Re: Re: Idiot Ann Coulter as Asperger's Syndrome Victim

[Guest guest]

The thing to be upset about is that the entire essay is tongue in cheek.

He's using Asperger's as a means of insulting Coulter, not seriously

suggesting she may be one of us. THe purpose behind the essay is, if

anything, to insult Ann Coulter, by connecting her with us.

>

> -

> I don't understand why people are upset with this at all. Maybe this

> right winger is one of us. So what? I think the whole business of

> selectiviely imposing AS on only the PC people we want to include is

> more upsetting than having to live with a few rightwing nutcases who

> might be more deserving of being ASSpies.

>

> I have known several asspies to be just as guilty of lying, hysterics

> and other assinine behavior as this woman. But they are NOT

> symptoms of aspergers, just additonal fringe benefits in some cases

> and that should be corrected.

>

> Jerry Newport

>

> -- In

AutisticSpectrumTreeHouse <AutisticSpectrumTreeHouse%40yahoogroup\

s.com>,

> " Ari N. "

>

> wrote:

> >

> > Am I the only one who views this as incredibly offensive? Let's let this

> > fellow (a college professor, for the love of God!) know that we don't

> > appreciate being used as a pejorative for his political vendettas. (I'm

> also

> > not terribly fond of being equated with Ann Coulter, or having my

> neurology

> > accused of being characteristic of hysterics, lying and general

> dishonesty)

> > If we get enough of us to post fast (it was posted a few hours ago)

> > expressing our annoyance, I suspect we'll be able to move him to a

> > retraction fairly quickly. Let's get to it. This sort of ignorant

> prejudice

> > is best dealt with by swift advocacy.

> >

> > -Ari

> >

> > http://docrod.blogspot.com/2006/06/idiot-ann-coulter-as-

> aspergers.html

> >

> > *After hearing Ann Coulter on the Hannity radio show today

> (Thursday),

> > it dawned on me -- Ann is a victim of Asperger's Syndrome. Those

> afflicted

> > with Asperger's Syndrome may have normal or above average

> intellectual

> > capacity, but also possess atypically inappropriate or poorly

> developed

> > social skills.

> >

> > While Coulter is not nearly as intelligent as she and others purport her

>

> to

> > be, anyone who graduated from Cornell and Michigan Law possesses

> some

> > smarts. But, her track record of rhetorical bombthrowing, combined

> with her

> > flawed attempts at interpersonal communication skills in recent

> interviews,

> > clearly reveals Asperger's traits. As such, I almost feel sorry for her

> > because it does speak to a brain disorder.

> >

> > I say almost, because she was at it again today. Two things she said

> were

> > typical of her lack of any understanding of logic. First, she equates

> her

> > current number one ranking on the New York Times bestseller list as

> > indicating a groundswell of support for her berating the so-

> called " Jersey

> > Girls " . Coulter's prior books have sold from 300,000 to 400,000 hard

> copies.

> > Those numbers would qualify her as a bestseller, though not a

> blockbuster.

> > Her cynical attacks on the 9/11 widows has generated a lot of

> publicity, and

> > probably 1) prompted her normal book-buying audience to buy her

> book earlier

> > than normal and 2) led to some people to buy her book out of morbid

> > curiosity. Remember, NASCAR viewership has never been higher,

> but there's a

> > chunk of the audience that is not watching to see drivers go around in

> a

> > circle, but to see the crashes. Right now, Coulter's book is the

> equivalent

> > of a car accident.

> >

> > Second, Coulter asserts that liberals have not been complaining

> about the

> > other claims in her book (that liberals are godless, that evolution is

> bunk,

> > etc.) and are thus conceding that her arguments are correct. Ms.

> Coulter,

> > here's a newsflash. Liberals are not addressing those issues because

> > liberals are not interested in interplanetary dialogue. Your positions

> are

> > so out there, it's not worth discussion. But, the viciousness by which

> the

> > 9/11 widows are attacked can't be ignored.

