because if they are “shared” we are all entitled to use them!!! Obvious surely? And most , if not nearly all disabled toilets are NOT SHARED?

            Clearly the only person unable to reason rationally or logically is yourself.

            As I said clearly when you asked previously

            *If it’s a shared one,not for the exclusive use of the disabled,I would consider using it. If it was disabled only I would not.*

            “Feel free to show me the Legislation, Primary or
            Regulation, Code of Practice, Approved, or otherwise, British, or other, Standard, or even any official recommendations, advice, or guidelines, Building Control or Disability Discrimination related, indicating that any of the toilet facilities that are required to be *designed* to be ACCESSIBLE to ALL with ANY kind of “disability” are to be reserved exclusively for the use of the “disabled”.”

            It’s called having good manners and not being a selfish twat – there doesn’t have to be legislation. People should know how to behave. In the same manner that men don’t use women’s toilets, and, vice versa, women don’t use the mens. Pretty straightforward. Etiquette, something you’re clearly lacking as you don’t know how to behave.

            “By the way, regarding your parent, do you take
            them into the ordinary loos?”

            We have them collected as my father is bed ridden most of the time – but when we occasionally go out he wears them until he gets home when they then go in the yellow refuse bag for collection.

            “(But non of that alters the fact that Disabled
            *ACCESSIBLE* toilets are not for the exclusive use of people in wheelchairs, or whatever)”

            Who said they were for exclusive use of those in wheelchairs ???

            As to the link defining disability looks pretty clear cut to me.

            http://www.pluss.org.uk/what-disability-0

            So what exactly is disability?

            Under the Equality Act 2010, a person is considered to be disabled if they have

            “a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on their ability to perform
            normal day-to-day activities”

            Lets break this down into simple terms:

            Physical impairments
            Well, this could include anything from a loss of a limb to a dexterity or sensory impairment, such as visual or hearing. It would also include health conditions with fluctuating effects such as Diabetes, Cancer, Osteoporosis, MS, ME, Fybromyalgia, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and Arthritis. Also included would be progressive conditions such as Muscular Dystrophy and Motor Neurone Disease, and respiratory conditions such as Asthma, and Cardiovascular diseases, including Thrombosis, Stroke and Heart Disease. In fact, people with HIV, Cancer or Multiple Sclerosis, and people who are certified blind or partially sighted are protected by the Act from the point of diagnosis (they do not need to demonstrate that their condition has a long term, adverse effect on their daily life). Severe Disfigurement is also covered by the act (again no need to demonstrate adverse effects).

            Mental impairments
            Well, this would include learning disabilities such as Downs Syndrome. It would also include developmental disorders such as Autism, Aspergers, Dyslexia and Dyspraxia.

            Also covered under mental impairments are mental health issues – this could include anything from severe Depression, Nervous Breakdown, OCD, Eating Disorders, Dementia, Bi-polar Disorder, Schizophrenia, as well as some personality disorders and self harming behaviour.

            In the past, a mental health condition had to be clinically recognised in order for it to be regarded as a mental impairment for the purposes of the Act. However, this requirement was removed in 2005.

            No mention of Incontinence because it is an inconvenience, not a disability.

            I have to say, for someone who doesn’t apparently suffer from incontinence you are getting very heated about the whole subject.

            “• Difficulty in getting dressed, for example, because of physical restrictions, a lack of understanding of the concept, or low motivation;”

            Having low motivation and thus unable to get dressed in the morning is a disability is it? Are we in the twilight zone because that’s ridiculous.

            “(But non of that alters the fact that Disabled *ACCESSIBLE* toilets are
            not for the exclusive use of people in wheelchairs, or whatever)”

            So are all disabled toilets “disabled accessible” then?

          • Mr B J Mann

            Except I never said my first point to YOU.

            What I said was:

            Mr B J Mann Bertie • 9 days ago

            Perhaps you’d like to demonstrate your grasp of etiquette, your understanding of how to behave (apart from minor matters such as showing respect, refraining from vulgarity, arguing without descending to ad hominem attacks, *showing* *people* *the* *courtesy* *of* *actually* *reading* *their* *contributions*, *and* *maybe* *even* *considering* *their* *points*……..).

            And actually answer *the* first point?!

            —–

            Moving on to the next bit of your d!atribe, I accept your admission that there is no legislation that says that disabled toilets are for the disabled only.

            Now all you need to do is accept that there is no legislation that says that there are such things as disabled only toilets either.

            And your rant about men’s and women’s is a red herring.

            “Disabled” toilets don’t have a sign on them saying “D_I_S_A_B_L_E_D”.

            Neither do they have a sign on them indicating or “signifying” that they are out of order.

            They have a symbol on them signifying that they are disabled ACCESSIBLE!

            But they are part of the normal complement of provision for the building occupants.

            Feel free to PROVE otherwise.

            Until you can prove that they are extra to the normal needs you cannot argue that it is bad manners for anyone (else) to use them in an emergency (only that it would be if you were preventing a disabled person accessing them when you had other ones available).

            ——-

            Moving on to your next d!atribe, are you trying to prove that you should have gone to ~O^O….::::::::::.

            Or that you have other spec!al needs?!?!?!

            Simply cutting and pasting the link I’ve already told you is inaccurate and insufficient does not prove you are right.

            Simply regurgitating the page I told you ended with a link to the official definition which proved you wrong, errrrmmmm, PROVES YOU *WRONG* !!!

            AGAIN, from YOUR link, see THIS ~O^O……::::::::::

            “Also specific guidance on the definition of disability can be found by clicking here:
            http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/guidance_on_matters_to_be_taken_into_account_in_determining_questions_relating_to_the_definition_of_disability.pdf

            Which is from where I helpfully provided you with the first two of the official definitions.

            Both of which, in your ignorance, you STILL insist AREN’T disabilities.

            Even though I have cut and pasted them from the official document linked from the page YOU linked to.

            Dunderhead!

            Now get back to your parking warden beat!

          • Bertie

            For someone who apparently has no skin in the game on this you are surprisingly vocal and interested – especially about the portrayal of incontinence as an inconvenience and not a disability.

            Behaviour more often than not associated with people who actually have said inconvenience and are bitter they aren’t deemed as having a disability.

            Nor is being unable to get dressed due to lack of motivation a disability. In any reasonable persons opinion it’d be called “Shirting, or being a lazy bastard”

            Anyway, I trust you have been productive the last 7 days as indeed have I (hence the lack of response)

          • Mr B J Mann

            Errrmmmmmmmmmm:

            I do have skin in the game, but what I’m unsurprisingly vocal and interested in is justice, fairness, equality, and not allowing deranged little g0bsh!tes like you bully reasonable people and jumped up little Narsties try to twist the rules to their own warped views.

            You are clearly wrong – “especially about the portrayal of incontinence as an inconvenience and not a disability”.

            As you own link showed.

            Because it linked to an official site which officially defined *even* *MINOR* incontinence as A *DISABILITY* if it was long term

            As for:

            “Behaviour more often than not associated with people who actually have said inconvenience and are bitter they aren’t deemed as having a disability.”

            Are you “projecting” there?

            I suspect you are!

            And as for:

            “Nor is being unable to get dressed due to lack of motivation a disability. In any reasonable persons opinion it’d be called “Shirting, or being a lazy b’stard””

            That may well be true in layman’s terms.

            But, AS *YOUR* LINK *PROVED*, it *IS* a Disability *IN* *LAW*!

            Clearly you haven’t spent the past week busy checking the facts!

            Bet you’ve been busy wearing your nice uniform with the yellow bands and stopping people from legally parking where you don’t, in your infinite wisdom, think they ought to!

          • Bertie

            What skin in the game then?

            Not that you’ve incontinence surely – something you denied earlier.

            In similar vein to yourself I also am interested in ” justice, fairness, equality,”

            “not allowing deranged little g0bsh!tes like you bully reasonable people
            and jumped up little Narsties try to twist the rules to their own warped
            views.”

            Who’s bullying? I’m merely expressing my opinion that I think people who use the disabled facilities are selfish – especially as in the case of using the disabled loos you cant see if a disabled person is waiting or not!!!!! (Presumably you have the door closed?)

            And why is one a gobshite merely for expressing an opinion contrary to yours? One could say such a description is more worthy of the prole who has been hurling around insults such as:

            “Been busy sticking white stuff up you nose, eh?”

            “Are you a real parking warden?”

            “Or did you mum make your outfit for you?!?!?!?”

            Gobshite far more apt for the childish prole-esque abuse emanating from your mouth!

            “You are clearly wrong – “especially about the portrayal of incontinence as an inconvenience and not a disability”.
            As you own link showed. Because it linked to an official site which officially defined *even* *MINOR* incontinence as A *DISABILITY* if it was long term”

            It wasnt in the main section defining disability. It’s an inconvenience, a bad one, but not a disability.

            next you’ll be telling me that being too tired,lacking in motivation to get up in the morning and get dressed is a disability as well – which is patently ridiculous and pathetic in the extreme.

            “Are you “projecting” there?I suspect you are!”

            Nope you’re wrong yet again. Only person projecting here is you. It’s pretty clear the only reason you’re getting so irate is that you’ve incontinence and you’re bitter you dont qualify as disabled under the definitions.

            I’d put incontinence below short sightedness on the disability front.

            Nor is being unable to get dressed due to lack of motivation a
            disability. In any reasonable persons opinion it’d be called “Shirking”, or being a lazy b’stard

            “That may well be true in layman’s terms.
            But, AS *YOUR* LINK *PROVED*, it *IS* a disability *IN* *LAW*!”

            Which shows the Law has been ambushed by limp wristed pathetic lefties with no spine.

            Utterly ridiculous diagnosis.

            “Bet you’ve been busy wearing your nice uniform with the yellow bands and stopping people from legally parking where you don’t think they ought to!”

            I’ve actually been busy sorting out a funeral you twat – something more important that you pissing your pants uncontrollably

          • Mr B J Mann

            >>”What skin in the game then?”
            >>”Not that you’ve incontinence surely – something you denied earlier.”

            So why accuse me of it later in your post, and why ask when you’ve just quoted my reply in the next line:

            >>”In similar vein to yourself I also am interested in ” justice, fairness, equality,” ”

            And, no, you’re not, because if you were, you’d consider someone with an urgent need to use the only available loo, even if it’s a “disabled” (ACCESSIBLE – still waiting for proof from you it’s anything more than that!) one to have priority over someone who’s just turned up in a wheelchair (they, at least, can queue in comfort, all other things being equal).

            Which is why you deserve:

            >> >>”not allowing deranged little g0bsh!tes like you bully reasonable people and jumped up little Narsties try to twist the rules to their own warped views.”

            >>Who’s bullying? I’m merely expressing my opinion that I think people who use the disabled facilities are selfish – especially as in the case of using the disabled loos you cant see if a disabled person is waiting or not!!!!! (Presumably you have the door closed?)”

            No, you’re not, you’re bullying. You are ATTACKING people who you disagree with. That was your first “contribution” to the “discussion”:

            >>Bertie -> Damaris Tighe • 11 days ago
            >>”Wow, what a selfish inconsiderate tw-t you are.”

            >>”And why is one a gobshite merely for expressing an opinion contrary to yours?”

            I’ve just explained.

            AGAIN!

            >>”One could say such a description is more worthy of the prole who has been hurling around insults such as:….”

            But I’ve been responding, eventually, in exasperation, to your repeated !insults and your repeated l!es and your repeated refusal to accept the legal facts and your repeated response to simple facts with abuse.

