"Paralympics"

I thought that I'd ask this question here rather than get into a Naafi bar chestpoking session, even though there is an element of outrage about it; what is the 'Paralympics' about, other than a celebration of being second-rate? If it's better placed elsewhere, I'm sure a Moderator will oblige.

I can certainly see the use of them as a socially inclusive (a word I loathe but am legally bound by the EU to use in this context) event, but I'm driven to this question by a quote I saw in the Irish Independent - I don't know who said it - that: “paralympic athletes are on the same level as ablebodied champions”.

This is such self-evident balls that I'm horrified to see it in print, as it means that our values (OK, the Irish public's values) are skewed to equate disability with ability. As I said, self-evident balls.

These events may be great for those who take part, I'm sure, and I wish them the very best of their day in the spotlight, but the sight of someone with cerebral palsy competing against someone with one leg or mongolism has to be on a par with every other socialist drive to instil a culture of grossly unfair and deeply stupid 'equality' on us.

We've lost the ability to distinguish between the 10% of everything which is good; the 1% which is excellent, and the rest, which is crap. I blame Blair, Clinton and the EU. And Hazel Blears, who should be painted red and gasped at by Japanese tourists.

 

"a quote I saw in the Irish Independent - I don't know who said it - that: “paralympic athletes are on the same level as ablebodied champions”.

Err, well that is a ridiculous statement taken in the context of outright performance. i.e. A top proficiency swimmer with one arm is not really likely to out perform a top proficiency swimmer with two arms – though they’d probably beat me. Without knowing the context the statement was made in and exactly what point the author was making, it’s open to various interpretations?

The Olympics overall, IMHO, has strayed dramatically over the years, mostly in view of the events they have and continue to admit – but that’s another argument. ‘Is there a point to holding the Paralympics?’ Yeah sure there is, particularly for those with a disability. The Olympic movement pays for it so what’s the problem? If you don’t care to watch, don’t watch. I can’t be ARRSED to watch feckless able-bodied retards smack a little ball over a net, or even worse knock a little rubber one against a wall, so I don’t watch. Substitute the ball for a shuttlecock however, and I become transfixed. ”Yeah, that’s only because of Gail Emms”. Cobblers it is – well, that might have something to do with it.

No.9

 

The fact that somebody is in some way disabled doesn't remove the desire to compete against others and, obviously, such folks can't mix it in any meaningful way with able-bodied athletes. So it's only reasonable to allow them to compete against each other, which also may or may not give some incentive to healthy but totally unfit folks.

I know for a fact that one of my brothers developed an interest in and began playing basketball after helping his mucker train a team of paraplegics in the sport at his local school gym. He didn't actually roll around in an NHS shopper to do it, but that was his initial incentive.

MsG

 

A competitor in the Paralympics who is competing with a handicap has much more of my respect than that I would give to an able bodied person in the same sport.

The sheer grit and determination of these people to achieve should rightly be celebrated and it is entirely appropriate that they should use the excellent facilities of Beijing to do so.

These are the true olympians, beating disability to compete in a sport!

 

I think you're confusing the Paralympics with the Special Olympics. A bloke who's sound in mind but not in body, maybe bits are missing or the wiring just isn't sending current the right way - well, fair play to them. They can still perform extreme feats of physical prowess beyond the rest of us. I'm damn sure I wouldn't fancy pushing a wheelchair round a marathon course.

Special Olympics are a balloon of a different colour and only worth it for the chance to point and laugh.

 

I struggle with the criteria used to decide who gets to compete against who! I was watching some highlights the other day where an Australian cyclist with all four limbs in place defeated a German chap with one arm missing from the shoulder down (and clinging to his bicycle for dear life).

I wasn't surprised to hear that the Aussie was World Champion, world record holder & multiple Olympic medallist. Perhaps he was missing a finger or something? Now I generally love to see Australians dominate in any sporting contest but something about this is just 'not cricket'.

 

Deaf? Blind*? Dumb?

Looking at the paralympics wiki page it appears it is for athletes "with physical, mental, and sensorial disabilities. This includes athletes with mobility disabilities, amputations, blindness, and cerebral palsy. "

* was there a dog on the cycle track?

