onewheeldave

Attended for what? covid? or is it non-covid ailments that they've not been getting treatment for due to the previous lockdowns? Bizarre. Top comes across to me as one of the few people on this thread who aren't scared of the virus. He/she seems to have a good understanding of the fact that the virus is no real threat to anyone who doesn't have the risk factors that make them prone to bad outcomes if infected.

What are 'the public' going to do? Prior to covid I considered the public to be overly gullible to, and, overly compliant to authority. Boy, did I underestimate the extent of it!!! I've watched the public not only comply willingly with and follow increasingly bizarre demands and limitations to their personal liberty, but then go on to demand ever more extreme rules, and, cry out for extensive punishments for anyone who declines to comply, or even expresses a concern that some of the rules may cause more harm than good. It looks to me that the public will continue to do whatever they are told to do by the authorites, however extreme or long term that turns out to be. Yes, there is. We've got several industries now, based on administrating lockdowns. Vaccine passports in various forms are highly likely, as are ID cards. Pubs/restauraunts are open provided you're willing to book on an app and then be prepared to jump through the various multiple hoops in place once you arrive, as for travel- be prepared to abandon your holiday half way through if your destinations risk level is altered while you are there.

Anyone worried about a pdf being 'infected' can scan it with their anti-virus software.

The National Basketball Association in 2020 was composed of 74.2 percent black players, all there through actual merit and ability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ethnicity_in_the_NBA A basketball court not only provides a very useful community resource and encourages young people to engage in healthy fitness activity, it can also in some cases lead to a lucrative career as a high level basketball athlete in one of the few industries where blacks are proportionatly represented.

I'd say that for your point to be valid, you'd need to flip around the rest of the relevant factors as well i.e. if newsrooms there maintained an environment that only comprised 17% of white staff, and 13% of white leadership in a city where more than half of the city identifies as white, then you could make a case that she is being racist.

Very similar to what was said to that minority who opposed slavery in the US back in the past. --------------------------- Concerning the argument that neoliberalism is ill-defined or hard to define or that there is disagreement about exactly what it is- the exact same kind be said of pretty much any political or economic system.

Interesting that you assume the only way for someone to stand up for themselves is by looking physically scary.

From the link- [people who are exempt] children under the age of 11 people who cannot put on, wear or remove a face covering because of a physical or mental illness or impairment, or disability where putting on, wearing or removing a face covering will cause you severe distress if you are speaking to or providing assistance to someone who relies on lip reading, clear sound or facial expressions to communicate to avoid harm or injury, or the risk of harm or injury, to yourself or others ‒ including if it would negatively impact on your ability to exercise or participate in a strenuous activity police officers and other emergency workers, given that this may interfere with their ability to serve the public Clearly, most people do fit fit into any of the above categories.

Transmission isn't the main problem- colds and many other minor viruses are transmitted. With covid it's the harm it does when received- and it is very relevant that the health of the average adult in the UK/US is abysmal, with lifestyle diseases like type 2 diabetes, obesity, heart disease etc being rampant, and people with those conditions being especially susceptible to harsh effects from covid. Arguably, the best defence a nation can have against covid, is a fit, healthy population, with very low rates of lifestyle diseases like type 2 diabetes, obesity, heart disease- something to think about and prioritise if we genuinely want to tackle future epidemics rather than 'manage' them with economy destroying lockdowns. Incidently, despite all the focus on the number of deaths being attributed to covid- they are minute in comparision to the toll from lifestyle diseases like type 2 diabetes, obesity, heart disease- a toll that has been around for decades and looks to set to continue into future ones.

Yes

But it does overload the NHS.

But you didn't want to mention that in your initial post?

Asthmatics can't smoke? Smoking is an addiction, by definition difficult to quit even if the victim realises they are damaging his/her health. The fact that she had a cigarette does not mean she didn't have asthma.