            Have you bothered to follow your own link properly yet?!?!

            >> >>”You are clearly wrong – “especially about the portrayal of incontinence as an inconvenience and not a disability”.
            >> >>As you own link showed. Because it linked to an official site which officially defined *even* *MINOR* incontinence as A *DISABILITY* if it was long term”

            >>”It wasnt in the main section defining disability. It’s an inconvenience, a bad one, but not a disability.”

            So you STILL haven’t followed your own link properly yet!

            1) The page you linked to was a third party precis of a general outline of disability definitions to give people a flavour.

            2) The page ITSELF directed people who wanted a fuller proper definition to an official document.

            3) I pointed this out.

            4) I even quoted it to you.

            5) And you STILL not only refuse to believe me.

            6) You ABUS3 me for pointing out the facts for you!

            >>”next you’ll be telling me that being too tired,lacking in motivation to get up in the morning and get dressed is a disability as well – which is patently ridiculous and pathetic in the extreme.”

            IT’S A DIRECT QUOTE FROM THE OFFICIAL DEFINITION.

            THE ONE ABOUT INCONTINENCE WAS THE SECOND IN THE LIST.

            SO, NOT WANTING TO EDIT TOO MUCH OUT, I LEFT IT IN.

            BUT YOU *STILL* HAVEN’T BOTHERED TO CHECK WHAT WAS ON YOUR *OWN* LINK!

            AND YOU STILL !NSULT ME FOR TRYING TO EDUCATE YOU!

            >> >>”Are you “projecting” there?I suspect you are!”

            >>Nope you’re wrong yet again. Only person projecting here is you. It’s pretty clear the only reason you’re getting so irate is that you’ve incontinence and you’re bitter you dont qualify as disabled under the definitions.”

            No, there’s nothing obvious about that.

            It’s what you’re choosing to see.

            Clearly based on how you would react.

            Therefore clearly you ARE projecting.

            The reason I’m getting so irate (apart from the fact I’m trying to educate an ignorant, obnoxious, vile, buffoon) is that I happen to know you are spreading g0bsh!te, and I think you should be challenged before you do any more harm.

            >>I’d put incontinence below short sightedness on the disability front.

            ?

            So you’re claiming that the fact that you are so short-sighted (and blinkered?) puts you above someone with, say, bowel cancer?!?!?!

            Keep proving what a tw-t you are!!!!

            >>Nor is being unable to get dressed due to lack of motivation a
            disability. In any reasonable persons opinion it’d be called “Shirking”, or being a lazy b’stard

            But as that’s the quote from the official definition you are gu!lty of disability discrimination and a hat3 cr!me!

            >> >>”That may well be true in layman’s terms.
            >> >>But, AS *YOUR* LINK *PROVED*, it *IS* a disability *IN* *LAW*!”
            >>Which shows the Law has been ambushed by limp wristed pathetic lefties with no spine.
            Utterly ridiculous diagnosis.

            But, Mr Disabled (ACCESSIBLE) Loo Plod, THAT’S THE LAW.

            AND THE LAW IS THE LAW.

            As people like you like to insist.

            IT’S ALSO THE HEIGHT OF BAD MANNERS, INCONSIDERATE AND EXTREMELY SELFISH, TO INCONVENIENCE, DISCRIMINATE AGAINST AND INSULT THE DISABLED.

            WHICH, BY *YOUR* DEFINITION, MAKES YOU THE BIGGEST TW-T OUT THERE!

            >> >>”Bet you’ve been busy wearing your nice uniform with the yellow bands and stopping people from legally parking where you don’t think they ought to!”
            >>I’ve actually been busy sorting out a funeral you twat – something more important that you pissing your pants uncontrollably

            But you weren’t too busy to attack people who, for all you know, were dy!ng to get to the loo.

            Or who d!ed because you were so insistent on playing at PC PC Parking Plod.

            Or who were dy!ng to get to the loo because they were out at a funeral of someone some inconsiderate b’stard like you drove to their grave.

            Bet you are the kind of person this person was writing about:

            http://blog.scope.org.uk/2015/04/16/theres-more-to-me-than-meets-the-eye-100days100stories/

            Here’s a tip, if you don’t want abuse back, don’t start dishing it out!

          • Bertie

            Not that you’ve incontinence surely – something you denied earlier.”

            “So why accuse me of it later in your post, and why ask when you’ve just quoted my reply in the next line”

            I was being facetious due to your evasiveness on the subject. You are getting far too heated for someone merely interested in fairness, equality.So clearly this is something close to your heart.

            ie you suffer a bout of incontinence

            It is certainly widely held, particularly by those who have been brought up to be considerate of others, that using the disabled toilet is not on if one is able bodied. Am surprised that you cant understand this – you clearly aren’t of a certain circle. (ie You’re probably Working class to spell it out for you)

            Interesting you accuse me of being a vile,ignorant, obnoxious, buffoon,

            “And, no you’re not, because if you were, you’d consider someone with an urgent need to use the only available loo, even if it’s a “disabled” (ACCESSIBLE – still waiting for proof from you it’s anything more than that!) one to have priority over someone who’s just turned up in a wheelchair (they, at least, can queue in comfort, all other things being equal).”

            Yet you are quite happy for a disabled person in a wheelchair to wait, in the queue, for access to the toilets whilst you relieve yourself just because they dont have to stand,being wheelchair bound as they are!!! What makes you think these wheelchairs are comfortable for starters?

            Deplorable attitude.

            “No, you’re not, you’re bullying. You are ATTACKING people who you disagree with. That was your first “contribution” to the “discussion”:”

            No, I merely voiced a CONTRARY OPINION to the original poster expressing my view that I thought he was being selfish only to get bombarded with numerous childish posts by yourself arguing the toss – And it is you who, to date, has been bullying, moving the goalposts, engaging in misrepresentation, using straw men, proffering childish remarks revolving around cocaine(ie white stuff I presume), my mother and various other school boy debating antics.

            “But I’ve been responding, eventually, in exasperation, to your repeated !insults and your repeated l!es and your repeated refusal to accept the legal facts and your repeated response to simple facts with abuse.”

            You certainly haven’t been responding….and I went afk for 6 days to find seven separate messages,each with some pathetic childish comment.

            Eg Drivel related to traffic wardens.Relevance?

            “So you STILL haven’t followed your own link properly yet!”

            As I told you – I read the front page precis, that was enough for me. I’m too busy and it’s not an important issue in the big scheme of things.

            Being considerate of the genuine disabled however is. And as i said my values are clearly more traditional than yours – as indeed are those of many other Brits who feel similarly about using the disabled toilets when one is not entitled.

            To say they’re in a wheelchair so they can wait in a queue as they don’t have to stand is missing the point,and is pretty disgraceful for someone who has a minor affliction. as i said before- get some of those incontinent pads,then you’ll be fine.

            “You ABUS3 me for pointing out the facts for you!””

            Excuse me – I’m not the one doing the abusing. You;re the one that started this ridiculous debtate, trolling as you clearly are. Interested in fairness,equality,justice – yeah right, of course you arent. You’re here to argue the toss with anyone who doesnt share your opinion.

            “IT’S ALSO THE HEIGHT OF BAD MANNERS, INCONSIDERATE AND EXTREMELY
            SELFISH, TO INCONVENIENCE, DISCRIMINATE AGAINST AND INSULT THE DISABLED.”

            So you ARE disabled then

            What’s your disability?

            You keep evading this question I’ve noticed.

            And if you aren’t disabled, how am I am inconveniencing ,, discriminating against, or insulting the disabled as Im communicating with you only.

            “WHICH, BY *YOUR* DEFINITION, MAKES YOU THE BIGGEST TW-T OUT THERE!”

            Well see who the biggest twat is when you answer the prior question.

            In response to my:

            I’ve actually been busy sorting out a funeral you twat – something more
            important that you pissing your pants uncontrollably

            “But you weren’t too busy to attack people who, for all you know, were dy!ng to get to the loo.”

            Wow what a piece of work you are. Not only are you a selfish twat willing to deprive a genuinely disabled person from using the loo because you need to go, you also equate that to someone dying.

            As I said, you’re a nasty piece of work – your last remark amply evidences what a low life, ill mannered herbert you are.

            I’d suggest calming down if I were as your scribble indicates you might be able to pop a vein!

            “Here’s a tip, if you don’t want abuse back, don’t start dishing it out.”

            Might want to take a leaf out of your own book there !!!!

          • Mr B J Mann

            You’re beyond help, you really are.

            Feel free to carry on projecting.

          • Bertie

            There you go reaching again…

            Who’s projecting?

            I’m not the one with the issue.you however exhibit all the signs!

          • Mr B J Mann

            Oh dear, oh dear.

            Perhaps I should have replied in detail.

          • Mr B J Mann

            >> >> >>”Not that you’ve incontinence surely – something you denied earlier.”

            >> >> “So why accuse me of it later in your post, and why ask when you’ve just quoted my reply in the next line”

            >> I was being facetious due to your evasiveness on the subject. You are getting far too heated for someone merely interested in fairness, equality.So clearly this is something close to your heart.

            >> ie you suffer a bout of incontinence

            No, you were being insulting and attempting to be discriminatory.

            >> It is certainly widely held, particularly by those who have been brought up to be considerate of others, that using the disabled toilet is not on if one is able bodied.

            And when and where you were brought up, how were you brought up to define disabled and able bodied? Again!

            And who put you in charge of the definitions?

            And of policing them?!

            >> Am surprised that you cant understand this – you clearly aren’t of a certain circle. (ie You’re probably Working class to spell it out for you)

            Is that supposed to make sense?

            Does the magic circle use “disabled” loos when able bodied?

            Or the middle or upper classes?

            Royalty perhaps?

            Or are you just saying they are all as inbred as you as you struggle with comprehension, unlike us workers?!

            Is that why you can’t follow a simple link, and can’t even follow a definition that I kindly cut and pasted for you.

            And is that why you then start hurling abuse at people who fall under the definition.

            Are you some kind of yah boo yahoo?!

            >>Interesting you accuse me of being a vile,ignorant, obnoxious, buffoon,

            If the cap fits!

            >> >> “And, no you’re not, because if you were, you’d consider someone with an urgent need to use the only available loo, even if it’s a “disabled” (ACCESSIBLE – still waiting for proof from you it’s anything more than that!) one to have priority over someone who’s just turned up in a wheelchair (they, at least, can queue in comfort, all other things being equal).”

            >>Yet you are quite happy for a disabled person in a wheelchair to wait, in the queue, for access to the toilets whilst you relieve yourself just because they dont have to stand,being wheelchair bound as they are!!! What makes you think these wheelchairs are comfortable for starters?

            Again, you are projecting.

            I never said that *I* used them, never mind made people wait.

            I merely pointed out that “disabled ACCESSIBLE loos are part of the normal complement of a building’s facilities for all occupants and visitors (though most buildings never see a disabled person, never mind one needing the loo) and so if not being used and someone in desperate need is queuing, those who have been brought up to be considerate of others would see no problem in them using the disabled loo.

            As wouldn’t those wheelchair bound persons who have been brought up to be considerate of others, especially as most don’t have an urgent need.

            Why is the need of a wheelchair user who has just rolled up and though, ah, a disabled loo, might be able to squeeze out a drop now rather than later greater than someone who is in desperate need and been queuing for ages?

            It’s YOU who have the:

            >>Deplorable attitude.

            And fail to understand the true meaning of manners and consideration.

            But perhaps you know which fork to use and who you need to curtsy to, so that’s alright then!

