Guest guest Posted November 19, 2005 Report Share Posted November 19, 2005 This exact subject recently came up on a parenting list that I finally got sick of. The parents were all talking about how offended they get when somebody calls their child " autistic " , and prefer to only say " he has autism. " Like there's really a difference. It's like making a big deal out of differentiating between " she's blonde " and " she has blonde hair. " Or like the term " visually impaired. " My husband is blind, dammit, not " visually impaired, " and he hates that PC BS. All these people who think the language matters so much never bother to ask the actual disabled people how *we* feel about it, do they? Elayne http://www.huntfamilyhome.net " The government thinks you're an idiot. " -- Radley Balko, www.theagitator.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2005 Report Share Posted November 19, 2005 Gail & her Service Dogs wrote: > ...I'm getting chewed on about this in another list,because of my use of > the term 'autistics'. basically,it isn't on some PC list terminology,and > frankly,I'm way too tired and stressed to give a turkey if it is PC or not. > Has anyone else ever heard of this being fussed over? > > Here is a snip from one of the post... > " As a friend on this list serve, I'm sending you some > info on a website with wonderful guidelines on writing > and reporting about people with disabilities (using > " people first " language. I've found that it makes a > tremendous difference when teaching staff and the > community. The website is below: > > http://www.lsi.ku.edu/lsi/internal/guidelines.html > > I find it offensive seeing people on a listserve > related to disability issues refer to " autistics " . > When we use terms like this, WE are the ones > dehumanizing people. " Someone has their head up their ass, and it isn't you. Person-first language is used by people who want to pretend that autism is a disease instead of a difference. Don't let this person intimidate you. Tell them they can't tell you what you're going to refer to yoruself as. I'm an autistic, not a person with autism. Person-first language chaps my ass. Griff -- .... " There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life. " - Zappa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2005 Report Share Posted November 19, 2005 On Nov 19, 2005, at 9:19 PM, Gail & her Service Dogs wrote: > ...I'm getting chewed on about this in another list,because of my > use of > the term 'autistics'. basically,it isn't on some PC list > terminology,and > frankly,I'm way too tired and stressed to give a turkey if it is PC > or not. > Has anyone else ever heard of this being fussed over? Yes, it's quite commonly fussed over. It's a way for staff to feel that they are " more enlightened " then us mere disabled people, as the staff use the right terms. To be fair, some people with disabilities do prefer the people first language. My usage guidelines are typically: - If I am talking about a specific person, and I know their preference, I respect it. It's not more respectful to use people first language if someone wants to be called autistic. Instead, it is denying them the right to call themselves what they want. - If I'm talking about a group (autistics for instance), and I know the term most people diagnosed as such use to refer to themselves, I use the same term. - If I don't know, I typically use people-first language, but I try not to get too caught up in it one way or another. I try to be willing to be corrected by someone with the actual disability however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2005 Report Share Posted November 19, 2005 Elayne wrote: >This exact subject recently came up on a parenting list that I finally got >sick of. The parents were all talking about how offended they get when >somebody calls their child " autistic " , and prefer to only say " he has >autism. " Like there's really a difference. It's like making a big deal out >of differentiating between " she's blonde " and " she has blonde hair. " Sometimes there *is* a difference, I think. If the underlying attitude is good, it doesn't matter what terms are used. But sometimes the choice of terms tells a lot about what the underlying attitudes are. A child " with autism " may have a parent who wants to destroy autism, who sees autism as a cancer, a horrible disease that has taken over an otherwise " normal " (and therefore loveable) child. That kind of attitude forces the child to strive to " overcome " xyr true self in order to be seen as loveable. A child who is autisitc is a child who can be xemself, whole, not trying to isolate/drown those aspects (or manifestations) of xemself that don't fit in with what's considered " normal. " Jane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2005 Report Share Posted November 19, 2005 At 11:56 PM 11/19/2005, Gail & her Service Dogs wrote: > ...one of the recent comebacks on that post is this snip: > > " > >I think *****'S point is well taken. All