 

Didn't see any dogs, neither could I see that the Aussie had any artificial limbs.

Surely deaf dumb & blind people should compete against other deaf dumb & blind people? Folk missing a leg compete against other folk missing legs & so on.

Can't help thinking that in this ONE example the playing field was less than level.

From what the commentators are saying, It seems there are quite a few ex-forces people (with 'disabilities' as a result of their service)from many
nations competing at the games. Good luck to them all!

 

In the farce that was Atlanta, the paralympians were housed in the same village as able bodied athletes. So, no lifts or ramps etc. The BBC were covering it as a magazine highlight programme. The problems of the accomodation were highlighted, including the fact the British Athletes were on the top floor of a 3 storey building with no easy access.

One legless athlete had to sling his collapsed wheelchair on his back, and hump himself up and down 3 flights of stairs for meals, and the toilets were on the floor below.

The BBC girlie interviewing asked him why he was putting up with it, bearing in mind how hard it was to just do the basic things.

His reply was to point to the Union Flag on his polo shirt and said "I do it for this" . Cameraman panned back onto interviewer who was doing a not very good job of holding back her tears. Even a rock would have been moved.

In Atlanta , our Paralympians showed more guts, resilience and medals, than our able-bodied athletes.

Paralympians are not figures of fun or derision. They are some of the gutsiest people on the planet.

 

I thought all the 'Para's' were in Afghanistan doing something useful and where the events include shooting (10m to 600m), steeplechase (with 40lbs of minging , smelly kit), fire controlling and beach volleyball (well volleys of some sort!) and not Beijjing

Seriously though, I agree: how can you have 'disabled' athletes with different disabilities competing against each other fairly ? We NEED Olympics for missing left leg people, another for those with one arm, another for those wheelchairbound etc, etc.

Utrinque Paratus !!

D_B

 

All the Paralympics serves to do is remind me just how lazy I am sat on my able-bodied arrse watching it! Watching someone with no arms swim 200m is, frankly, extraordinary considering that I struggle to swim 50 metres.

The paralympics is an opportunity for disabled athletes to compete against each other and represent their countries. Considering that they stem from a competition started in 1948 for disabled war veterans it is hardly appropriate to suggest that it is some left wing, tree-hugging, liberal, Blairite, EU, Guardian-sponsored exercise in political correctness.

 

without being a target for the PC brigades, I am -er- stumped - by the types missing limbs who compete.. If they had to hop,skip or jump along against each other with the missing components using only their personal physical strength to compensate, I'd be impressed.. but, in many cases, its technological enhancements that give them the ' medal spurt '..

As always, those with financial backing get the best stuff, lighter chairs, faster wheels.. I know that there is a minimum standard, and that the powers that be are always evaluating, but...

Saw a clip about a legless sprinter.. he uses some kind of high tension metal paddle/duck feet springy things... incredible what he can accomplish.. he can and does outrun able bodied types and wants to compete in the 'regular ' stream..lots of debate over whether he's the one running or he's being 'assisted' with the gear giving him and advantage over albe-bodied folk.

I'm sure the officials have to spend weeks matching up disabilities so that people can compete ' fairly' and on equal terms..

that being said.. I know a couple of guys who play wheelchair basketball and hockey on little sleds and these guys are more competitive, better conditioned and more ' professional' than many, so called pro athletes..

I'd not want to go up against them and enjoy watching them on the court/rink as they put on a tremendous show..I think acceptance and approval would be higher,if more saw them in action..

If you got the guts and the talent to overcome a defect or injury then you deserve my praise and admiration..the ones that wallow and demand handouts - the opposite...

 

Some guy in the paralympics was disqualified yesterday, apparentley he tested positive for WD40...!

 

'I know, I'll get me coat'

 

And you watch the winter paralympians - when their turn comes round again!
Mentoring such people is a humbling experience. Never managed to mentor a paralympian, but have instructed blind skiiers.
Humility and humour abounded when I announced one morning:
"Sorry folks, no skiing this morning. The clag's right down and I can't see a damn thing."

"So oooooooooooo " came the reply!