> >

> > A third claim by Coulter gives creedence to the Asperger's diagnosis.

> Twice

> > she referred to Corn -- who apparently gave her a prior bad

> review of

> > her book -- as a heroin addict. If Mr. Corn is a recovering addict, the

> ad

> > hominem attack was both gratuitous and cruel. If Mr. Corn has never

> been an

> > addict, Ms. Coulter is in danger of being sued for libel (though Mr.

> Corn is

> > a public figure, you can't libel a person out of malice, and revenge for

>

> a

> > bad review would constitute malice). In either case, the comment is

> typical

> > of a person suffering from Asperger's Syndrome.

> >

> > Beyond her present dysfunction, Ms. Coulter has other problems.

> >

> > 1) She has lied about her age. She has claimed she is 43, but she is

> > actually 45.

> >

> > 2) She is being investigated in Florida for voter fraud, not only giving

> a

> > false address on her voter registration form, but also voting in the

> wrong

> > district.

> >

> > 3) She plays fast and loose with the facts, and may have committed

> > plagiarism -- check out the Huffington Post, the Rude Pundit and the

> Raw

> > Story blogs.

> >

> > Still, that all pales in comparison to suffering from Asperger's. I hope

>

> she

> > seeks treatment. Our public discourse could use the break.*

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Ari wrote:

>The thing to be upset about is that the entire essay is tongue in cheek.

>He's using Asperger's as a means of insulting Coulter, not seriously

>suggesting she may be one of us. THe purpose behind the essay is, if

>anything, to insult Ann Coulter, by connecting her with us.

Right. It does not matter at all who is the target of the attack.

What matters is what the writer implies about people with an

Asperger's Syndrome diagnosis. He implies that everyone with that

diagnosis can be expected to have a " brain disorder " (his words) that

will make the person unreliable and weird and generally not to be

respected or trusted. Although there may well be some AS-diagnosed

individuals who fit that description, it is no more fair to say that

" AS makes them that way " than it is fair to say " Being female makes

her that way " (in the case of a woman one wishes to bad-mouth) or

" Being male makes him that way " or " being of Asian ancestry makes xem

that way " or whatever.

And it is dangerous to all of us when malicious stereotypes are

spread around. What is the effect on the person who goes for a job

interview tomorrow and the person doing the hiring has just read some

diatribe about AS? Even if the job candidate does not " come out " with

xyr AS/autism diagnosis, any " signs " of AS/autism (or what the

employer *thinks* are signs of AS/autism) may be taken as proof that

the candidate is dangerously unstable -- or at least too big a risk.

Jane

[Guest guest]

Exactly. That's especially a concern in Academia, where positions are very

competitive for Professorship spots and the selection committees will often

not wish to consider anyone with potentially undesirable traits. It's a

shame, because many of us are very well suited for academia too. We need to

combat these stereotypes, or else this person's students and anyone applying

for a job under his auspices will suffer the consequences. That's not even

going into the longer term ripple effect, as his field will probably provide

ample opportunities for him to spread this stereotype to his students as a

teaching tool.

-Ari

>

> Ari wrote:

> >The thing to be upset about is that the entire essay is tongue in cheek.

> >He's using Asperger's as a means of insulting Coulter, not seriously

> >suggesting she may be one of us. THe purpose behind the essay is, if

> >anything, to insult Ann Coulter, by connecting her with us.

>

> Right. It does not matter at all who is the target of the attack.

> What matters is what the writer implies about people with an

> Asperger's Syndrome diagnosis. He implies that everyone with that

> diagnosis can be expected to have a " brain disorder " (his words) that

> will make the person unreliable and weird and generally not to be

> respected or trusted. Although there may well be some AS-diagnosed

> individuals who fit that description, it is no more fair to say that

> " AS makes them that way " than it is fair to say " Being female makes

> her that way " (in the case of a woman one wishes to bad-mouth) or

> " Being male makes him that way " or " being of Asian ancestry makes xem

> that way " or whatever.