            >> >> “No, you’re not, you’re bullying. You are ATTACKING people who you disagree with. That was your first “contribution” to the “discussion”:”

            >> No, I merely voiced a CONTRARY OPINION to the original poster expressing my view that I thought he was being selfish

            So, in your well brought up, polite, considerate, mannered view introducing yourself into a discussion with:

            >> Wow, what a selfish inconsiderate twat you are.

            Counts as “merely voiced a CONTRARY OPINION”

            And that to a lady.

            My, you WERE so well brought up!

            8> >> “So you STILL haven’t followed your own link properly yet!”

            >> As I told you – I read the front page precis, that was enough for me. I’m too busy and it’s not an important issue in the big scheme of things.

            >> Being considerate of the genuine disabled however is. And as i said my values are clearly more traditional than yours – as indeed are those of many other Brits who feel similarly about using the disabled toilets when one is not entitled.

            But I helpfully and considerately cut and pasted the relevant definition for you.

            Plus an extra one gratis.

            And you reacted by abusing the genuine disabled.

            Are you sure you understand the definition of considerate?

            And I’m still waiting for your own personal, private definition of “genuine disabled” who are, according to you, “entitled” to use “disabled” loos!

            >>To say they’re in a wheelchair so they can wait in a queue as they don’t have to stand is missing the point,and is pretty disgraceful for someone who has a minor affliction. as i said before- get some of those incontinent pads,then you’ll be fine.

            See, there you go again.

            Assuming I have a problem.

            Belittling me and abusing me for it.

            Despite the fact that I have repeatedly shown you that in fact people with that problem ARE “genuine disabled”.

            And so belittling and abusing the “genuine disabled”!

            And you still haven’t explained WHY the wheelchair user is in greater need regardless of whether the incontinent person is “genuinely” disabled or not.

            Never mind why you are in charge of deciding.

            You really don’t have the faintest concept of consideration for people or good manners.

            Hence:

            >> >> “You ABUS3 me for pointing out the facts for you!””

            >> Excuse me – 8> >> “IT’S ALSO THE HEIGHT OF BAD MANNERS, INCONSIDERATE AND EXTREMELY SELFISH, TO INCONVENIENCE, DISCRIMINATE AGAINST AND INSULT THE DISABLED.”

            >> So you ARE disabled then

            So you DO have a learning disability!

            >>……8> >> “WHICH, BY *YOUR* DEFINITION, MAKES YOU THE BIGGEST TW-T OUT THERE!”

            8<——- More ranting in the same vein snipped

          • Bertie

            Yawn, I cant be arsed. You’re a troll,

            What’s with the “Childish”

            8<——- More ranting in the same vein snipped

            Suffice it to say…

            **Because YOU SAY I am.**

            I never said you were disabled.

            **And then abuse me for it!**

            Abuse you for being disabled.that pales into insignificance compared to the abuse you have hurled at me.

            Hypocrite as well as a pathetic limp wristed pansy.

            Anyway, I've responded at length to one of your other "foaming at the mouth" pieces of misrepresentation, disinformation and hyperbole.

            It's a long weekend for some so I'm out to enjoy the sun.

            Let me know if you manage to get out of your bedsit now wont you.

            Pretty sure you'll be foaming at the mouth hastily scribbling yet more vituperative remarks – funny that the original poster has yet to comment but you've taken up the baton for him, for the last two weeks…

          • Mr B J Mann

            >> I never said you were disabled.

            Errrmmmmmm, yes, you did

            **And then abuse me for it!**

            Abuse you for being disabled.that pales into insignificance compared to the abuse you have hurled at me.

            Hypocrite as well as a pathetic limp wristed pansy.

            Anyway, I’ve responded at length to one of your other “foaming at the mouth” pieces of misrepresentation, disinformation and hyperbole.

            It’s a long weekend for some so I’m out to enjoy the sun.

            Let me know if you manage to get out of your bedsit now wont you.

            Pretty sure you’ll be foaming at the mouth hastily scribbling yet more vituperative remarks – funny that the original poster has yet to comment but you’ve taken up the baton for him, for the last two weeks…

            Actually, I’m not surprised that some as educated as you should have got it wrong, but she’s a lady, so you’re no gentlemen.

            And she clearly recognised that both you and your responses were beneath her contempt:

            Your first response to the original poster was:

            Bertie -> Damaris Tighe • 14 days ago

            Wow, what a selfish inconsiderate twat you are…..

            …….you are bereft of manners.

            Which I picked you up on because you were incredibly rude and unvelievablt wrong.

            And your response:

            Bertie -> Mr B J Mann • 13 days ago

            …..You’re being a selfish twat.

            …lacking in etiquette. You clearly dont know how to behave.

            And as she no doubt correctly foresaw, your later responses went downhill from there, showing increasing evidence of escalating disturbance!

          • Bertie

            I will leave you with a starter for ten…..

            Vis my prior,

            “Am surprised that you cant understand this – you clearly
            aren’t of a certain circle. (ie You’re probably Working class to spell it out for you)”

            **Is that supposed to make sense?**

            It does unless you’re intellectually below par which clearly you are.

            **Does the magic circle use “disabled” loos when able bodied?**

            This,from you,however is utterly meaningless.

            **Or the middle or upper classes?
            Royalty perhaps?**

            I believe you’ll find they are loathe to use “PUBLIC TOILETS” per se, unless they happen to be in 5star hotels ,or posh restaurants where people such as yourself don’t frequent.

            Have an enjoyable weekend. I wish your mother well as i know what it’s like to have an elderly frail parent – one who actually has a serious disability.

            Toodle pip

          • Mr B J Mann

            >> >> >> “Am surprised that you cant understand this – you clearly
            aren’t of a certain circle. (ie You’re probably Working class to spell it out for you)”

            >> >> **Is that supposed to make sense?**

            >> It does unless you’re intellectually below par which clearly you are.
            Starting with the ad hominem as usual!

            >> >> **Does the magic circle use “disabled” loos when able bodied?**

            >> This,from you,however is utterly meaningless.

            Feeling below par? They’re a circle. Of mystery. I was trying to establish which mystery circle you were alluding to.
            You shouldn’t need to be a rocket scientist or a brain surgeon to figure it out.
            But you prefer to signal the fact you couldn’t.
            No surprises there, then, considering you’ve spent a week or so proving you can’t even follow your own links.
            Not even when someone helpfully follows them for you and cut’s and pastes the relevant bits for you!

            >> >> **Or the middle or upper classes?
            Royalty perhaps?**

            >> I believe you’ll find they are loathe to use “PUBLIC TOILETS” per se, unless they happen to be in 5star hotels ,or posh restaurants where people such as yourself don’t frequent.

            So are you confirming that was the circle you were referring to?!

            >> Have an enjoyable weekend. I wish your mother well as i know what it’s like to have an elderly frail parent – one who actually has a serious disability.

            Still not explaining who or what complies with your own personal definition of disability.

            But seemingly getting more confused by the day.

            I haven’t even said what’s wrong with mine, apart from eventually getting a blue badge.

            And the only disability I recall you mentioning is incontinence.

            Which you swear blind isn’t one!

            >> Toodle pip

            To you too.

          • Bertie

            Are you an idiot?

            I said
            “Am surprised that you cant understand this – you clearly
            aren’t of a certain circle. (ie You’re probably Working class to spell it out for you)””

            A certain circle relates to the people you mix with, the “Social Class” you hail from. I even gave you the answer immediately after with my “ie You’re probably Working Class”

            “It does unless you’re intellectually below par which clearly you are.”

            **Starting with the ad hominem as usual!

            Given that this was the second paragraph I scribbled it clearly isn’t a case of STARTING WITH as you so erroneously and stupidly claim.

            You however, proceeded to write utter gibberish in a vain effort to establish what “certain circle” was despite my telling you, in black and white

            **Feeling below par? They’re a circle. Of mystery. I was trying to establish which mystery circle you were alluding to.You shouldn’t need to be a rocket scientist or a brain surgeon to figure it out.

            Well you clearly failed to work it out given I gave you the answer with the working class reference!!!

            **But you prefer to signal the fact you couldn’t.
            No surprises there, then, considering you’ve spent a week or so proving you can’t even follow your own links.
            Not even when someone helpfully follows them for you and cut’s and pastes the relevant bits for you!

            Your comment doesn’t even make sense.

            “I believe you’ll find they are loathe to use “PUBLIC
            TOILETS” per se, unless they happen to be in 5star hotels ,or posh restaurants where people such as yourself don’t frequent.”

            **So are you confirming that was the circle you were referring to?!

            Gold star, you finally worked it out despite my giving you the answer in the sentence immediately following the certain circle comment!

            What is also incredible is that my initial comment,about one using disabled toilets, if one has any common sense whatsoever, obviously relates to those able bodied people who are using them….

            “I never said you were disabled.”

            ***Errrmmmmmm, yes, you did

            “Eh no I did not. I asked you several times if you were, and given your evasiveness therefore assumed you were. Why else would you not say whether you were or not!

            **And then abuse me for it!**

            No, I didn’t abuse you at all – just disagreeing with you and your foul mouthed tirades doesn’t mean I am abusing you.

            yet again you show how simple minded you are , your school boy debating techniques are laughable, as are you constant puerile vituperations…

            **You really need help mate, and I’m going to have one more try.

            1) I never said that I used Disabled Toilets.**

            I never said you did – I merely said anyone able bodied who uses the Disabled toilets is a selifish twat.

            And the initial comment by the first poster gave every indication that he wasn’t bothered if he inconvenienced a disabled person by his using such facilities when he wasnt clearly able bodied….

            **2) I never said that I was incontinent.

            I never claimed you were – I asked you several times, you were evasive,which in itself raises suspicions, so I assumed you might be given your foaming at the mouth over interest in the whole subject.

            **3) The website you linked on is not a legal or government one,

            It’s still a decent site for the front page precis of the main things that suitably define “disability”

            By the way, my disabled parent thought you were an utter tit thinking “incontinence” and “lacking motivation to get out of bed in the morning” were disabilities.

            The former was an inconvenience,the latter just plain laziness.

            And by the way – he does have an actual disability.And it isn’t something as ridiculous as incontinence or motivational issues.

          • Mr B J Mann

            TR0LL

          • Bertie

            “PS And how many paragraphs did you waste avoiding addressing which mystery “certain circle” I “clearly *aren’t* of”?!?!”

            Eh??? Are you an idiot.

            I addressed exactly which “certain circle” you are of in my very first initial remark that you were so glaringly unable to get your tiny brain around.- cant you bloody read.

            **PPS You seem to have mixed up half the answer to this post with half the answer to another.”

            I didn’t actually. I answered your original post, then decided to append two responses to your other pointless messages in an effort to clear my inbox of your childish puerile debating drivel

            And you accuse me of being a troll.

            At least I’m not retarded as you clearly are

            **Never mind answer the second half of the other post.
            Then again, you haven’t actually answered the first part either.

            Or this one.

            Par for the course!***

            None of that is, in any sense of the word, sequential. Nor is it referenced at all clearly.

            What is
            “Or this one” referring to for example!

            Anyway we’re done – you an utter imbecile and I’ve better things to do.

            You’re also a selfish twat who would have non compunction using the disabled toilets, having no consideration for the inconvenience you might be putting others through.

            (And yes, that’s means Im still referring to you as a selfish twat for the avoidance of doubt)

          • Mr B J Mann

            Thank you for confirming my worst fears about you.
            Bye.