Scenario- shop assistant/manager 'excuse me sir/madam, have you got your mask' reply- 'I am exempt'. A corteous response. A very clear response.

Presumably the implication being that mask exempt people not wearing a mask are being selfish??

I'll tell you again- they can [wear a lanyard]- they choose not to. They have good reasons for their choice. They are not breaking any rules. Anyone pressuring them to wear identifying symbols is breaking rules.

Personally I've opposed compulsory masking from the start [for reasons given multiple times on this thread] so I can hardly object to that small number of non-mask exempt individuals who don't wear masks. To the extent that masks do protect, the fact that the vast majority of the population have embraced masking, is sufficient IMO.

Your suspicion that some [you've no evidence that it is 'many'] non-mask wearers are not exempt is, of course, totally innaplicable in any specific case you will encounter of a non-mask wearer, as the nature of hidden disability generally precludes being able to judge whether the person is disabled by looking at them. There have been several posters on this thread who seem unable to grasp this, and, for whatever reason, they seem to have the same urge as you to insist that the disabled must wear an identifying symbol e.g.

Are you ok with mask exempt people not wearing a mask?

This is nonsense Anyone giving 'grief' to a disabled mask exempt person is a bully, pure and simple. I personally have had zero 'grief' in enclosed spaces when not wearing a mask- I suspect that is because anyone attempting to give me grief would get plenty back, and it probably shows. In contrast, many other autistic people and disabled people, including some of my clients, have received 'grief', despite being mask exempt and wearing lanyards/badges. Again, this is compatible with the hypothesis that there are a lot of bullies, ignorant of the rules, who like to pick on vulnerable and disabled people.

So you're referring to those who ARE mask exempt who choose to not wear lanyards/badges identifying them as such. The way you've phrased your question carries an implication that they are somehow unable to wear a lanyard, whereas, in many cases, it's a choice to not wear one. It's important to understand that the govt regulations make it clear that there is no obligation for mask exempt people to wear lanyards; no doubt that is partly for historical reasons because forcing minority groups to wear symbols that identify them to the public as being in a particular minority group has led to things like scapegoating and genocide. As to why individual mask exempt people choose to not wear such ID, I expect the reasons are many and varied- they could include the one mentioned above. Perhaps they don't want their hidden disability to be made public, possibly fearful of their prejudiced employers finding out and dismissing them? The key point is that by not wearing a lanyard, they are doing nothing wrong. This is in sharp contrast to any member of the public, or shop assistant, or security guard, who, being under the false impression that mask exempt people need to wear a lanyard, persist with more questions once the person has replied to the intial one with the answer 'I am mask exempt'- further questioning is against the rules and constitutes harrassment.

Who do you mean by 'the rest'?

Some do wear a lanyard- mainly in an effort to cut down the routine harrsssment they face from, as you put it 'the rest of us' judging them as not being sufficiently disabled to justify not wearing a mask. I have several disabled clients who, despite possessing medical letters and mask exemption badges, refuse to use public transport due to the accusing glares and sometimes verbal violence they face from, as you put it, 'the rest of us'. The govt have made it clear that a disabled person who is mask exempt is not required to wear a badge/lanyard identifying them as such, and that when asked by a shop assistant/security guard why theyu are not wearing a mask, all they need to say is 'I am exempt'- any further questions from the assistant/security guard requesting proof are innapropriate. If the assistant/security guard then says that the person 'needs to wear a lanyard....' that is also innapropriate and in breach of the govt guidelines.

There are quite a lot actually.

If it is the case that there are more maskless males than females in shops, there are several rational explanations other than the one that seems to be being implied [that the males are 'pretending to be exempt']. It's the nature of hidden disabilities that they are not necessarily going to be apparent to you, and, the fact that they look, as you put it 'fit enough' is totally irrelevant to their disabled status. And no, people with hidden disabilites who are exempt are under no obligation to wear a badge. There are available things like sunflower badges and lanyards for those who wish to display them, but no mask exempt person is required to do so.