groups have their own, > >in-house terms. Like family, these terms are often none too laudatory > >but are okay because they are in house. Ick. None too laudatory? Aspie? HELLO? Zola the Aspie who wants to be called an Aspie like she is. INTP Generation X 68.44181% - Geek Goddess Right. Okay, people, you have to tell me these things, alright? I've been frozen for 30 years, okay? Throw me a freakin bone here--Dr. Evil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2005 Report Share Posted November 19, 2005 Jane Meyerding wrote: a child who can be xemself, What the hell is an xemself? I've never seen this term before. Red Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2005 Report Share Posted November 20, 2005 >Jane Meyerding wrote: > a child who can be xemself, and Red responded: >What the hell is an xemself? I've never seen this term before. In another forum, it is common (though not universal) to use genderless pronouns when appropriate (i.e., when referring to an intersexual person or when writing about a person whose gender is not known -- in this case, because the child is hypothetical). The three pronouns are xe (for he/she), xem (for him/her), and xyr (for his/hers). Jane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2005 Report Share Posted November 20, 2005 > > a child who can be xemself, > > and Red responded: > >What the hell is an xemself? I've never seen this term before. > > In another forum, it is common (though not universal) to use > genderless pronouns when appropriate (i.e., when referring to an > intersexual person or when writing about a person whose gender is not > known -- in this case, because the child is hypothetical). The three > pronouns are xe (for he/she), xem (for him/her), and xyr (for > his/hers). > > Jane > To heck with PC. Just say what you think works Jerry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2005 Report Share Posted November 21, 2005 > > Autie, autistic, aspie...don't matter to me. And I always had a > problem with PC. It's anti-freedom of speech. Sure is. People today are dumb enough without dumbing them down further with PC facism. I would say " I'm autistic " but I am not. But how do I say the same thing with aspergers? " I hate the term " aspie " so that is out. I don't like saying " I have aspergers " because it sounds like I carry it around in a suitcase and can just check it at the hotel desk if I need to act NT for a while. Jerry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2005 Report Share Posted November 21, 2005 ....I used to say I have AS,but I find it much easier to just say I'm autistic....and man,does that ever freak out Aric's IEP team!! Their whole attitude is one of 'WHY would you say that about yourself!! And especially since AS isn't on the spectrum! You are really sick! " they tried to argue that since the state doesn't regard AS as on the spectrum,it isn't autism.. yeah,right! Since when has any government gotten things like that right especially since in this case it is a differentiation made because of funding... What bothers them the most is that I have no problem with it,and that we teach Aric it is a strength,not something to hide or be ashamed of. Damn them! They are so stupid-they are obsessed with making him 'fit in',and are paranoid about him being seen as 'different'.....he IS different,for God's sake! And what is wrong with different,I asked them....strength is in diversity! ....sorry,now I'm back in defensive mode...too many months of fighting Gail, Anja & Mullen, my German Shepherd & Greyhound Service Dogs & Flicka the MinPin EmoSD. DePorres Service Dog Trainers Guild »§«.,¸¸,.·´¯`·.,¸¸,.»§« Live simply. Love generously. Care deeply. Speak kindly. Leave the rest to God. -- Re: What is the 'PC " way to refer to those on the spectrum? > > Autie, autistic, aspie...don't matter to me. And I always had a > problem with PC. It's anti-freedom of speech. Sure is. People today are dumb enough without dumbing them down further with PC facism. I would say " I'm autistic " but I am not. But how do I say the same thing with aspergers? " I hate the term " aspie " so that is out. I don't like saying " I have aspergers " because it sounds like I carry it around in a suitcase and can just check it at the hotel desk if I need to act NT for a while. Jerry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2005 Report Share Posted November 21, 2005 > I would say " I'm autistic " but I am not. But how do I say the same > thing with aspergers? " I hate the term " aspie " so that is out. I > don't > like saying " I have aspergers " because it sounds like I carry it > around > in a suitcase and can just check it at the hotel desk if I need to act > NT for a while. Once you can find me two professionals who, upon seeing a panel of adults diagnosed with different labels on the autistic spectrum, can agree one which ones are autistic and which ones are asperger's, I'll believe there is a difference. Until then I'll stick with saying " Asperger's " is simply a synonym