Re: Division Seeds in Autism Advocacies

[Guest guest]

:

> Division Seeds in Autism Advocacies

Are a depressing item of business. That is why I propose a bottom line and

essential agreement that does not have to mean getting along.

And what is that bottom line?

Inger

[Guest guest]

quality of life not group conflicts... Inger Lorelei <inglori@...> wrote: : > Division Seeds in Autism Advocacies Are a depressing item of business. That is why I propose a bottom line and essential agreement that does not have to mean getting along. And what is that bottom line? Inger Aspie Owned, Aspie Operated.AspergersHosting.comA.S.W.C Autism Advocacy & Exchangehttp://www.aspergershosting.com/ASWC

Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

[Guest guest]

That's a very nice ideal. But a bit too vague for this venture.

I suggest that if you want this advocacy coalition to work for AS being recognised BOTH as a gift and as a disability that sometimes requires assistance, special housing etc. then members ought to at least be required to agree to this balanced view.

If they cannot; if they are just out to fight and insult anyone who doesn't put us on a pedestal, their participation will only harm how we are viewed (even more than they have already done) and ruin any hope of reaching an understanding with those non-autistics who might be in a position to help those of us who need it.

Inger

Re: Re: Division Seeds in Autism Advocacies

quality of life not group conflicts... Inger Lorelei <inglori@...> wrote:

:> Division Seeds in Autism AdvocaciesAre a depressing item of business. That is why I propose a bottom line and essential agreement that does not have to mean getting along.And what is that bottom line?Inger Aspie Owned, Aspie Operated.AspergersHosting.comA.S.W.C Autism Advocacy & Exchangehttp://www.aspergershosting.com/ASWC

Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

[Guest guest]

The problem though is when making it about policy of gift, disability or differences that sort of is the triangle of common dispute. Representing autism as a whole I think is a mistake. Yet to make statements about the truth of individuals in the positive or the negative is not a bad thing. Quality of life is the bottom line. If when it comes down to quality of life and people are disagreeing for group pride reasons then its there own selfishness. Common sense is the fact and truth of the reality where the autism community needs to come together to really be a community. Though social reciprocity is a difficulty in this, it is and should not be dependent upon agreements otherwise then quality of life, we know that a truth exists and that's that, those denying it are ignoring truth, that’s there issue. People have got to care, not be about there group status or be selfish

concerning minute politics that by comparison do not matter to how it is they view autism. Subjectivisms automatically enables a view that some at least with a form of autism are very smart, do well and are a positive attribute to what autism is for them. Like that thinking in picture author lady. Analytically dispute knowing conversation like this are not allowed on certain groups dispite claiming to be freedom, I’d conclude that the social identity archetype of autism and A.S have gone way to far, it is autism that identified the person in who he or she is. While others view autism as an affliction that is an unfortunate part of someone, that is where the psychosocial divide originally exists I believe, when persons can accept a bit of intelligence and discuss the issues and not exclude, its when those groups become reasonable enough to become involved. Inger Lorelei

<inglori@...> wrote: That's a very nice ideal. But a bit too vague for this venture. I suggest that if you want this advocacy coalition to work for AS being recognised BOTH as a gift and as a disability that sometimes requires assistance, special housing etc. then members ought to at least be required to agree to this balanced view. If they cannot; if they are just out to fight and insult anyone who doesn't put us on a pedestal, their participation will only harm how we are viewed (even more than they

have already done) and ruin any hope of reaching an understanding with those non-autistics who might be in a position to help those of us who need it. Inger Aspie Owned, Aspie Operated.AspergersHosting.comA.S.W.C Autism Advocacy & Exchangehttp://www.aspergershosting.com/ASWC

Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

[Guest guest]

Am I to interpret this statement as you agreeing with me that the ones who wish to participate in this venture must at the very least be willing to accept that ASD is not ONLY a gift, and not ONLY a disability, but that it can be both, depending on the individual and the circumstances?

This ought to automatically exclude the most fanatical on each side of the fence, and for ONCE leave some room for those of us who are able to adopt a BALANCED approach.

I know you don't like division, , and I think you have a very beautiful and idealistic Soul. But it's not about excluding people; they exclude THEMSELVES if they are not willing to be open-minded and reasonable.

I am tired of fanatics getting all the voice in issues that concern us ALL. (I was, for example, not asked for my input when Amy wrote to the UN speaking on behalf of all of us.)

I would like a group that has a CLEARLY STATED stance of being non-fanatic and balanced. Fanatics are so great at making a lot of noise, anyway, they don't need even more attention.

But those of us who have a more balanced view, our voices are often drowned out in the general commotion. I think it is our turn to be heard now. To show that not ALL Aspies/autistics are fanatic, arrogant and disdainful of everyone else.