          • Bertie

            “Why have I wasted so much of my life trying to “reason” with someone who
            can’t even tell the difference between “are” and “aren’t” when they
            have written it”

            It was your comment I linked you muppet.

            ***PS And how many paragraphs did you waste avoiding addressing which mystery “certain circle” I “clearly *aren’t* of”?!?!”
            ***

            You were the one who wrote the above, incorrectly transposing my original comment in which I used it properly.

            Are you trying to engage in pedantry in an effort to score some belated points.

            Christ you’re an utter obnoxious retard.

            No wonder you’d have no hesitation using the disabled toilets, selfish ignorant bastard that you clearly are. The sense of self entitlement that oozes out of your lower class pores beggars belief.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Your original comment was:

            >>Bertie -> Mr B J Mann • 6 days ago
            >>”It is certainly widely held, particularly by those who have been brought up to be considerate of others, that using the disabled toilet is not on if one is able bodied. Am surprised that you cant understand this – you clearly aren’t of a certain circle.”

            In case you’re STILL struggling, that’s ~O^O…:::::

            ” *A_R_E_N_’_T* of a certain circle.” ! ! !

            So, AGAIN, ou going to address ~0-0…:::::::
            “which mystery “certain circle” I “clearly *aren’t* of”?!?!”
            NOT which I AM of, which I *AREN’T* of!
            By the way, does Mummy know you’re fcuk!ng with the servants?!?!

          • Bertie

            Christ almighty how bloody stupid are you…

            I said
            “”It is certainly widely held, particularly by those who have been brought up to be considerate of others, that using the disabled toilet is not on if one is able bodied. Am surprised that you cant understand this – you clearly aren’t of a certain circle.””

            To which YOUR response was, in between the gibberish

            “”which mystery “certain circle” I “clearly *aren’t* of”?!?!””

            Ergo I directly “QUOTED YOU” when you said

            “””which mystery “certain circle” I “clearly *aren’t* of”?!?!”””

            You are even more stupid than I thought.

            Yes you nitwit,

            “NOT which I AM of, which I *AREN’T* of!”

            that SHOULD HAVE BEEN YOUR RESPONSE to my original comment

            You should have said

            “which mystery “certain circle” I “clearly AM NOT OF”

            instead of the rubbish you actually came out with.

            **”By the way, does Mummy know you’re fcuk!ng with the servants?!?!

            How is that even relevant pez?

            You might want to put the soap back in your mouth too boot you uneducated ignorant prole.

            p.s It would be mummykins if you actually had a clue. Which clearly you don’t because your parents were too poor to get you a proper education.

            p.p.s What’s with all this juvenile textspeak??

            ~O^O…:::::

            Are you 12? Obviously not if your mother was in a concentration camp(as you claimed)

            Which means you;re clearly a retard if you engage in child textspeak.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Bertie -> Mr B J Mann • an hour ago
            >>Christ almighty how bloody stupid are you…
            >>I said
            >>””It is certainly widely held, particularly by those who have been brought up to be considerate of others, that using the disabled toilet is not on if one is able bodied. Am surprised that you cant understand this – you clearly aren’t of a certain circle.””

            A_G_A_I_N :

            If it’s so clear:

            WHICH CERTAIN CIRCLE AREN’T I OF?!?!?!?!

            And as for the rest of your gibberish on the point:

            I wasn’t making a spontaneous enquiry in my own words:

            I was querying your statement by quoting it back to you!

          • Bertie

            Again – how stupid are you.

            **
            If it’s so clear:
            WHICH CERTAIN CIRCLE AREN’T I OF?!?!?!?!”
            **

            I answered that immediately after I scribbled my initial remark making the claim below

            “Am surprised that you cant understand this – you clearly aren’t of a certain circle.”

            Read my initial post and then you’ll realise that I called you a prole – which clearly you are!

            **
            I wasn’t making a spontaneous enquiry in my own words:
            I was querying your statement by quoting it back to you!

            I know you muppet. I was wondering why you were because I gave you the answer in the VERY NEXT SENTENCE!!!

            How unintelligent are you.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Are you recovering from a stroke?

            You assert that I am a member of the prole circle.

            But YOU STILL haven’t said which circle you were alluding to me clearly

            NOT being of.

            Is English not your first language?!?!?!

          • Bertie

            **Are you recovering from a stroke?
            **

            no just suffering from intense boredom corresponding with you,a lower life form

            **But YOU STILL haven’t said which circle you were alluding to me clearly
            **

            Really?

            It’s in black and white.

            I said

            “Am surprised that you cant understand this – you clearly
            aren’t of a certain circle.
            (ie You’re probably Working class to spell it out for you)””

            Ie YOU ARE WORKING CLASS

            Aka A prole.

            I’ve told you several times but you’re too retarded to realise.

            I think you’ll find that the only person for whom English is not their first language would be yourself given your limited vocabulary, your poor grammar,and your inability to argue your way out of a paper bag!!!!

            Quite surprising frailties for a Jew.

          • Mr B J Mann

            How wery waycist of you!

            But you STILL haven’t clarified which circle you thought I WASN’T in!

            To spell it out:

            There are very many circles.

            Naming the one you think I’m IN:

            DOESN’T explain which one you thought I clearly WASN’T in!

          • Bertie

            “But you STILL haven’t clarified which circle you thought I WASN’T in!”

            Use your brain. I was very precise.

            I said –
            (ie You’re probably Working class to spell it out for you)”

            That means, by default, I dont think you are Middle Class, Upper Class, Upper Middle Class – It means exactly what I meant it to say. You are a foul mouthed prole that struggles to even scribble comprehensible sentences. the evidence is visible from your correspondence.

            Not very smart are you…

            “DOESN’T explain which one you thought I clearly WASN’T in!”

            See my answer above you imbecile.It’s self explanatory and you are seemingly incapable of understanding plain English. Perhaps i should use smaller words for you.

            eg You are a thick pez

          • Mr B J Mann

            You clearly are the most pig-ignorant tr0ll on the planet!

            Circle is clearly SINGULAR.

            You CLEARLY said:

            >> “Am surprised that you cant understand this – you clearly aren’t of a certain circle.”

            “A certain Circle” is EVEN MORE clearly singular.

            So which is it?

            Not “give me a list of ALL the other circles you COULD have been referring to”!

            Which ONE *SINGLE* CIRCLE *WERE* you referring to when you said:

            >> “you clearly aren’t of a certain circle.”

            Am surprised that *YOU* cant understand this!

            Then again, you’re the one that calls ladies “TW-T” (with an “A”) and yet has the cheek to call me rude?!?!?

            Mummykins must be spinning!

            Don’t bother wasting any more of my time.

          • Bertie

            Wow, quick response. You clearly are poor and unemployed sitting at your keyboard waiting for a response over the last 5 days!

            “You clearly are the most pig-ignorant tr0ll on the planet!
            Circle is clearly SINGULAR.”

            I know Circle is singular you ignoramus. Hence my response
            ,for the avoidance of doubt, that I had you down as “Working Class”

            That is ” A Circle”, just a a particular social circle is a circle.

            You clearly said:
            >> “Am surprised that you cant understand this – you clearly aren’t of a certain circle. “A certain Circle” is even more clearly singular.

            “So which is it?
            Not “give me a list of all the other circles you could have been referring to”!”

            Why is this so hard for you to comprehend.

            For the fourth time.

            You are WORKING CLASS – You are a prole. That is “Your social circle” which I have written several times but you seem to thick to take it in.

            “Which ONE *SINGLE* CIRCLE were you referring to when you said:
            >> “you clearly aren’t of a certain circle.”

            Those with manners. ie The Educated who are able to express themselves without using F expletives all the time nor selfishly deprive the disabled from use of the disabled toilets because they cant be bothered to wait!

            “Am surprised that *YOU* cant understand this!”

            I regret to say you’re the idiot that cant understand. I’ve been pretty clear which circle you frequent.(and by specifying so made it very clear which social circles you were not a member of – Upper Class would be one social circle for eg, Upper Middle Class another)

          • Mr B J Mann

            So you still can’t even understand what you, yourself, “wrote”?!

            This is beyond boring.

            Go back to “writing” parking tickets, plastic plod.

          • Bertie

            Au contraire, I know exactly what I wrote and to what I was referring to with my appended remark
            .

            the fact you’re unable to comprehend doesn’t surprise given you’re clearly a thicko.Probably Greek as well which explains everything.

            How come you are not working? You must be at home, caring for your mother, taking an attendance allowance but spending all your time baiting people on the internet with whom you disagree with.

            “Go back to “writing” parking tickets, plastic plod.”

            Any English person with a brain wouldn’t even say that. It’s, however, the kind of thing a Greek person would say…given their poor grasp of the English language and constant swearing.

          • Mr B J Mann

            ~O^O…..:::::::: `O.::: o’o

          • Bertie

            “~O^O…..:::::::: `O.::: o’o”

            Do let me know when you’re able to engage in mature dialogue and not over use of emoticons, the latter being the behaviour of children and the uneducated!

          • Mr B J Mann

            I’ve tried to draw pictures for you as you seem to struggle with even your own written words.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Ahhh, sorry, I must be thick, I thought you were saying I WAS a prole, and NOT clarifying what you thought I *WASN’T*.
            Are you saying you’ve repeatedly been telling me that I clearly WASN’T of the circle of proles?
            Or is one of us STILL totally confused.
            I think you need to get mummykins (was it) or your disabled friend (can’t the Teddy Bear Hospital fix him?!) to read through this thread for you!

          • Bertie


            I think you’ll find that prole and working class are the same.And I was calling you that.

            And no I have repeatedly said that YOU ARE part of the prole-esque circle. ie You are working class

            “Or is one of us STILL totally confused.”

            No one of us is clearly an idiot – clue, it isn’t me!!!

            “I think you need to get mummykins (was it) or your disabled friend (can’t the Teddy Bear Hospital fix him?!) to read through this thread for you!”

            Tad difficult given she is dead!

            What’s your next bright idea – other than slitting your wrist that is? Perhaps you should use gas – that’d be fitting….

            Goodbye PEZ (that’s short hand for peasant,prole,working class pansy or whatever floats your boat!)

          • Mr B J Mann

            What a gas!

            Back under your bridge, Tr0ll.

            Or into your padded c3ll.

            Your dear old mummykins must be spinning in her grave!

            Bye!

          • Bertie

            “What a gas!”

            Sorry, I don;t understand prole..What exactly does that mean?

            “Back under your bridge, Tr0ll.”

            Given you were the one trolling and you’re the one with a bee in your bonnet that have continued this heated dialogue now for several weeks – constantly misrepresenting what I have said , only one troll around here. And that’s you.

            A poor one as well I suspect.

            “Your dear old mummykins must be spinning in her grave!”

            Wow, what a nice comment…..

            Really shows what a lower class selfish obnoxious peasant you are.

          • Mr B J Mann

            8<—————

          • Bertie

            “8<—————"

            What does that even mean?

            how childish are you.No educated adult corresponds in such a manner.

          • Mr B J Mann

            As for the rest of your “contribution”:

            >>”How is that even relevant pez?”

            Did you mean to write “please”?

            >>”You might want to put the soap back in your mouth too boot you uneducated ignorant prole.”

            Was that meant to be “…mouth, too boot, you…”.

            And what does “too boot” mean?

            Is it another expression for “prole” and other people who don’t wear shoes to work?

            >>”p.s It would be mummykins if you actually had a clue. Which clearly you don’t because your parents were too poor to get you a proper education.”

            Hey, you call her whatever you want (when is she going to wean you?)!