>

> And it is dangerous to all of us when malicious stereotypes are

> spread around. What is the effect on the person who goes for a job

> interview tomorrow and the person doing the hiring has just read some

> diatribe about AS? Even if the job candidate does not " come out " with

> xyr AS/autism diagnosis, any " signs " of AS/autism (or what the

> employer *thinks* are signs of AS/autism) may be taken as proof that

> the candidate is dangerously unstable -- or at least too big a risk.

>

> Jane

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

OK

I step into the fire. I am fan of ann coulters and I like her style. I dont

think she is a liar. I think those that call her a liar are people who have

a political agenda. She often makes good points. As for the " jersey girls "

regardless of the words she makes 2 good point that are valid

1) Democrats often us victims to make political point , cause they

" unassailable " and if you attack their view it is very easy to make an

attack on them and their victim hood.

2) I and many others in the USA watched how the 9/11 widows gained a lot of

political clout and pushing agenda that would be opposed more vigorously if

it wasn't for their victim hood.

Ann Coulter went for the jugular and broke taboo and actually attacked the

victim. In America, This is amazing. She broke taboo and gave compelling

alternative of the McCarthy years as well. We need fresh thinkers like her.

>

> I agree with everyone about all the bad things they say about this

> person. as if she personifys everyone with ASD. They talk alot about

> her being a liar, and as for me and a few others i know we are not

> good at lying. also it acts like they think that every asperger's is a

> social mistake. i know for a fact that not all of us are like that. I

> wish the person had read some facts. also maybe asked some questions

> to another person with ASD before he desided to lump us all together

> and say that we where all liars and social freeks. i think that it was

> not a good thing to start sterotyping us that way without knowing all

> the facts.

>

>

>

--

www.fmplugin.net

www.melesystems.com

www.youseful.com

www.sharpinstall.net/smf (forums)

[Guest guest]

I really don't care about whether Ann Coulter is attacked or not.

Personally, I don't like her and I'm saying that as someone who is certainly

not left-wing. But the point here isn't about Coulter, it's about this

person using our neurology as a pejorative.

He's taken it down, by the way, but they haven't acknowledged the offense or

made an apology. I'm going to draft a letter asking them to publically

apologize, at the very least in the same place they posted the original

entry, and take a few moments to discuss the importance of avoiding these

kinds of misconceptions and how false they are. If he agrees, that's

wonderful. If not, then we can think about pursuing other options (writing

to the Dean of his Department, etc.) that would make him more likely to

avoid these sorts of things in the future. I feel like simply taking this

thing off isn't enough, as he's likely to use this sort of language and

offensive comparisons in his classes or his real day to day life unless a

more public recantation is made. We really need to drive home the point

here, for the sake of future autistics whose lives this person might somehow

affect.

-Ari

>

> OK

>

> I step into the fire. I am fan of ann coulters and I like her style. I

> dont

> think she is a liar. I think those that call her a liar are people who

> have

> a political agenda. She often makes good points. As for the " jersey girls "

> regardless of the words she makes 2 good point that are valid

>

> 1) Democrats often us victims to make political point , cause they

> " unassailable " and if you attack their view it is very easy to make an

> attack on them and their victim hood.

> 2) I and many others in the USA watched how the 9/11 widows gained a lot

> of

> political clout and pushing agenda that would be opposed more vigorously

> if

> it wasn't for their victim hood.

>

> Ann Coulter went for the jugular and broke taboo and actually attacked the

> victim. In America, This is amazing. She broke taboo and gave compelling

> alternative of the McCarthy years as well. We need fresh thinkers like

> her.