I'd like to help build bridges of understanding between Aspies and non-autistics, just as we try to do in the Family Forum. I believe in understanding & compassion, not anger & hate.

Inger

Re: Re: Division Seeds in Autism Advocacies

The problem though is when making it about policy of gift, disability or differences that sort of is the triangle of common dispute. Representing autism as a whole I think is a mistake. Yet to make statements about the truth of individuals in the positive or the negative is not a bad thing.Quality of life is the bottom line. If when it comes down to quality of life and people are disagreeing for group pride reasons then its there own selfishness. Common sense is the fact and truth of the reality where the autism community needs to come together to really be a community. Though social reciprocity is a difficulty in this, it is and should not be dependent upon agreements otherwise then quality of life, we know that a truth exists and that's that, those denying it are ignoring truth, that’s there issue.

People have got to care, not be about there group status or be selfish concerning minute politics that by comparison do not matter to how it is they view autism. Subjectivisms automatically enables a view that some at least with a form of autism are very smart, do well and are a positive attribute to what autism is for them. Like that thinking in picture author lady.

Analytically dispute knowing conversation like this are not allowed on certain groups dispite claiming to be freedom, I’d conclude that the social identity archetype of autism and A.S have gone way to far, it is autism that identified the person in who he or she is. While others view autism as an affliction that is an unfortunate part of someone, that is where the psychosocial divide originally exists I believe, when persons can accept a bit of intelligence and discuss the issues and not exclude, its when those groups become reasonable enough to become involved.Inger Lorelei <inglori@...> wrote:

That's a very nice ideal. But a bit too vague for this venture.

I suggest that if you want this advocacy coalition to work for AS being recognised BOTH as a gift and as a disability that sometimes requires assistance, special housing etc. then members ought to at least be required to agree to this balanced view.

If they cannot; if they are just out to fight and insult anyone who doesn't put us on a pedestal, their participation will only harm how we are viewed (even more than they have already done) and ruin any hope of reaching an understanding with those non-autistics who might be in a position to help those of us who need it.

Inger

Aspie Owned, Aspie Operated.AspergersHosting.comA.S.W.C Autism Advocacy & Exchangehttp://www.aspergershosting.com/ASWC

Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

[Guest guest]

Advocacy sort of runs in the blood, my father is a very out spoken advocate for disabled veterans and has worked with political figures, news papers, the government, and non-profits including churches. I have no illusion that the possibility (not for sure) of being heard and it being highly productive is indeed possible. Balanced is logical, disagreements are part of life. However a strong core policy of quality of life can only be replicated but not defeated. Its strong, therefore those participating will be strong. Yet strength and power do combine and power has a tendency to corrupt, so views from within that are not voted upon are not representative of the whole. There is a social model that is designed for it that is really legitimate and core strong. However centralized identities such as myself, due to the nature of ego to the collective group are the common

weakness, that’s why there is to be no centralized figure(s). I read some group dynamics and worked out my own theory. Inger Lorelei <inglori@...> wrote: Am I to interpret this statement as you agreeing with me that the ones who wish to participate in this venture must at the very least be willing to accept that ASD is not ONLY a gift, and not ONLY a disability, but that it can be both, depending on the individual and the circumstances? This ought to automatically exclude the most fanatical on each side

of the fence, and for ONCE leave some room for those of us who are able to adopt a BALANCED approach. I know you don't like division, , and I think you have a very beautiful and idealistic Soul. But it's not about excluding people; they exclude THEMSELVES if they are not willing to be open-minded and reasonable. I am tired of fanatics getting all the voice in issues that concern us ALL. (I was, for example, not asked for my input when Amy wrote to the UN speaking on behalf of all of us.) I would like a group that has a CLEARLY STATED stance of being non-fanatic and balanced. Fanatics are so great at making a lot of noise, anyway, they don't need even more attention. But those of us who have a more balanced view, our voices are often drowned out in the general commotion. I think it is our turn to be heard now. To show that not ALL Aspies/autistics are fanatic, arrogant and disdainful of everyone else. I'd like to help build bridges of understanding between Aspies and non-autistics, just as we try to do in the Family Forum. I believe in understanding & compassion, not anger & hate. Inger Aspie Owned, Aspie Operated.AspergersHosting.comA.S.W.C Autism Advocacy & Exchangehttp://www.aspergershosting.com/ASWC

Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

[Guest guest]

So, "quality of life" is what it is to be based on?

And you still intend to invite AFF and AP to participate?

Inger

Re: Re: Division Seeds in Autism Advocacies

Advocacy sort of runs in the blood, my father is a very out spoken advocate for disabled veterans and has worked with political figures, news papers, the government, and non-profits including churches.I have no illusion that the possibility (not for sure) of being heard and it being highly productive is indeed possible.Balanced is logical, disagreements are part of life. However a strong core policy of quality of life can only be replicated but not defeated. Its strong, therefore those participating will be strong. Yet strength and power do combine and power has a tendency to corrupt, so views from within that are not voted upon are not representative of the whole. There is a social model that is designed for it that is really legitimate and core strong.