            >>”p.p.s What’s with all this juvenile textspeak??”

            I don’t think you’ll find: ~O^O…::::: anywhere in textspeak.

            Just trying to make things clearer for you as you struggle with text.

            >>”Are you 12? Obviously not if your mother was in a concentration camp(as you claimed)”

            Nope, just coming down to your level, I’m kind like that!

            >>”Which means you;re clearly a retard……….”

          • Bertie

            Oh bore off.

            How is that even relevant pez?”

            **Did you mean to write “please”?

            No it is shorthand for peasant.

            You might want to put the soap back in your mouth too boot you uneducated ignorant prole.”

            **Was that meant to be “…mouth, too boot, you…”.

            You were the one brandishing F expletives prole.

            **And what does “too boot” mean?

            Use your brain – what do you thin it means?

            **Is it another expression for “prole” and other people who don’t wear shoes to work?

            Eh no , ignoramus.

            Use google it will explain it for you in simple terms.

            “p.s It would be mummykins if you actually had a clue. Which clearly you don’t because your parents were too poor to get you a proper education.”

            ** Hey, you call her whatever you want (when is she going to wean you?)!
            **

            She’s dead arsehole.

            “p.p.s What’s with all this juvenile textspeak??”

            **
            I don’t think you’ll find: ~O^O…::::: anywhere in textspeak.
            Just trying to make things clearer for you as you struggle with text.
            **

            It’s not even legible English – yawn you’re tedious.

            “Are you 12? Obviously not if your mother was in a concentration camp(as you claimed)”

            **
            Nope, just coming down to your level, I’m kind like that!
            **

            Nice try but best stop misrepresenting in an effort to portray yourself as having any moral high ground – which you don’t.

            Anyway I’m done.

            Go bother someone else with your juvenile poor excuse for a life.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Too boot?

            Nope, neither in Google or Bing.

            Did you mean to type “to boot”.

            As for “You were the one brandishing F expletives prole.”

            Says the guy who’s brandished “TW-T” (with an A, not an I) dozens of times.

            Including at a lady.

            You do realise you were calling her a lady’s private parts, don’t you?!

            Not even the Beeb allows that!!!!!!

            And as for you being done:

            You’re clearly not even half baked!

          • Bertie

            Which lady did I brandish that remark at?

            It’s not clear that the poster to whom i initially responded was a lady.

            You clearly aren’t a lady with your continuous vulgar prose,and yes, constantly using the F expletive is far worse that called you a twat or a twit.

            Nor was I directing my comments at your ELDERLY SICK MOTHER – the only lady who has been identified to date.

            The clues being in capitals – she is elderly and sick, so no one would bat an eye if she used the disabled toilets.(As i have repeatedly said)

            So which “Lady” have I called a selfish twat then?

            “And as for you being done:
            You’re clearly not even half baked!”

            Ooh a witty retort.How long did it take you come up with that – or did you phone a friend?

          • Mr B J Mann

            The clue is in the name:
            “Damaris”.
            SHE was a Biblical figure.
            And this prole didn’t even need to phone a friend, tr0ll!

          • Bertie

            “The clue is in the name:
            “Damaris”.
            *SHE* was a Biblical figure.”

            Avatar name means nothing. What do you think my refers to then?

            Nor have I read the Acts of the Apostles in any depth so not come across this Greek women –

            So hardly relevant unless “You” are religious or Greek. You must be Greek – hence your constant expletives and inability to understand plain English.

            “And this prole didn’t even need to phone a friend, tr0ll!”

            I think you’ll find it’s the proles that are the most religious as they’ve nothing else in their lives!

            Hope that helps.

          • Mr B J Mann

            8<——–o'o——-

          • Bertie

            “8<——–o'o——-"

            Ample evidence that you're either an idiot, of a child.

            Keep taking your tablets.

            Surprised they've let you out of the loony bin myself.

          • Mr B J Mann

            PPPS Are your parents not just married, but related.

            As were theirs?!

            As they seem to have the same disabilities as you.

            It’s not *MY* thinking.

            But a quote from the legal governmental guidelines I’ve repeatedly wasted my time trying to quote for your benefit.

            As you are too “challenged” to follow your own links!

          • Bertie

            It’s clear you’re too challenged to in any way comprehend that lacking motivation to get out of bed in the morning is in no way a bloody disability in any sense of the word.

            Use your common sense – oh you haven’t got any because you’ve allowed a selfish sense of entitlement to take precedence.

            **PPPS Are your parents not just married, but related.
            As were theirs?!

            Come up with that on your own did you? Or did you require assistance from whoever is using the family brain cell?

            Oh and by the way –

            PPPS above is not followed by another PPPS!!!!

            **PPPS
            >> “No, I didn’t abuse you at all – just disagreeing with
            you and your foul mouthed tirades doesn’t mean I am abusing you.”
            >>
            “Yet again you show how simple minded you are , your school boy
            debating techniques are laughable, as are you constant puerile
            vituperations…”
            >> “….selifish tw-t.”

            **Sorry, but quoting
            the vulgarities you repeatedly attack myself and the lady you started
            on with (Tourette’s too?!) back at you doesn’t count as “foul mouthed
            tirades”.

            Vulgarities? Rich coming from you. And calling you selfish is not abusing you – how pathetic are you? Nor is disagreeing with you.Nor did I attack your elderly sick mother you lying disingenuous individual.

            You do realise that someone with tourettes wouldn’t be referring to you as a twit or twat right?

            Anyway, glad to see you haven’t had that brain haemorrhage yet. Suggest you calm down as your typing
            reveals your incandescent rage and inability to comprehend what a selfish inconsiderate lower class oik you are..

            Adios – we are done.

          • Mr B J Mann

            It’s clear you’re too challenged to in any way comprehend a simple legal document however many times it’s pasted up for you.

            Never mind anything else I’ve kindly explained to you.

            By the way, do you know what that tw-t word actually means, or did mummy never tell you why even a selfish inconsiderate lower class oik wouldn’t address it to a lady as you did?!
            Good riddance but not adios to you too.

          • Bertie

            I can read thank you very much, unlike yourself.

            The appendage, in which it says incontinence and , guffaw, lacking self motivation to get out of bed in the morning, are quasi disabilities merely reflects the infection of common sense by this modern day limp wristed political correctness that has permeated society.

            Even a disabled friend I know thinks you’re an utter pansy if you think incontinence is anything more than an inconvenience – the inability to get out of bed due to motivational issues nothing more than utter laziness.

            Yes yes, I know traditional values..but then the country was great when it didnt have to cater for pathetic selfish pansies such as yourself.

            **By the way, do you know what that tw-t word actually means, or did mummy
            never tell you why even a selfish inconsiderate lower class oik
            wouldn’t address it to a lady as you did?!**

            Hmmm you’re being presumptuous now aren’t you.

            I was calling you a TWIT you ignoramus. No wonder your working class heritage automatically deferred to TWAT.

            Suggest you head back to school as your puerile debating techniques leave alot to be desired – as does your backbone. You’re clearly spineless – wouldn’t surprise me if you’re a hypocritical grasping socialist either.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Well, you’re the one who can’t even read simple words like “AREN’T” in your OWN posts, never mind the web pages you link to.

            And I didn’t say I thought anything about the law:

            I merely related it to you, as you seem to struggle following your own links!

            As for “the infection of common sense by this modern day limp wristed political correctness that has permeated society….. an utter pansy if you think incontinence is anything more than an inconvenience…… I know traditional values..but then the country was great when it didnt have to cater for pathetic selfish pansies……”

            It’s you who thinks that someone with a broken leg, whose just rolled up in a wheelchair and decided he might pop into the loo should get priority over someone who not only can’t sit and wait their turn in comfort, but who are about to explode in a long queue, and who would rather not inconvenience those around them thereby (never mind the servants who would have to clean up after him).

            Do you actually have the capacity for rational thought.

            Silly question as you struggle to even read even your own posts!

            Including, but not limited to:

            Bertie -> Mr B J Mann • 16 days ago
            “You’re being a selfish twat.”

            And:

            Bertie -> *Mrs/Miss* Damaris Tighe • 17 days ago
            “Wow, what a selfish inconsiderate twat you are.”

            No “TWIT” there, apart from you, then, is there!

            Now, go and tell Mummy what you’ve been yelling at a lady!

          • Bertie

            I think you’ll find my usage was correct ignoramus.

            Yours however was incorrect where you didn’t substitute aren’t for I am when responding to my remark..

            But don’t let that worry you prole.

            Suggest you re read your scribblings – then you”ll realise what a T**T (that’s twit btw in case you want to go reaching imbecile) you’re being…

            Suggest you take a chill pill

            “It’s you who thinks that someone with a broken leg, whose just rolled up in a wheelchair and decided he might pop into the loo should get priority over someone who not only can’t sit and wait their turn in comfort, but who are about to explode in a long queue, and who would rather not inconvenience those around them thereby (never mind the servants who would have to clean up after him).”

            Well clearly just having a broken leg doesn’t make one disabled.But having a broken leg is far more of an inconvenience than incontinence because you can wear incontinence pads that deal with that you idiot

            Are you really that much of a dullard.

            “Do you actually have the capacity for rational thought.”

            Compared to you, yes.I also have common sense ! Something else you’re noticeably lacking.

            ***
            “Bertie -> Mr B J Mann • 16 days ago
            “You’re being a selfish twat.”

            And:

            Bertie -> *Mrs/Miss* Damaris Tighe • 17 days ago
            “Wow, what a selfish inconsiderate twat you are.”

            No “TWIT” there, apart from you, then, is there!
            **

            They’re not starred out now are they

            **”Now, go and tell Mummy what you’ve been yelling at a lady!”

            I’ve not been yelling at your mother.

            And if you think you’re a lady then you are very misguided. That explains your inability to discuss without recourse to ad hominem attacks,puerile misrepresentations, irrational emotionality

            That also explains why you’re such a pathetic pansy oozing self entitlement.

            Oh and lets get straight to the point – trying to play on peoples sentiments with the “my mother escaped a concentration camp” bullshit routine doesn’t hold much water either especially when you used it to completely blank the fact I went to a parents funeral arsehole –

          • Mr B J Mann

            >>”I think you’ll find my usage was correct ignoramus……”
            >>”Suggest you re read your scribblings – then you”ll realise what a T**T (that’s twit btw in case you want to go reaching imbecile) you’re being…”

            What?

            Your usage when you posted:

            Bertie -> *Mrs/Miss* Damaris Tighe • 17 days ago
            >>”Wow, what a selfish inconsiderate twat you are.”

            >>”I’ve not been yelling at your mother.”

            Do TRY to keep up!

            I never said that Miss, or Mrs, Tighe was my mother!

          • Bertie

            And all the other occasions I used it?

            Bore off. You’re obviously a loser on benefits with a bullshit story about a mother surviving a concentration camp.

            I’m pretty pro Israel but even you are testing my patience (assuming your concentration camp is actually true.Which i doubt)

          • Mr B J Mann

            No, you just tried to baffle me with the following BS:

            Bertie -> Mr B J Mann • 2 hours ago

            Bertie -> *Mrs/Miss* Damaris Tighe • 17 days ago
            “Wow, what a selfish inconsiderate twat you are.”

            **”Now, go and tell Mummy what you’ve been yelling at a lady!”
            I’ve not been yelling at your mother.
            And if you think you’re a lady then you are very misguided.

            Why did you bring up my mother when discussing Mrs or Miss Tighe?