>

>

> On 6/16/06, natalie <water_harpie1@... <water_harpie1%40yahoo.com>>

> wrote:

> >

> > I agree with everyone about all the bad things they say about this

> > person. as if she personifys everyone with ASD. They talk alot about

> > her being a liar, and as for me and a few others i know we are not

> > good at lying. also it acts like they think that every asperger's is a

> > social mistake. i know for a fact that not all of us are like that. I

> > wish the person had read some facts. also maybe asked some questions

> > to another person with ASD before he desided to lump us all together

> > and say that we where all liars and social freeks. i think that it was

> > not a good thing to start sterotyping us that way without knowing all

> > the facts.

> >

> >

> >

>

> --

> www.fmplugin.net

> www.melesystems.com

> www.youseful.com

> www.sharpinstall.net/smf (forums)

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Ari

I agree with you. We should write letters to this guy and the department

head.

He tried to smear someone for simply being on of us (maybe). I am reminded

of german elected officials insulting each other of being autistic

>

> I really don't care about whether Ann Coulter is attacked or not.

> Personally, I don't like her and I'm saying that as someone who is

> certainly

> not left-wing. But the point here isn't about Coulter, it's about this

> person using our neurology as a pejorative.

>

> He's taken it down, by the way, but they haven't acknowledged the offense

> or

> made an apology. I'm going to draft a letter asking them to publically

> apologize, at the very least in the same place they posted the original

> entry, and take a few moments to discuss the importance of avoiding these

> kinds of misconceptions and how false they are. If he agrees, that's

> wonderful. If not, then we can think about pursuing other options (writing

> to the Dean of his Department, etc.) that would make him more likely to

> avoid these sorts of things in the future. I feel like simply taking this

> thing off isn't enough, as he's likely to use this sort of language and

> offensive comparisons in his classes or his real day to day life unless a

> more public recantation is made. We really need to drive home the point

> here, for the sake of future autistics whose lives this person might

> somehow

> affect.

>

> -Ari

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

At 02:25 PM 6/16/2006, Ari N. wrote:

>He's taken it down, by the way, but they haven't acknowledged the offense or

>made an apology. I'm going to draft a letter asking them to publically

>apologize, at the very least in the same place they posted the original

>entry, and take a few moments to discuss the importance of avoiding these

>kinds of misconceptions and how false they are. If he agrees, that's

>wonderful. If not, then we can think about pursuing other options (writing

>to the Dean of his Department, etc.) that would make him more likely to

>avoid these sorts of things in the future. I feel like simply taking this

>thing off isn't enough, as he's likely to use this sort of language and

>offensive comparisons in his classes or his real day to day life unless a

>more public recantation is made. We really need to drive home the point

>here, for the sake of future autistics whose lives this person might somehow

>affect.

I actually advise against that, Ari. That he did something is

important--how many times have you seen crap like this go on and maybe if

we're lucky, they will print our letters but leave the article unchanged,

like with the nutty professor article? Give him a chance to think it

over--the fact that he changed it promptly says that he's a reasonable

human being. He may end up doing something after he's had a chance to read

up on it.

We don't " really need to drive home the point " here because if he didn't

" get it " , he wouldn't have acted on it. He doesn't need to be punished--it

was clear that his awareness was raised, and like any change, it isn't

instantaneous. That's why I wrote him and thanked him for doing it--it

further breaks the stereotype that people with Aspergers are oblivious to

others and don't know how to act properly in a social setting.

I would like you to understand where I am coming from here. We are a

minority. We need to stand up for ourselves. We also need to use good

strategy so that we get the most bang for the buck. This person's actions

showed us that he is at the least a reasonable human being who thinks about

what he does. He may never have considered the matter before, but he is

thinking about it now. That is our goal, is it not? To get people to

understand?

Don't alienate him by giving him both barrels when he already took steps by

changing what he said. Anyone can make a mistake unthinkingly, you and I

included. Give the benefit of the doubt here and save your energy for the

real offenders like the nutty professor bitch.

That being said, there is no reason you couldn't write a pleasant letter

saying you were glad he changed it and would he consider writing something

about stereotypes. The idea would be to open a dialogue with someone who is

inclined to listen. We want him to keep listening, so we adjust our actions

to this end.