for " Autism " , but very context dependent and dependent upon the biases of the person making the distinction. Once the label doesn't need addition context, then I'll believe it's valid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2005 Report Share Posted November 21, 2005 Jerry wrote: > I would say " I'm autistic " but I am not. But how do I say the same >thing with aspergers? " I hate the term " aspie " so that is out. I don't >like saying " I have aspergers " because it sounds like I carry it around >in a suitcase and can just check it at the hotel desk if I need to act >NT for a while. Some people say, " I'm on the autistic spectrum. " (The image in my mind is of a person riding a rainbow. Don't know where that image came from.) I'm not advocating the phrase (for or against), just mentioning it as one way some people handle the " label " problem. Jane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2005 Report Share Posted November 21, 2005 > ... What bothers them the most is that I have no problem with it,and > that we teach Aric it is a strength,not something to hide or be > ashamed of. > Damn them! They are so stupid-they are obsessed with making him 'fit > in',and > are paranoid about him being seen as 'different'.....he IS > different,for > God's sake! And what is wrong with different,I asked them....strength > is in > diversity! Bravo! I use the word " autistic " when describing myself. I try to educate people about the spectrum, but once people associate a word with something, which is always something narrow, as in the case of autism, when you say you're autistic, people always think of the " classic " definition, you know, like " Rainman " , and that's what's so frustrating about it. They can't believe that you have autism and be able to function just like they do. But are they seeing and experiencing things as we are? Of course not, and to them you are either normal or you are not, and if you aren't normal, you should do your best to imitate what is considered normal. Because they wouldn't have the guts to stand up and be proud of any differences they could or do have, they think you should bury your head in the sand. too. The human race has a tendency to want all of us to share the same religious beliefs, the same like and dislikes, follow the same trends, reject what is passe and call people who think " outside the box " as out to lunch. When you think of all the most famous thinkers and inventors in history, how many sound autistic? (Speaking of which, has anyone seen the special feature about Roald Dahl on the Charlie and the Chocolate Factory DVD? He struck me as being on the spectrum...beautiful man, nice piece about him.) Whoops, I digress... I've always been fascinated in evolution, have read scores of books about it, and think about in relation to our lives. I very much believe in the idea that autism is evolution in action, and that by and large, autistic people are a major aspect regarding the future of the human race, should there be a future. If we are happy with who we are (especially so) and allowed to BE ourselves, autistic people are the most creative, imaginative and forward thinking humans on the planet. I always despised the sheep mentality that I see in most people. Autism doesn't lend itself to this, outside of those that are trying to be NT. It's like evolution is trying to veer us away from the herd mentality for the sake of the race as a whole. It works for wolves and sheep, but for people it seems to always get in the way of real progress. If this herd mentality doesn't get tamed down, how is it we're ever going to evolve where we no longer have wars over every little thing? The population is exploding. If we don't learn how to cooperate soon, it's all going to go to hell. And if autistic people don't get the recognition and acceptance we deserve, I'm afraid evolution's going to be thwarted by the herd, resulting in de-evolution, when it could have been a beautiful thing... Okay, now it was my turn to rant. And to dream a little... Ultimately, I'm so very happy to know who I am, to hell with those that remain unenlightened or who can't accept differences or new information that appears contrary to what they've been taught. People who don't accept others most often can't accept themselves either. I've never been allowed in any of their " clicks " , not that I'd ever want to be. I much prefer being me. It's so VERY uncomfortable for me to try and become one the the " crowd " . Just makes me feel all icky. So as a consequence, I didn't have that many friends as a kid, at times none at all. But now I do - all great people who are no more normal than I am, thank god. We can have good arguments and interesting conversations. I'm so glad I stuck to my guns in that I didn't seek false friendships just for the sake of fitting in. **shudder** Sorry, all over the place tonight. I can't quite make a point, so I'll stop now! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 ....hey,rant on! You sound just like me,and all the things I have been trying to get over to people all these years! I tell Aric that for politeness,we have to learn a few scripts,and have a few social masks that we will have to drag out on occasion. But it is better that we are honest to ourselves and to others,to be who and what we are,and help them understand as they help us understand them Gail, Anja & Mullen, my German Shepherd & Greyhound Service Dogs & Flicka the MinPin EmoSD. DePorres Service Dog Trainers Guild »§«.,¸¸,.·´¯`·.,¸¸,.»§« Live simply. Love generously. Care deeply. Speak kindly. Leave the rest to God. -- Re: What is the 'PC " way to refer to those on the spectrum? > ... What bothers them the most is that I have no problem with it,and > that we teach Aric it is a strength,not something to hide or be > ashamed of. > Damn them! They are so stupid-they are obsessed with making him 'fit > in',and > are paranoid about him being seen as 'different'.....he IS > different,for > God's sake! And what is wrong with different,I asked them....strength > is in > diversity! Bravo! I use the word " autistic " when describing myself. I try to educate people about the spectrum, but once people associate a word with something, which is always something narrow, as in the case of autism, when you say you're autistic, people always think of the " classic " definition, you know, like " Rainman " , and that's what's so frustrating about it. They can't believe that you have autism and be able to function just like they do. But are they seeing and experiencing things as we are? Of course not, and to them you are either normal or you are not, and if you aren't normal, you should do your best to imitate what is considered normal. Because they wouldn't have the guts to stand up and be proud of any differences they could or do have, they think you should bury your head in the sand. too. The human race has a tendency to want all of us to share the same religious beliefs, the same like and dislikes, follow the same trends, reject what is passe and call people who think " outside the box " as out to lunch. When you think of all the most famous thinkers and inventors in history, how many sound autistic? (Speaking of which, has anyone seen the special feature about Roald Dahl on the Charlie and the Chocolate Factory DVD? He struck me as being on the spectrum...beautiful man, nice piece about him.) Whoops, I digress... I've always been fascinated in evolution, have read scores of books about it, and think about in relation to our lives. I very much believe in the idea that autism is evolution in action, and that by and large, autistic people are a major aspect regarding the future of the human race, should there be a future. If we are happy with who we are (especially so) and allowed to BE ourselves, autistic people are the most creative, imaginative and forward thinking humans on the planet. I always despised the sheep mentality that I see in most people. Autism doesn't lend itself to this, outside of those that are trying to be NT. It's like evolution is trying to veer us away from the herd mentality for the sake of the race as a whole. It works for wolves and sheep, but for people it seems to always get in the way of real progress. If this herd mentality doesn't get tamed down, how is it we're ever going to evolve where we no longer have wars over every little thing? The population is exploding. If we don't learn how to cooperate soon, it's all going to go to hell. And if autistic people don't get the recognition and acceptance we deserve, I'm afraid evolution's going to be thwarted by the herd, resulting in de-evolution, when it could have been a beautiful thing... Okay, now it was my turn to rant. And to dream a little... Ultimately, I'm so very happy to know who I am, to hell with those that remain unenlightened or who can't accept differences or new information that appears contrary to what they've been taught. People who don't accept others most often can't accept themselves either. I've never been allowed in any of their " clicks " , not that I'd ever want to be. I much prefer being me. It's so VERY uncomfortable for me to try and become one the the " crowd " . Just makes me feel all icky. So as a consequence, I didn't have that many friends as a kid, at times none at all. But now I do - all great people who are no more normal than I am, thank god. We can have good arguments and interesting conversations. I'm so glad I stuck to my guns in that I didn't seek false friendships just for the sake of fitting in. **shudder** Sorry, all over the place tonight. I can't quite make a point, so I'll stop now! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 > > I would say " I'm autistic " but I am not. But how do I say the same > > thing with aspergers? " I hate the term " aspie " so that is out. I > > don't > > like saying " I have aspergers " because it sounds like I carry it > > around > > in a suitcase and can just check it at the hotel desk if I need to act > > NT for a while. > > Once you can find me two professionals who, upon seeing a panel of > adults diagnosed with different labels on the autistic spectrum, can > agree one which ones are autistic and which ones are asperger's, I'll > believe there is a difference. > > Until then I'll stick with saying " Asperger's " is simply a synonym > for " Autism " , but very context dependent and dependent upon the > biases of the person making the distinction. Once the label doesn't > need addition context, then I'll believe it's valid. > , I was only talking about myself and I am not one of those in the broad, grey area between autism and aspergers. There is no way you can put me in the same boat with other extremes of the spectrum who are obviously autistic and just as obviously not aspergers, such as Sue Rubin for example. It is not a question of " better " , just different. Jerry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 > , I was only talking about myself and I am not one of those > in the broad, grey area between autism and aspergers. There is no way > you can put me in the same boat with other extremes of the spectrum > who are obviously autistic and just as obviously not aspergers, such > as Sue Rubin for example. It is not a question of " better " , just > different. I disagree. That's like saying someone only has the flu if they don't die from it, as if someone dies from it they " clearly " have something else. It's very possible to manifest autism differently. I wouldn't gaurantee every shrink would label you as Asperger's instead of autism either - it very much depends on their personal diagnostic criteria. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 --- In AutisticSpectrumTreeHouse , " Gerald Newport " > , I was only talking about myself and I am not one of those > in the broad, grey area between autism and aspergers. There is no way > you can put me in the same boat with other extremes of the spectrum > who are obviously autistic and just as obviously not aspergers, such > as Sue Rubin for example. It is not a question of " better " , just > different. I use " Asperger's " for two reasons: 1. I am not convinced that Asperger's and Autism are the same thing, though I believe that they are related. This may not be a PC opinion, but there it is. 2. Using the term " autistic " to describe myself is likely to generate a negative reaction (i.e. disbelief, assuming that I am " joking " , assuming that I am a hypochondriac/hystrionic/borderline, etc.). If I desired to counteract these assumptions, I would have to go into a long explaination about my neurology, and frankly, I don't always feel like doing that. (Some people, of course, choose a more activist stance, which I also feel is quite appropriate.) The upshot is that people generally have a very narrow conception of what it is to be autistic. I do not resemble this conception and as a result, I would also have to counteract the person's contempt/suspicion of me for claiming to be autistic *as well as* cope with my own difficulties in the areas of social communication/interaction. There aren't enough hours in the day. No thanks. L. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 Lairie wrote: >The upshot is that people generally have a very narrow conception of >what it is to be autistic. I do not resemble this conception and as a >result, I would also have to counteract the person's >contempt/suspicion of me for claiming to be autistic *as well as* cope >with my own difficulties in the areas of social >communication/interaction. >There aren't enough hours in the day. No thanks. I understand about not having enough hours in the day. And I also understand (from my own experience) being unable or unwilling to expend energy, either at a specific time or all the time, on difficult interpersonal dialogues. So I am not saying anyone or everyone " ought " to do otherwise. I will say, however, that saying " I am autistic " and not putting up with guff about it is one way to advocate for all autistics, including those unable to say " I am autistic. " Seems to me that the people perceived as " severe " or " low-functioning " or " classic " or " kanners " or whatever, they are the ones most likely to be most hurt/oppressed by the " very narrow conception of what it is to be autistic. " So the more that narrow conception is widened, the better. Jane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 > I use " Asperger's " for two reasons: > > 1. I am not convinced that Asperger's and Autism are the same thing, > though I believe that they are related. This may not be a PC opinion, > but there it is. Fair enough. I think they are different versions of the same thing, but I respect the opinion of those who disagree. > 2. Using the term " autistic " to describe myself is likely to generate > a negative reaction (i.e. disbelief, assuming that I am " joking " , > assuming that I am a hypochondriac/hystrionic/borderline, etc.). BTDT, no question. I have found though, that as time goes by and understanding of autism