            More to the point, what would your mother have thought of you yelling “TW-T* with an “A” at a lady?

          • Bertie

            Eh what bullshit.

            I called the original poster a selfish twat.

            Just because they’ve put Mrs/Miss in front of their avatar name means nothing.

            “Why did you bring up my mother when discussing Mrs or Miss Tighe?”

            We’ve been discussing YOU, not this Damaris Tighe from the moment you interjected. And it was you that mentioned your MOTHER!!!!!

          • Mr B J Mann

            No, we are discussing your p!g-!gnorant abuse of people such as (“Miss or Mrs” as you seem to be so ill-educated you aren’t aware that it is a lady’s name) Damaris Tighe.

            >> “I called the original poster a selfish tw-t.” (With an “a”).

            QED

            Back to your parking beat, plastic plod!

          • Bertie

            Sorry, if you re unable to scribble legibly then i will simply not bother responding pez.

            “No, we are discussing your p!g-!gnorant abuse of people such as (“Miss
            or Mrs” as you seem to be so ill-educated you aren’t aware that it is a
            lady’s name) Damaris Tighe.”

            I also think you’ll find one sole message calling someone a selfish twat for using the disabled toilets when they are not disabled does not constitute abuse.Because Damaris gave no impression they were disabled – just that they were too impatient to wait and couldn’t care if they inconvenienced a disabled person.

            However successive vituperative comments from yourself, to which I responded, does in fact constitute said abuse.

            It was you that interjected so aggressively and it is YOU that has been excessively abusive these last three weeks or so with your pointless harassment just because you disagreed with my opinion,

            If you’re getting carer’s allowance for your sick elderly mother then i suggest you go earn it rather than twittering away pointlessly over the internet.

            You’re a prole, and an ignorant once at that.

          • Mr B J Mann

            ¬O .’. >8

          • Mr B J Mann

            PPPS

            >> “No, I didn’t abuse you at all – just disagreeing with you and your foul mouthed tirades doesn’t mean I am abusing you.”
            >> “Yet again you show how simple minded you are , your school boy debating techniques are laughable, as are you constant puerile vituperations…”
            >> “….selifish tw-t.”

            Sorry, but quoting the vulgarities you repeatedly attack myself and the lady you started on with (Tourette’s too?!) back at you doesn’t count as “foul mouthed tirades”.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Oooops, apologies, I got one thing wrong.

            I forgot to address you misunderstanding of:

            Disabled *P_R_I_O_R_I_T_Y* seating on public transport.

            ie ANYONE can use the seats, but if a disabled person appears they have *P_R_I_O_R_I_T_Y*

            Though I understand all these long words and less than black and white definitions can be confusing to some people.

          • Bertie

            ??

            I’m fully aware of what “Disabled priority” means.

            Unlike you, clearly, I’m not a selfish bastard so wouldn’t dream of sitting in them,even if it was the only seat available. As I said.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Clearly you don’t understand what “Disabled priority” means, or at least how it works as you clearly posted:

            ==============================

            >>How about the “Disabled” seats on a bus or tube with no disabled passengers, and no other free seats, would you not use them either, because they are “Disabled” (seat removed?!?!?!)?!?!”

            No, I would stand so that should a disabled person be waiting at the next stop they wouldn’t be inconvenienced.

            ==============================

            You are also clearly a rude, uneducated, ignorant, obnoxious, b’stard as you call anyone who uses them properly that isn’t disabled:

            “a selfish bastard”

          • Bertie

            You’re jumping to conclusions there.

            I know exactly what disabled priority means – on buses / tube it means they get priority but use is allowed by everyone lse if they are not around.

            When you asked whether I would use such a seat on a bus or tube I expressed a preference to not use them in case someone disabled turned up and I therefore inconvenienced them by already occupying the seat.

            That doesn’t mean I don’t understand what disabled priority means – just that I don’t feel its morally right to occupy such seats on the off chance someone who needs it turns up.

            Now stop misrepresenting and claiming I someone which is utterly untrue just because you disagree with my principled and unselfish position on the subject.

            “You are also clearly a rude, uneducated, ignorant, obnoxious, b’stard as
            you call anyone who uses them properly that isn’t disabled:”

            For someone who clearly isnt even concerned at non disabled people using such facilities, you seem to be getting very hot under the collar just because someone disagrees with you.

            We seem to have morphed from disabled toilets(where you would be unable to see if a disabled person was waiting to use the facilities you were occupying) to disabled prioriity seats on buses & trains where visibility isnt an issue.

            Clearly you’re an inconsiderate individual, one who disingenuously engages in misrepresentation in an effort to smear anyone who actually has some manners and sense of etiquette – because it’s clear you dont.

          • Mr B J Mann

            >>”You’re jumping to conclusions there.”

            No, I’m not.

            >>”I know exactly what disabled priority means – on buses / tube it means they get priority but use is allowed by everyone lse if they are not around.”
            >>”When you asked whether I would use such a seat on a bus or tube I expressed a preference to not use them in case someone disabled turned up and I therefore inconvenienced them by already occupying the seat.”
            “That doesn’t mean I don’t understand what disabled priority means – just that I don’t feel its morally right to occupy such seats on the off chance someone who needs it turns up.”

            Yes, it does.

            Or, even worse, it means you do know what it means, but that you think that if someone uses them as they are supposed to be used you can attack them with insults along the lines of them being:

            “Immoral”, “Disabled inconveniencing”, “Unprincipled”, “Selfish”, “Unconcerned”, “inconsiderate”, “unmannered” and lacking a “sense of etiquette”.

            And: “selfish inconsiderate tw-t”, “bereft of manners”.

            And: “being a selfish twat”, “Ergo lacking in etiquette. You clearly dont know how to behave.”

            And: “person who doesn’t give a damn that he might be inconveniencing a disabled person by using their toilet facilities because he cant wait his turn as the rest of us do! ie selfish tw-t.”

            And: “inconsiderate tw-ts such as yourself who don’t give a damn about people less fortunate”

            And “selfish twat – …Etiquette, something you’re clearly lacking as you don’t know how to behave.”

            And “Unlike you, clearly, I’m not a selfish bastard”

            And “you are indeed “a rude, uneducated, ignorant, obnoxious, b’stard”

            Oh, and “an even bigger ignoramus”

            Hope those quotes aren’t “misrepresenting and claiming I someone which is utterly untrue just because you disagree with my principled and unselfish position on the subject.”

            As for me being “someone who clearly isnt even concerned at non disabled people using such facilities, you seem to be getting very hot under the collar just because someone disagrees with you.” why are YOU getting so hot under the collar?

            Who promoted YOU to Disabled (accessible) loo and Disabled (priority) seat Warden?

            Wazzup? fail to pass the entrance exam for Parking Plod?!?!?

            >>”We seem to have morphed from disabled toilets(where you would be unable to see if a disabled person was waiting to use the facilities you were occupying) to disabled prioriity seats on buses & trains where visibility isnt an issue.”

            But, similarly, a disabled person outside a disabled (accessible) loo wouldn’t be able to see if the loo was occupied by a disabled person or not either, so what difference does it make to them, never mind you?

            In fact, if someone walked out of the loo, neither you, nor they, would be able to tell if they were disabled or not, never mind whether their disabled need was more urgent or not.

            Are you one of the people who h-rassed and bull!ied this person:

            Woman with bowel disease writes open letter to tormentors …
            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2968210/Woman-bowel-disease-writes-open-letter-tormentors-tutted-used-disabled-toilet.html

            Clearly YOU “are an inconsiderate individual, one who disingenuously engages in misrepresentation in an effort to smear anyone who actually has some manners and sense of etiquette – because it’s clear you don’t”.

            Oh, and did you manage to find any proof disabled toilets were reserved for “disabled” people, never mind what the definition of “disabled” was with respect to them.

            Last time I checked you were still struggling to follow the link YOU provided!

          • Bertie

            Cant be arsed to read all the drivel.

            Suggest you go back to school and learn how to paragraph and punctuate correctly amongst other things.

            Do let me know how you are able to ascertain whether you are inconveniencing a disabled person requiring use of the disabled toilets when you’re unable to see them arriving, or whether they’ve been there long..

            The whole idea of disabled priority(in terms of tube/train seats) is that one, a disabled person hoving into view is clearly visible, so you’re able to get up and not inconvenience them.Clearly not true with regard to disabled toilets.

            “But, similarly, a disabled person outside a disabled (accessible) loo
            wouldn’t be able to see if the loo was occupied by a disabled person or
            not either, so what difference does it make to them, never mind you?”

            How’s that relevant. Strawman.

            “Are you one of the people who h-rassed and bull!ied this person:Woman with bowel disease writes open letter to tormentors ”

            How is that , in any way, relevant to my being of the opinion that using the disables toilets when you arent eligible is selfish. I’m far too busy to waste time trawling disabled people to tut at. You however seem to have alot of time on your hands!!!

            P.s I’m semi retired so trade from home.What’s your excuse for being online trolling all day???

          • Mr B J Mann

            So you’re still a, to use your favourite word, tw-t.
            Should have know you can lead a donkey to water but you can’t make him think.
            If you ever grow up try reading the post and you might learn something.

          • Bertie

            “So you’re still a, to use your favourite word, tw-t.

            Nothing compared to the diatribe you’ve thrown at me.

            And you clearly have based all this trolling on some spurious belief that I would be shouting at your mother, who in ill health, is clearly not going to worry anyone using the disabled toilets..

            “Should have know you can lead a donkey to water but you can’t make him think.” (p.s In your idiom It’s a horse btw)

            Indeed – your whole diatribe has been ill founded on waht you think my view might be of your mother using the disabled toilets…

            “If you ever grow up try reading the post and you might learn something.”

            Suggest you look at yourself in the mirror frankly as it’s clear who the “child” is here.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Oh dear, oh dear, oh diatribe!

            >> >> “So you’re still a, to use your favourite word, tw-t.

            >>Nothing compared to the diatribe you’ve thrown at me.

            I suggest you review your own posts, especially your first two cyber-abus3 “contributions”

            >>And you clearly have based all this trolling on some spurious belief that I would be shouting at your mother, who in ill health, is clearly not going to worry anyone using the disabled toilets..

            But a) How would you know she was in ill health.

            b) I specifically said before she had a blue badge.

            c) You’ve been hurling abuse at anyone you though wasn’t disabled who you decreed were not entitled to used “disabled” toilets.

            d) You’ve specifically singled out people who you decreed as not being disabled using them due to incontinence which you have specifically decreed as not being a disability (despite an official legal document linked to for the purposes of identifying disabilities from a website *YOU* linked to specifically saying incontinence WAS a disability in law) for abuse.

            So I was polite to say:

            >> >> “Should have know you can lead a donkey to water but you can’t make him think.”

            >>(p.s In your idiom It’s a horse btw)

            Don’t call me an idiom, I was specifically alluding to you as a donkey.

            But I was being too polite.

            >>Indeed – your whole diatribe has been ill founded on waht you think my view might be of your mother using the disabled toilets…

            No, just about every post of yours has confirmed what you would say in the circumstances.

            Or do you not read your contributions before hitting “Post”?!

            >> >> “If you ever grow up try reading the post and you might learn something.”

            >> Suggest you look at yourself in the mirror frankly as it’s clear who the “child” is here.

            Again, I suggest you review your on “contributions” to the “discussion”!

          • Mr B J Mann

            Ooops, apologies again.

            Regarding your visual impairment, you still haven’t told me where I said
            I was incontinent, or that I used disabled toilets.