Z

http://zola.livejournal.com/

" What are we going to do tonight, Brain? "

" The same thing we do every night, Pinky. We're going to try to take over

the world!! " ---Pinky and the Brain

[Guest guest]

Something should be done. HOwever, it may be best to try and approach it

diplomatically first. A polite letter got the thing taken down. I'm going to

write a letter to get an apology posted. I'll let you all know what the

result is. I would recommend that everyone stand by on taking any further

action until then.

-Ari

>

> Ari

>

> I agree with you. We should write letters to this guy and the department

> head.

>

> He tried to smear someone for simply being on of us (maybe). I am reminded

> of german elected officials insulting each other of being autistic

>

>

> On 6/16/06, Ari N. <Aneeman@... <Aneeman%40gmail.com>> wrote:

> >

> > I really don't care about whether Ann Coulter is attacked or not.

> > Personally, I don't like her and I'm saying that as someone who is

> > certainly

> > not left-wing. But the point here isn't about Coulter, it's about this

> > person using our neurology as a pejorative.

> >

> > He's taken it down, by the way, but they haven't acknowledged the

> offense

> > or

> > made an apology. I'm going to draft a letter asking them to publically

> > apologize, at the very least in the same place they posted the original

> > entry, and take a few moments to discuss the importance of avoiding

> these

> > kinds of misconceptions and how false they are. If he agrees, that's

> > wonderful. If not, then we can think about pursuing other options

> (writing

> > to the Dean of his Department, etc.) that would make him more likely to

> > avoid these sorts of things in the future. I feel like simply taking

> this

> > thing off isn't enough, as he's likely to use this sort of language and

> > offensive comparisons in his classes or his real day to day life unless

> a

> > more public recantation is made. We really need to drive home the point

> > here, for the sake of future autistics whose lives this person might

> > somehow

> > affect.

> >

> > -Ari

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

>

[Guest guest]

Zola,

I think you and I are in agreement, actually. As I said in my original

message, my intention is not to write to his superiors or do anything

negative immediately. I intend to write him a polite letter, requesting that

he apologize and explain on his blog how what he said was not true. I think

that once I explain the negative ramifications of his stereotyping, he very

well may do what we want him to do. I prefer to think of other forms of

pressure as very much a last resort in this instance. Rest assured, you

don't need to impress upon me the need for careful thought in dealing with

cases like these. I don't intend to give this fellow " both barrels " and I

hope you'll tell me where you got that impression. This guy should be given

every opportunity to be educated and cooperative. Only after every other

option has been exhausted would I seriously consider writing a politely

worded letter to the Dean of his college. Youth doesn't always equal

thoughtless, impulsive action. That happens to be another stereotype I

intend to work against.

-Ari

>

> I actually advise against that, Ari. That he did something is

> important--how many times have you seen crap like this go on and maybe if

> we're lucky, they will print our letters but leave the article unchanged,

> like with the nutty professor article? Give him a chance to think it

> over--the fact that he changed it promptly says that he's a reasonable

> human being. He may end up doing something after he's had a chance to read

>

> up on it.

>

> We don't " really need to drive home the point " here because if he didn't

> " get it " , he wouldn't have acted on it. He doesn't need to be punished--it

>

> was clear that his awareness was raised, and like any change, it isn't

> instantaneous. That's why I wrote him and thanked him for doing it--it

> further breaks the stereotype that people with Aspergers are oblivious to

> others and don't know how to act properly in a social setting.

>

> I would like you to understand where I am coming from here. We are a

> minority. We need to stand up for ourselves. We also need to use good

> strategy so that we get the most bang for the buck. This person's actions

> showed us that he is at the least a reasonable human being who thinks

> about

> what he does. He may never have considered the matter before, but he is

> thinking about it now. That is our goal, is it not? To get people to

> understand?