becomes more widespread, people are less inclined to doubt me when I say that I'm autistic. I even had one person a couple of weeks ago whose face just lit up when I said I'm autistic: " Really? Wow, that's so cool! How are things different for you? " It was quite a breath of fresh air. > If I desired to counteract these assumptions, I would have to go > into a > long explaination about my neurology, and frankly, I don't always feel > like doing that. (Some people, of course, choose a more activist > stance, which I also feel is quite appropriate.) True, it's a big PITA and not easy to deal with. > The upshot is that people generally have a very narrow conception of > what it is to be autistic. I do not resemble this conception and as a > result, I would also have to counteract the person's > contempt/suspicion of me for claiming to be autistic *as well as* cope > with my own difficulties in the areas of social > communication/interaction. > > There aren't enough hours in the day. No thanks. People do have a lot of preconceptions about autism (and most of them are false, of course), but those preconceptions are slowly starting to change, and they're being changed the only way that they *can* be changed -- by autistics " coming out of the closet " and challenging those notions. It's slow going, and it can definitely be pretty miserable, but I do try to " come out " as autistic at least every once in a while to help the process along, even though I often feel the same weariness that you do. Even so, though -- once in a while, you'll get a very pleasant surprise, like I did a couple of weeks back, so you never know. --Parrish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 > > > , I was only talking about myself and I am not one of those > > in the broad, grey area between autism and aspergers. There is no way > > you can put me in the same boat with other extremes of the spectrum > > who are obviously autistic and just as obviously not aspergers, such > > as Sue Rubin for example. It is not a question of " better " , just > > different. > > I disagree. That's like saying someone only has the flu if they > don't die from it, as if someone dies from it they " clearly " have > something else. No, there is a difference between aspergers and autism. You just don't want to see it. If there wasn't any difference, why would they both have seperate definitions? Why does the last thing in the DSM-IV for Aspergers clearly state that if you have aspergers, you don't meet criteria for autism? Explain that > > It's very possible to manifest autism differently. Where have I said it isn't possible? Of course it is. That is true for aspergers too. I wouldn't > gaurantee every shrink would label you as Asperger's instead of > autism either - it very much depends on their personal diagnostic > criteria. > Probably best to agree to disagree on this one. I can gaurantee that given the choice of aspergers or autism, NO professional would put me in the autism category. Jerry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 > , I was only talking about myself and I am not one of those > in the broad, grey area between autism and aspergers. There is no way > you can put me in the same boat with other extremes of the spectrum > who are obviously autistic and just as obviously not aspergers, such > as Sue Rubin for example. It is not a question of " better " , just > different. Believe it or not, I've actually seen people try to define Sue away as " Asperger's " online in the past. Not joking. In an attempt to discredit her of course, since " Asperger's " for some reason is used to do that a lot. (I guess " Asperger's " isn't autistic enough for some people. But she doesn't fit the definition for it at all regardless of stereotypes or whatever.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 Jerry wrote: > No, there is a difference between aspergers and autism. You just >don't want to see it. If there wasn't any difference, why would they >both have seperate definitions? Why does the last thing in the DSM-IV >for Aspergers clearly state that if you have aspergers, you don't >meet criteria for autism? Explain that Any instrument like the DSM should be an attempt to *describe* reality. It does not in itself constitute a reality to be imposed on the real lives of real individuals. Jane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 > Person-first language chaps my ass. Can I use that in a random .sigfile? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 --- In AutisticSpectrumTreeHouse , Jane Meyerding > I will say, however, that saying " I am autistic " and not putting up > with guff about it is one way to advocate for all autistics, > including those unable to say " I am autistic. " Seems to me that the > people perceived as " severe " or " low-functioning " or " classic " or > " kanners " or whatever, they are the ones most likely to be most > hurt/oppressed by the " very narrow conception of what it is to be > autistic. " So the more that narrow conception is widened, the better. I think that is a very legitimate way to advocate, and I admire those that do it. I just don't usually feel like being an advocate/activist. :-) As for " who is hurt more " , I suppose that one could argue that the " classic " autistics are probably far more vulnerable than " Aspies " in that the " classics " because they are (probably) less likely to live independently, hold jobs, and have a significant social network. As such, they are more likely to be disregarded in any sort of self-advocacy that they might attempt. This is a horrible state of affairs, and I can't even imagine what it must be like. At the same time, the " passing Aspie " (such as myself) is often at a disadvantage as we are EXPECTED to be " fully functional " (as NT defined) in NT settings. Failure to function in this fashion results in negative character judgements (i.e. lazy, careless, thoughtless, selfish, nasty) or mental health assumptions (i.e. personality disorders). Attempts at explaining Aspergers/Autism is met with suspicion, as one is regarded as making excuses for bad behavior. It's a real catch-22. I have two NT friends who each have a " hidden " medical condition. One suffers from chronic pain problems and the other has a serious heart condition. They get the same sort of crap from people who make negative character/mental health judgements about them when they express their limitations. As another friend once said: " People don't respect your disability if they can't see it. " L. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 > Any instrument like the DSM should be an attempt to *describe* > reality. It does not in itself constitute a reality to be imposed on > the real lives of real individuals. Exactly. I have described it in the past as this: What if, instead of Kanner and Asperger, we had totally different people who originally described autism? With totally different interests of course than Kanner and Asperger necessarily had. What if we had, say, sen's Syndrome? sen's syndrome would be characterized by (among all the standard autistic- " spectrum " traits as well) social passivity, particular difficulty with initiating, slowness of movement (outside, possibly, of stimming), and other things like that. Under that definition I'd probably have sen's syndrome (where Dr. sen simply concentrated on a particular group of autistics that I happen to belong to). I am diagnosed as autistic under the real life definitions. There are people who are diagnosed as Asperger under the real life definitions who would also be diagnosed as sen's syndrome. What if we were having this conversation, and I said, " Surely I cannot call myself autistic. Because I have this similar condition called sen's syndrome. And see the traits are right there in the DSM. " Would that make sense? Just because one doctor at some point in time had emphasized a particular kind of motor and social passivity as the important overriding feature of the group of autistic people he was looking at? To just cut myself off from the whole definition of autism because some guy in history found certain traits more interesting or useful to document than others? Meanwhile, of course, in this scenario, plenty of people now called aspies and auties would have sen's syndrome, those with that kind of motor/social passivity. Those without it (whether aspie or autie in our world) would have just plain autism, real autism, that we wouldn't want to confuse with sen's syndrome of course, apparently. That is why I don't divide us in two. Because I can see other ways to split us in half just as easily. On some other line. And I do not think that just because Asperger and Lorna Wing both happened at one point to find a particular pattern interesting, that this means that this pattern is set apart from other autistics in reality. Any more than I would set myself apart from other autistics/ " aspies " who do not have the particular trouble initiating that I do. I'm not sure if what I'm saying makes sense or not, but I hope I'm getting my point across (background: several days of migraine with vomiting, very little food in system because I don't want to upchuck it, getting dizzy -- meaning I do have a point buried in here somewhere but I hope it's readable). To me the autism/AS line is arbitrary and I can see lots of other lines and would rather see the whole thing as a many-dimensional landscape than splitting it in half in such a crude jagged way based on some people's importance-giving of speech acquisition and such. I do think there are delineations in the autism spectrum/landscape/multidimensional grid, but I don't agree with the way the lines are drawn currently. Hence I use autism for all of them until someone comes up with a better set of words that make more sense (if they ever do). I just don't view age of speech acquisition and such as *the* dividing line, or the most important dividing line, between autistic people, so I don't use it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.