            And you’ve also left me wondering why you missed my request for you to do so.

            You should have gone to ~0^0…:::::::Savers

            (Other Brands are available!)

          • Bertie

            I’ve actually been busy – unlike you clearly.

            Any chance you can learn to write or punctuate?

          • Mr B J Mann

            S_P_E_C

            Happy now?!?!

            Been busy sticking white stuff up you nose, eh?

          • Bertie

            ?
            Eh.

            Childish as well I see.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Seeing seems to be something you struggle with::::…0-0¬

          • Mr B J Mann

            Gawd, I’ve boo-bood again!

            Re your reference to incontinence pads:

            Do you know where the facilities for disposing them are found?

            IN THE *DISABLED* LOO!

            I can see now what your disability is:

            You have shot yourself in the foot so many times you have no feet left!

          • Bertie

            We get “our incontinence pads” collected, and when out, wait until we get home before disposing of them.

            You clearly aren’t purchasing the correct sort.

            Suggest you use the link I gave you previously.

          • Mr B J Mann

            You clearly aren’t reading my posts.

            Suggest you use the optician I gave you previously.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Are yours for your g0b?!?!?

          • Bertie

            ?

            Again childish non sequitorial remarks aren’t going to get you anywhere apart from evidencing the fact that you are indeed

            “a rude, uneducated, ignorant, obnoxious, b’stard” Labels you amusingly label other people as …

            Guffaw.

            I’ve met 5 year olds wiith more intellect and morals than you.

          • Mr B J Mann

            So mum’s already taken you on a visit to proper school then!

            I’m still looking for evidence you’ve managed to actually follow your own link, never mind that you’ve managed to rebut any of my (other, too serious for you) responses.

          • Bertie

            Eh?

            What’s the relevance of the first comment.

            “I’m still looking for evidence you’ve managed to actually follow your
            own link, never mind that you’ve managed to rebut any of my (other, too
            serious for you) responses.”

            I read the first page – it didn’t mention incontinence being a disability and because I don’t have incontinence I couldn’t be arsed to trawl the whole site, or the appendices because, as you are now aware, I had more pressing matters to deal with the last ten days or so and it simply wasnt important in the big scheme of things.

            Quite clearly you dislike my moral old fashioned considerate attitude to those less well off than oneself..no surprise as you’re clearly absent any manners or sense of personal discipline.

            Incontinence and not being able to get out of bed due to motivational issues disabilities…hilarious. anyone who has lived through WW2 will laugh in your face at such a claim.
            (And no, I didnt live through WW2 as I’m that old – I do however have a backbone and am not some pathetic squealing little shit with an overbearing sense of entitlement)

          • Mr B J Mann

            So you STILL haven’t read the part of YOUR linked to page where is points you to the full definition?!

            Sigh!

            And in my day ridiculing people’s disabilities, getting on your (im)moral high horse and failing to show old fashioned considerate attitude to those less well off than oneself, but instead abusing and insulting people who tried to point out the error of your ways was the height of bad manners.
            So no surprise as you’re clearly absent any manners or sense of personal discipline.

            As for “Incontinence and not being able to get out of bed due to motivational issues disabilities…hilarious. anyone who has lived through WW2 will laugh in your face at such a claim.”
            My mother was brought up in a concentration camp, is not in the best of health, and if she desperately needed the loo before she got her blue badge (no, not for incontinence) and popped in the “Disabled” (ACCESSIBLE – still waiting for evidence they’re not part of the general provision) loo, you’d be shrieking “tw-t” at her.
            Very nice!
            So where, and when, exactly, were you dragged up?!

          • Bertie

            “And in my day ridiculing people’s disabilities”

            Whose disability am I ridiculing?

            I’m the one actually standing up for those with genuine disabilities – because there are far too many people using the disabled toilets who shouldnt be doing so.

            “but instead abusing and insulting people who tried to point out the error of your ways was the height of bad manners.”

            Tad rich given I’ve not abused anyone,and the insults I’ve directed at you, in response to your constant childish ad hominems, pales into insignificance to your accusations of my being on cocaine, being a traffic warden etc etc I merely calledyou a selfish twat.

            Which clearly you are.

            “My mother was brought up in a concentration camp, is not in the best of
            health, and if she desperately needed the loo before she got her blue
            badge (no, not for incontinence) and popped in the “Disabled”
            (ACCESSIBLE – still waiting for evidence they’re not part of the general
            provision) loo, you’d be shrieking “tw-t” at her.”

            And how do you work that out then?

            You’re reaching. Because she is just the kind of person that should have unrestricted access to the disabled toilets!!!

            “Very nice!
            So where, and when, exactly, were you dragged up?!”

            Given that you are reaching with your previous godwinesque misarepresentation your question immediately above isn’t pertinent.

          • Mr B J Mann

            I know I shouldn’t feed the Plastic Parking Permit Troll, especially as you seem to have a compulsion, but here goes!

            >> >> “And in my day ridiculing people’s disabilities”

            >> Whose disability am I ridiculing?

            Those with the disabilities that I’ve repeatedly pointed out, including with quotes from the official legal document linked from the page *YOU* linked to.

            By the way, you STILL have explained who, in your infinite wisdom, is “entitled”, in your opinion, to use “Disabled” loos.

            Which is especially strange given that you insist it’s not people who are officially, legally, classed as disabled (as per the official, legal, document I’ve quoted from, that was linked from the page *YOU* linked to!)!?!?!

            >>I’m the one actually standing up for those with genuine disabilities – because there are far too many people using the disabled toilets who shouldnt be doing so.

            No, you’re not, as you’ve repeatedly said that not only are people who are legally classed as not just disabled, but whose disability means they have especially urgent needs to access special disabled loos, should not just not be allowed to use them, but should be insulted if they do.

            >> >> “but instead abusing and insulting people who tried to point out the error of your ways was the height of bad manners.”

            >> Tad rich given I’ve not abused anyone,and the insults I’ve directed at you, in response to your constant childish ad hominems, pales into insignificance to your accusations of my being on cocaine, being a traffic warden etc etc I merely calledyou a selfish twat.

            Errrmmmmmm, your very first contribution started with a tirade of insults:

            >>Bertie -> Damaris Tighe • 11 days ago
            >>Wow, what a selfish inconsiderate twat you are.

            Despite you having absolutely no idea of her circumstances.

            Worse, your opening(?) contribution in response to me was:

            >>We don’t – so you’re using a cubicle you are not entitled too.
            >>ie You’re being a selfish twat.
            >>It’s irrelevant whether someone disabled might, or might not, turn up whilst you are there. You arent entitled to use it.
            >>Ergo lacking in etiquette. You clearly dont know how to behave.

            So that’s several insults despite the fact that you had no idea whether or not I was disabled, no idea whether or not I was entitled to use it, and no idea whether or not I actually ever use them.

            Note, at that point you merely assumed, with no evidence that I wasn’t disabled, and assumed, with no evidence, that I used disabled loos, based on nothing more than your prejudiced, bigoted assumption that I was a “selfish twat…. lacking in etiquette. You clearly dont know how to behave”.

            Worse, since then you have not just assumed, but insisted, that I was disabled with incontinence, which, if I was, meant that I would have fallen within the official definition (as proved by the link to the official legal document linked from the site *YOU* linked to) of disability, and would be entitled to used a “disabled” loo as an officially disabled person (especially as some of the provisions within them are specifically designed to make them suitable for people who suffer from incontinence).

            And yet you insist on telling me that, despite that, I’m not entitled to use “disabled” loos, insist on ridiculing me on the disability you assert that I suffer from, and insist on telling me that I’m not disabled despite YOUR link proving I would be in the circumstances.

            So not only are you derang3d in general, you are indulging in disability d!scrimination and hate cyber hat3 cr!me!

            >> >> “My mother was brought up in a concentration camp, is not in the best of health, and if she desperately needed the loo before she got her blue badge (no, not for incontinence) and popped in the “Disabled” (ACCESSIBLE – still waiting for evidence they’re not part of the general provision) loo, you’d be shrieking “tw-t” at her.”

            >>And how do you work that out then?

            It’s called logical deduction and accepting the evidence you repeatedly present.

            You’ve spent a week shrieking “tw-t” at not only people who have said they use disabled loos without you knowing what their circumstances are, and shrieking “tw-t” at people who you think suffer from incontinence, but shrieking “tw-t” at people who you THINK suffer from incontinence and you THINK use disabled loos, without any evidence whatsoever of either.

            So if you actually saw someone using a disabled loo for incontinence the only thing that would stop you shrieking “tw-t” would be if you were speechless with rage.

            So, no, YOU ARE:

            >>reaching. Because she is just the kind of person that should have unrestricted access to the disabled toilets!!!

            When you’ve spent the past week saying that incontinence isn’t a disability.

            And if you’re not disabled you can’t use a “disabled” loo!

            >> >> “Very nice!
            >> >> So where, and when, exactly, were you dragged up?!”

            >>Given that you are reaching with your previous Godwinesque misrepresentation your question immediately above isn’t pertinent.

            Sez you!

          • Bertie

            There you go with your childish ad hominem attacks..
            “I know I shouldn’t feed the Plastic Parking Permit Troll, especially as you seem to have a compulsion, but here goes!”

            Evidence of that please.All I have done is question whether the genuinely able should use the disabled toilets. Yet you continually accuse me of some Gestapo-esque patrolling of such abuses by the perfectly able.

            “Those with the disabilities that I’ve repeatedly pointed out, including with quotes from the official legal document linked from the page *YOU* linked to.”

            Not having the motivation to get out of bed and get dressed isn’t a disability. It’s pure laziness expected of a limp wristed pansy. The fact you think it is a disability means you too are a pathetic spineless individual – thank god we didnt have your sort hitting the beaches of Normandy, of flying in the skies over head otherwise you’d be calling off sick on account of something as wimpish as a splinter in your little finger. Similarly incontinence is not a disability – it’s an inconvenience yes, but not a disability. I suppose you think Smoking is a disability as well, or being a litter lout(because you’re unable to bring yourself to put your rubbish in the bin!)

            All rather pathetic. You’ll note that neither Incontinence nor being a lazy bastard not willing to get out of bed were not
            in the front page precis (but, as you point out in the appendages – this in itself devalues their inclusion – most likely at the behest of some trendy lefty without a backbone who sees “disability” everywhere when in fact there is none, just inconvenience or misfortune…

            “By the way, you STILL have explained who, in your infinite wisdom, is “entitled”, in your opinion, to use “Disabled” loos.”

            I thought someone with your intellect and “Common sense” would be able to work that out – but then again you seem to lack both given YOU think its perfectly acceptable for someone wheelchair bound to wait in the queue because they apparently aren’t being inconvenienced because they can sit down!!!!! Absolutely shocking revelation.

            “No, you’re not, as you’ve repeatedly said that not only are people who are legally classed as not just disabled, but whose disability means they have especially urgent needs to access special disabled loos, should not just not be allowed to use them, but should be insulted if they do.”

            That is not what I said at all.

            Those with genuine disabilities are perfectly entitled to use it. The original poster, clearly perfectly able, is not.Hence my original post you twit. And if you think being unmotivated to get out of bed to get dressed is a disability then you’re even more of an idiot than i thought. It’s laziness, pure laziness, whether its in the appendix as a disability or not.
            Just use your common sense!

            **but instead abusing and insulting people who tried to point out the error of your ways was the height of bad manners.**

            Tad rich given I’ve not abused anyone,and the insults I’ve directed at you, in response to your constant childish ad hominems, pales into insignificance to your accusations of my being on cocaine, being a traffic warden etc etc I merely called you a selfish twat.