>

> Don't alienate him by giving him both barrels when he already took steps

> by

> changing what he said. Anyone can make a mistake unthinkingly, you and I

> included. Give the benefit of the doubt here and save your energy for the

> real offenders like the nutty professor bitch.

>

> That being said, there is no reason you couldn't write a pleasant letter

> saying you were glad he changed it and would he consider writing something

>

> about stereotypes. The idea would be to open a dialogue with someone who

> is

> inclined to listen. We want him to keep listening, so we adjust our

> actions

> to this end.

>

> Z

>

> http://zola.livejournal.com/

>

> " What are we going to do tonight, Brain? "

> " The same thing we do every night, Pinky. We're going to try to take over

> the world!! " ---Pinky and the Brain

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I got it from:

>I feel like simply taking this

>thing off isn't enough, as he's likely to use this sort of language and

>offensive comparisons in his classes or his real day to day life unless a

>more public recantation is made. We really need to drive home the point

>here, for the sake of future autistics whose lives this person might somehow

>affect.

and from

>If he agrees, that's

>wonderful. If not, then we can think about pursuing other options (writing

>to the Dean of his Department, etc.) that would make him more likely to

>avoid these sorts of things in the future.

I didn't see your mail about being more diplomatic, it came in after I sent

mine. The fact that took it down tells me he is more likely to avoid these

sorts of things in the future, and that's why I felt that continued

sanctions were overkill. As I said, I see nothing wrong with a pleasant mail.

Z

At 03:58 PM 6/16/2006, Ari N. wrote:

>Zola,

>

>I think you and I are in agreement, actually. As I said in my original

>message, my intention is not to write to his superiors or do anything

>negative immediately. I intend to write him a polite letter, requesting that

>he apologize and explain on his blog how what he said was not true. I think

>that once I explain the negative ramifications of his stereotyping, he very

>well may do what we want him to do. I prefer to think of other forms of

>pressure as very much a last resort in this instance. Rest assured, you

>don't need to impress upon me the need for careful thought in dealing with

>cases like these. I don't intend to give this fellow " both barrels " and I

>hope you'll tell me where you got that impression. This guy should be given

>every opportunity to be educated and cooperative. Only after every other

>option has been exhausted would I seriously consider writing a politely

>worded letter to the Dean of his college. Youth doesn't always equal

>thoughtless, impulsive action. That happens to be another stereotype I

>intend to work against.

>

>-Ari

>

>

> >

> > I actually advise against that, Ari. That he did something is

> > important--how many times have you seen crap like this go on and maybe if

> > we're lucky, they will print our letters but leave the article unchanged,

> > like with the nutty professor article? Give him a chance to think it

> > over--the fact that he changed it promptly says that he's a reasonable

> > human being. He may end up doing something after he's had a chance to read

> >

> > up on it.

> >

> > We don't " really need to drive home the point " here because if he didn't

> > " get it " , he wouldn't have acted on it. He doesn't need to be punished--it

> >

> > was clear that his awareness was raised, and like any change, it isn't

> > instantaneous. That's why I wrote him and thanked him for doing it--it

> > further breaks the stereotype that people with Aspergers are oblivious to

> > others and don't know how to act properly in a social setting.

> >

> > I would like you to understand where I am coming from here. We are a

> > minority. We need to stand up for ourselves. We also need to use good

> > strategy so that we get the most bang for the buck. This person's actions

> > showed us that he is at the least a reasonable human being who thinks

> > about

> > what he does. He may never have considered the matter before, but he is

> > thinking about it now. That is our goal, is it not? To get people to

> > understand?

> >

> > Don't alienate him by giving him both barrels when he already took steps

> > by

> > changing what he said. Anyone can make a mistake unthinkingly, you and I

> > included. Give the benefit of the doubt here and save your energy for the

> > real offenders like the nutty professor bitch.

