I wear glasses full time, should i be classed as disabled?

I wear glasses all the time...

Reply 24

WutJob..

OP

19

Original post by Tootles

So ask away, I'm waiting.

No, I made sure my glasses fit properly. The only discomfort I get is when I'm wearing earphones for several hours at a time, they squeeze the frames into the sides of my head.

Are the glasses you're wearing on your display picture designer?

Reply 25

Drewski

19

Original post by Tiger Rag

Only if your glasses don't correct the defects you have.

So, devil's advocate, a below-the-knee amputee with a well fitting, high tech prosthetic is arguably no longer disabled?

Reply 26

Original post by Tootles

No, I made sure my glasses fit properly. The only discomfort I get is when I'm wearing earphones for several hours at a time, they squeeze the frames into the sides of my head.

Good fitting glasses or not, I stand by my point.

Reply 27

Tiger Rag

22

Original post by Drewski

So, devil's advocate, a below-the-knee amputee with a well fitting, high tech prosthetic is arguably no longer disabled?

That's completely different. They tend to cause problems. Your glasses, if fitted properly, don't.

Wearing glasses won't affect your ability to do things. Wearing a prosthetic more than likely will do.

Reply 28

Original post by WutJob..

Are the glasses you're wearing on your display picture designer?

1.

I'm not wearing any glasses in my display picture. None of the pictures I have on here have me in them.

2.

Does it matter who made them, provided they're comfortable and do the job?

Original post by Dheorl

Good fitting glasses or not, I stand by my point.

Good for you, sticking to your guns even though you're demonstrably wrong.

Reply 29

Original post by Tiger Rag

That's completely different. They tend to cause problems. Your glasses, if fitted properly, don't.

Wearing glasses won't affect your ability to do things. Wearing a prosthetic more than likely will do.

Hypothetically a prosthesis could be more like a transplant if it was high-tech enough, and could be grafted in as a 100% compatible replacement that you'll never need to notice or think about again, just as though you'd never needed it.

This is, of course, decades if not centuries away.

But no, it's not the same, as you say.

Reply 30

Tuffyandtab

16

I guess if you're disabled then you are unable to do a particular thing.
Are you able to have 20/20 vision? Yes, by wearing glasses - so not disabled
Is someone who is paralysed head to toe able to walk? No (I believe) but they can use a wheelchair for mobility - so they are disabled.
But you could argue against my point and say that we are all disabled in one way. Am I able to travel back in time? No - am I then disabled?

Reply 31

Original post by Tootles

Good for you, sticking to your guns even though you're demonstrably wrong.

Considering you don't know what lifestyle I lead I don't see how on earth you think you can make that claim, but w/e.

Reply 32

Original post by Dheorl

Considering you don't know what lifestyle I lead I don't see how on earth you think you can make that claim, but w/e.

By all means, enlighten me.

Reply 33

Original post by Tootles

By all means, enlighten me.

The time I'm specifically referring to involved large amounts of time outdoors in harsh environments, catching sleep whenever and where ever you can, in and out of mountain lakes, staying in dark mountain huts next to glaciers that blind you without strong sunglasses. Sure, it's a fairly extreme lifestyle, but one where I'd much rather be partially deaf than partially sighted.

Even in more mundane lives though, from falling asleep on planes to having to either tolerate contacts and their downsides or have multiple pairs of glasses to swap between, they are far from hassle free and 100% comfortable.

Reply 34

Original post by Dheorl

The time I'm specifically referring to involved large amounts of time outdoors in harsh environments, catching sleep whenever and where ever you can, in and out of mountain lakes, staying in dark mountain huts next to glaciers that blind you without strong sunglasses. Sure, it's a fairly extreme lifestyle, but one where I'd much rather be partially deaf than partially sighted.

Even in more mundane lives though, from falling asleep on planes to having to either tolerate contacts and their downsides or have multiple pairs of glasses to swap between, they are far from hassle free and 100% comfortable.

..so something you chose to do. Not exactly a lifestyle, and not worthy of comparison to the average person - who generally has the sense to take their glasses off if they're at risk of falling asleep and damaging them.

Either way having to put on/take off glasses isn't a disability. If you're wearing glasses then your eyes still work, albeit not properly. This isn't the same as having an actual disability - one which makes your life harder.

Reply 35

Original post by Tootles

..so something you chose to do. Not exactly a lifestyle, and not worthy of comparison to the average person - who generally has the sense to take their glasses off if they're at risk of falling asleep and damaging them.

Either way having to put on/take off glasses isn't a disability. If you're wearing glasses then your eyes still work, albeit not properly. This isn't the same as having an actual disability - one which makes your life harder.

Well it is a lifestyle, considering for quite a while at various points it was my job...

And having bad sight is by any technical definition a disability. Because it's easily correctable though you're not given any special dispensation because of it.

Reply 36

Original post by Tootles

Lemme fetch my violin :nopity:

Ok, you've lost me there. I'm not sure at what point you felt having a reasonable conversation had to turn into being a patronising ass, but w/e, I'll leave you to live in your own little world.

Reply 37

Original post by Dheorl

Ok, you've lost me there. I'm not sure at what point you felt having a reasonable conversation had to turn into being a patronising ass, but w/e, I'll leave you to live in your own little world.

Wait... and you weren't being a patronizing ass? Making some claim like my lifestyle - which is pretty generic - is different because I don't have to take my glasses up mountains? Who the hell do you think you are?

You're talking *******s. You're standing as a single case, claiming that because you can't look after your glasses no putz can. That being the case, I'm not being patronizing, and I'm not denying the possibility of a reasonable conversation. I'm just acknowledging that you're behaving like a putz and dismissing your what you say, accordingly.

You were going into hostile environments with glasses.

1.

That was an idiotic thing to do.

2.

If looking after glasses is that much of a challenge and you really must go into those hostile environments, you could have got glasses that were better suited to what you were doing.

Reply 38

Tiger Rag

22

Original post by Dheorl

Well it is a lifestyle, considering for quite a while at various points it was my job...

And having bad sight is by any technical definition a disability. Because it's easily correctable though you're not given any special dispensation because of it.

Just wearing glasses doesn't mean your sight is that bad.

I'm still trying to work out how exactly, wearing glasses is a disability? Your vision has, for most people, been fully corrected.

Reply 39