            **Errrmmmmmm, your very first contribution
            started with a tirade of insults:
            >>Bertie -> Damaris Tighe • 11 days ago
            >>Wow, what a selfish inconsiderate twat you are.**

            Where they directed at you???? NO.

            Are you Damaris’s mum?

            The only tirade has been launched by yourself immediately post my comment not even directed at you.

            Hence NO _ I didn’t start off my conversation with you with a tirade of insults.Unless of course Damaris is your doppleganger.

            “Note, at that point you merely assumed, with no evidence that I wasn’t disabled, and assumed, with no evidence, that I used disabled loos, based on nothing more than your prejudiced, bigoted assumption that I was a “selfish twat…. lacking in etiquette. You clearly dont know how to behave”.”

            Nope I clearly stated that I did not think perfectly able people should use the disabled toilet.

            I made no assumptions about whether or not YOU, personally, were entitled or not. As the conversation developed I attempted to gauge what was your motivation behind the ever childish personal attacks merely because I expressed a perfectly valid opinion held by many people with traditional values, that the disabled toilets are for those with genuine disabilities,and not for those perfectly able

            In fact one could argue that you have deliberately tried to paint this as being something it is not, merely to bait and argue all the while smearing in your pathetic weasel like attempt to paint me as the bad guy.

            “Worse, since then you have not just assumed, but insisted, that I was disabled with incontinence, ”

            Given your continued evasiveness, coupled to you ever shrillness and vituperative responses I naturally suspected that you might be incontinent – given that incontinence was the area we focused on! Despite suspecting, I never insisted – asking you to answer by putting the question is not “Insisting”

            You are a selfish twat though if you’d happily use the disabled toilets , despite being perfectly able, just to avoid the normal queue. And I’m pretty sure there are many reasonable people of my generation and older who will share a similar opinion

            After much prodding we finally get to the bottom of the reasons behind your tirade. Your elderly very sick mother.
            with incontinence. Clearly common sense would say she is entitled! But in your blind rage you are simply unable to grasp this simple point.

            “And yet you insist on telling me that, despite that, I’m not entitled to use “disabled” loos, insist on ridiculing me on the disability you assert that I suffer from, and insist on telling me that I’m not disabled despite YOUR link proving I would be in the circumstances.”

            If you aren’t incontinent, nor do you have a disability, why would you use the disabled toilets…And nowhere have I insisted you CANT use the disabled toilets. Stop misrepresenting. I have said,consistently, I DON’T THINK YOU SHOULD USE them if you’re able bodied. There’s a difference in tone, meaning to anyone who has passed GCSE/O-Level English – have you?

            Me ridiculing? Oh hello – pot kettle you hypocritical lying bastard. Have you read the childish dross you’ve thrown at me……

            “So not only are you derang3d in general, you are indulging in disability d!scrimination and hate cyber hat3 cr!me!”

            Sacre bleu – You’re one of those nutjobs aren’t you. Why oh why they put computers in lunatic asylums I’ll never know.

            I’ve engaged in disability discrimination and hate cyber crime…

            Hilarious. All I’ve done is point out what a weak pathetic pansy you are. Call yourself a Brit – utterly ridiculous.

            Nice attempt at shutting down the debate by hurling unfounded accusations of cyber hate crime around – true Stalinistic behaviour worthy of the Guardian/BBC

            Talking out of your botty more like…..

            As to your other little gems

            **My mother was brought up in a concentration camp, is not in the best of health, and if she desperately needed the loo before she got her blue badge (no, not for incontinence) and popped in the “Disabled” (ACCESSIBLE – still waiting for evidence they’re not part of the general provision) loo, you’d be shrieking “tw-t” at her.”

            To which my response was..

            And how do you work that out then?

            **It’s called logical deduction and accepting the
            evidence you repeatedly present.**

            Logical deduction? You’re pulling my leg.You havent got a logical bone in your body.

            Your mother is

            1) Elderly

            2) Clearly in ill health

            These two alone, in their own right, would see any reasonable person, like myself,not even bat an eyelid if she used the disabled toilets. As indeed I went on too tell you because you’re clearly pig ignorant and needed it spelling out to you

            3) Disabled(but not incontinent so whats the disability then)
            is it one that’s pretty obvious?

            **You’ve spent a week shrieking “tw-t” at not only people who have said they use disabled loos without you knowing their circumstances are, and shrieking “tw-t” at people who you think suffer from incontinence, but shrieking “tw-t” at people who you THINK suffer from incontinence and
            you THINK use disabled loos, without any evidence whatsoever.**

            I’ve not been shrieking at all geezwoir. In fact the only person losing their rag,and engaging in the shrieking is yourself – one only has to read the dross you’ve been posting, poorly paragraphed, poorly pout together, peppered with insults galore…Go back and read your scribblings then you’ll see who’s foaming at the mouth.

            “So if you actually saw someone using a disabled loo for incontinence the
            only thing that would stop you shrieking “tw-t” would be if you were
            speechless with rage.”

            I wouldn’t shriek anything. I’d say something, especially if it were an individual clearly younger than 35 in good health.

            **Because she is just the kind of person that should have unrestricted access to the disabled toilets!!!When you’ve spent the past week saying that incontinence isn’t a disability.**

            Your mother is elderly and in ill health – common sense would say she’d be eligible to use the disabled toilets whether she was incontinent or not!!!!

            Is it really necessary to spell that out for you. Clearly because you’re stupid enough to think lacking motivation to get out of bed and get dressed is a disability.It’s pure laziness.

            When your sibling has stopped using the family brain cell do let me know.

            ***************************************************************************
            (Message 2)

            Let’s just keep this one message going – I simply cant be arsed dealing with 5 separate messages from an idiot every day

            Next up, in response to my pointing our the utter hypocrisy of your claim I’ve been dismissive and insulting

            ** suggest you review your own posts, especially your first two cyber-abus3 “contributions”**

            What cyber abuse would that be pansy?

            The one where you accused me of needing mum to take me to school, of snorting cocaine, of being a traffic warden, of shoving incontinence pads in my “gob”

            **But a) How would you know she was in ill health.**
            It’s usually pretty obvious….Got a paid of eyes have you?

            The elderly also tend to have problems standing,and queueing hence no one begrudges them nipping into the Disabled particularly those that find standing a major issue.

            **c) You’ve been hurling abuse at anyone you though wasn’t disabled who you decreed were not entitled to used “disabled” toilets.**

            I merely called them selfish – to then get abused by you over the subsequent two weeks! When it comes to hurling abuse methinks you’ll find you have been handing out far more than I’ve reciprocated with.

            **Should have know you can lead a donkey to water but you can’t make him think.**

            To which i replied:

            p.s In your idiom It’s a horse btw

            And your response now

            **Don’t call me an idiom, I was specifically alluding to you as a donkey. But I was being too polite.**

            Eh? What? I’m not calling you an idiom you muppet.

            “An idiom (Latin: idioma, “special property”,
            from Greek: ἰδίωμα – idíōma, “special feature, special phrasing, a
            peculiarity”, f. Greek: ἴδιος – ídios, “one’s own”) is a phrase or a
            fixed expression that has a figurative, or sometimes literal, meaning.
            An idiom’s figurative meaning is different from the literal meaning.”

            It’s “a horse to water”

            There’s nought to do with Donkeys in that idiom whatsoever.

            Calling you an idiom – hahahaha an IDIOT yes, but not an idiom

            Oh good god you really are simple aren’t you. Presumably you are registered disabled yourself for being utterly dense.

            I then went on to say..

            Indeed your whole diatribe has been ill founded on what you think my view might be of your mother using the disabled toilets…

            **No, just about every post of yours has confirmed what you would say in the circumstances.**

            Really – you clearly havent read my posts properly then as it’s pretty obvious my comments were directed at able bodied individuals using the disabled toilets, not sick old women!!!!

            Christ, you really are dense arent you.

            Who is going to begrudge sick elderly old women using the disabled toilets…

            Signing off we had my

            Suggest you look at yourself in the mirror frankly as it’s clear who the “child” is here.

            Your response being…

            **Again, I suggest you review your on “contributions” to the “discussion”!**

            Clearly you need help if you think your claims of cyber hate crime, cyber hate crime, snort your coke, has your mother taken you to school, shove those incontinent pads in your gob is anything but childish – in fact your whole discourse smacks of immaturity and below average intelligence.

            **************************************************************************
            (Message 3)

            **Mr B J Mann
            Oh dear, oh dear.
            Perhaps I should have replied in detail.**

            Methinks you’ve already done that in enough messages. Perhaps you could have appended this gem to one of your other diatribes!

          • Mr B J Mann

            You really need help mate, and I’m going to have one more try.

            1) I never said that I used Disabled Toilets.

            2) I never said that I was incontinent.

            3) The website you linked on is not a legal or government one, it is merely a “Social Enterprise” that

          • Mr B J Mann

            Are you a real parking warden?

            Or did you mum make your outfit for you?!?!?!?

          • Bertie

            ?

            How is this even relevant?

            Engaging in childish ad hominem attacks isnt going to get you anyway sunshine.

            Other than making yourself out to be an even bigger ignoramus than you already have.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Just trying to come down to your level, me being so considerate.

          • Bertie

            How’s that coming down to my level? You’re already several rungs below with your irrelevant immature ad hominem remarks.

            Clearly you dont work – get a disability benefit in some form then do you?

          • Mr B J Mann

            Sigh!

          • Mr B J Mann

            So, to summarise, using your posts and links:

            You haven’t proven I’m a selfish tw*t.

            Nor that incontinence isn’t a disability.

            Nor that I said I was incontinent.

            Nor that I use disabled loos.

            But, in fact, using your link, you have proved that incontinence IS a disability.

            And your posts that you insult and abuse people without cause or justification.

            Which proves that YOU are the TW*T.

            And a dumb one at that.

            So much for:

            Tad irrational & premature to claim victory!

      • Damaris Tighe

        Since when was calling someone disabled casting aspersions? The words ‘mote’ & ‘beam’ come to mind.

        • Bertie

          It’s an aspersion because I was preempting the typical line of attack to rubbish my comments – namely that I had a special interest in the position!!!!!

          I don’t hence one could claim my opinion is one of objectivity!

    • HFC

      Perhaps you might see that somebody who is forced to use crutches because they have difficulty and suffer pain walking and standing (in a queue) and has need of a urinal because they have intermittent bladder urgency all due to a compromised central nervous system might find it irritating to be kept waiting by an ‘I was only in there for a minute, sorry’ lying, selfish, thoughtless able-bodied person?

      Oh and I feel the same irritation about the fully mobile bastards who occupy ‘disabled’ parking spaces.

      The loss of mobilty and the pain are tolerable but some of the people I meet, less so.

      You know who you are.

      • Mr B J Mann

        PS Further to my reply to your reply to me above:

        >>”Oh and I feel the same irritation about the fully mobile bastards who occupy ‘disabled’ parking spaces”

        You do realise that many “fully mobile bastards” are fully entitled to Blue Badges and therefore fully entitled to “occupy ‘disabled’ parking spaces” don’t you?!

        So it would appear that “You are wrong” yet again!

        You really should give up while you are behind!!!

    • Mr B J Mann

      Dam, you’ve missed all the fun!

      • Damaris Tighe

        Wow, I did didn’t I! (Although I suspected that lobbing my initial grenade would cause outrage …)

  • Landphil

    Anyone who gave a fart.

Close