However centralized identities such as myself, due to the nature of ego to the collective group are the common weakness, that’s why there is to be no centralized figure(s).

I read some group dynamics and worked out my own theory.

[Guest guest]

If they show up they show up.. I've been accused of harrassing A.F.F which was flalse I could argue that the other way around. I dont contact them..A.P might but the group itself is not resolvent to these issues but positivity only, blindness of ideology. I might talk to her eventually but I dont think she will partake.Inger Lorelei <inglori@...> wrote: So, "quality of life" is what it is to be based on? And you still intend to invite AFF and AP to participate? Inger

Aspie Owned, Aspie Operated.AspergersHosting.comA.S.W.C Autism Advocacy & Exchangehttp://www.aspergershosting.com/ASWC

Travel Find great deals to the top 10 hottest destinations!

[Guest guest]

OK. Let us know if they join, and I'll decide then.

Inger

Re: Re: Division Seeds in Autism Advocacies

If they show up they show up.. I've been accused of harrassing A.F.F which was flalse I could argue that the other way around. I dont contact them..A.P might but the group itself is not resolvent to these issues but positivity only, blindness of ideology. I might talk to her eventually but I dont think she will partake.

[Guest guest]

I do not really think they will join other then cause problems. It's really not there type of politics... I's more about other things then quality of life Inger, I think you are worrying about conflicting with them socially. You don't need to really worry about that as those are not quality of life issues so it will be banned.. That is why a unity resolve for quality of life is so stronger, anything against it is seemingly compromising it needlessly and thus against it. Inger Lorelei <inglori@...> wrote: OK. Let us know if they join, and I'll decide then. Inger Aspie Owned, Aspie Operated.AspergersHosting.comA.S.W.C Autism Advocacy & Exchangehttp://www.aspergershosting.com/ASWC

Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

[Guest guest]

I won't speak for Inger. But for me, social issues have nothing to do

with it. They are manipulating members for their own purposes, and

sometimes they manipulate members just for the fun of it. When sites

such as theirs behave in such a fashion, sites such as mine should

shun them -if not actively work against them.

I have ceased wasting my time combatting them as I see their own

silliness and stupidity causing them their own negative publicity.

In some psychiatric circles, already both are the targets of licensed

professionals. My shrink things they are both full of sh*t, for

example.

Autistics with an ax to grind against the non-autistic community join

AFF. Those autistics who want to pretend there are no negative aspects

to autism join AP.

Let them delude themselves and make asses of themselves in front of

everyone. I will not bolster their unknowing effort to make the

autistic community look like fools by being in a coalition with them.

Tom

ASdministrator

" I think you are worrying about conflicting with them socially. "

[Guest guest]

Tom:

> I have ceased wasting my time combatting them as I see their own

> silliness and stupidity causing them their own negative publicity.

> In some psychiatric circles, already both are the targets of licensed

> professionals. My shrink things they are both full of sh*t, for

> example.

Apart from my activities on my own forums and wikipedia,

I'm also an active member of the evolutonary psychology

group. This is a group of people mostly from the academic

field, many are professors of psychology and psychiatry.

The group have over 3000 members. Since they changed

moderator to Stonjek, I can more or less freely

speak to these people about autism and the evolutionary

aspects of autism. I do not only write about positive aspects,

but often about the motivations and preferences of autistics

that I think I know a whole lot about. I've worked a lot

to achieve this goal, and I have a few people behind me

that made it possible. This is what I call making non-autistics

more aware of how we function and think. Especially

researchers in psychology should know a lot about

that so their next research project is a little more

in our interests. I never talk about asutism as a superior

way of being, but I frequently point out our stregths as

well as weaknesses.

Leif

[Guest guest]

Leif:

> Apart from my activities on my own forums and wikipedia,

I'm also an active member of the evolutonary psychology

group. This is a group of people mostly from the academic

field, many are professors of psychology and psychiatry.

The group have over 3000 members. Since they changed

moderator to Stonjek, I can more or less freely

speak to these people about autism and the evolutionary

aspects of autism. I do not only write about positive aspects,

but often about the motivations and preferences of autistics

that I think I know a whole lot about. I've worked a lot

to achieve this goal, and I have a few people behind me

that made it possible. This is what I call making non-autistics

more aware of how we function and think. Especially

researchers in psychology should know a lot about

that so their next research project is a little more

in our interests. I never talk about asutism as a superior

way of being, but I frequently point out our stregths as

well as weaknesses.

That's excellent, Leif! Keep up the good work.

Inger

FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship, support and

acceptance. Everyone is valued.

Check the Links section for more FAM forums.