> >

> > That being said, there is no reason you couldn't write a pleasant letter

> > saying you were glad he changed it and would he consider writing something

> >

> > about stereotypes. The idea would be to open a dialogue with someone who

> > is

> > inclined to listen. We want him to keep listening, so we adjust our

> > actions

> > to this end.

> >

> > Z

> >

> > <http://zola.livejournal.com/>http://zola.livejournal.com/

> >

> > " What are we going to do tonight, Brain? "

> > " The same thing we do every night, Pinky. We're going to try to take over

> > the world!! " ---Pinky and the Brain

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

>

[Guest guest]

Yes, I can certainly see why you might have gotten that impression. But if

you look at the substance of what I said, I think I was pretty clear that

any further action should only be taken if he didn't show himself to be

cooperative ( " If he agrees, that's wonderful... " ). I certainly can

understand the confusion though. Meta-message versus actual message, as they

say. Now on to write my letter.

-Ari

>

> I got it from:

>

>

> >I feel like simply taking this

> >thing off isn't enough, as he's likely to use this sort of language and

> >offensive comparisons in his classes or his real day to day life unless a

> >more public recantation is made. We really need to drive home the point

> >here, for the sake of future autistics whose lives this person might

> somehow

> >affect.

>

> and from

>

>

> >If he agrees, that's

> >wonderful. If not, then we can think about pursuing other options

> (writing

> >to the Dean of his Department, etc.) that would make him more likely to

> >avoid these sorts of things in the future.

>

> I didn't see your mail about being more diplomatic, it came in after I

> sent

> mine. The fact that took it down tells me he is more likely to avoid these

>

> sorts of things in the future, and that's why I felt that continued

> sanctions were overkill. As I said, I see nothing wrong with a pleasant

> mail.

>

> Z

>

>

> At 03:58 PM 6/16/2006, Ari N. wrote:

>

> >Zola,

> >

> >I think you and I are in agreement, actually. As I said in my original

> >message, my intention is not to write to his superiors or do anything

> >negative immediately. I intend to write him a polite letter, requesting

> that

> >he apologize and explain on his blog how what he said was not true. I

> think

> >that once I explain the negative ramifications of his stereotyping, he

> very

> >well may do what we want him to do. I prefer to think of other forms of

> >pressure as very much a last resort in this instance. Rest assured, you

> >don't need to impress upon me the need for careful thought in dealing

> with

> >cases like these. I don't intend to give this fellow " both barrels " and I

> >hope you'll tell me where you got that impression. This guy should be

> given

> >every opportunity to be educated and cooperative. Only after every other

> >option has been exhausted would I seriously consider writing a politely

> >worded letter to the Dean of his college. Youth doesn't always equal

> >thoughtless, impulsive action. That happens to be another stereotype I

> >intend to work against.

> >

> >-Ari

> >

> >On 6/16/06, Zola <<mailto:zola%

<zola%25>40zolaweb.com>zola@...<zola%40zolaweb.com>>

> wrote:

> > >

> > > I actually advise against that, Ari. That he did something is

> > > important--how many times have you seen crap like this go on and maybe

> if

> > > we're lucky, they will print our letters but leave the article

> unchanged,

> > > like with the nutty professor article? Give him a chance to think it

> > > over--the fact that he changed it promptly says that he's a reasonable

> > > human being. He may end up doing something after he's had a chance to

> read

> > >

> > > up on it.

> > >

> > > We don't " really need to drive home the point " here because if he

> didn't

> > > " get it " , he wouldn't have acted on it. He doesn't need to be

> punished--it

> > >

> > > was clear that his awareness was raised, and like any change, it isn't

> > > instantaneous. That's why I wrote him and thanked him for doing it--it

> > > further breaks the stereotype that people with Aspergers are oblivious

> to

> > > others and don't know how to act properly in a social setting.

> > >

> > > I would like you to understand where I am coming from here. We are a

> > > minority. We need to stand up for ourselves. We also need to use good

> > > strategy so that we get the most bang for the buck. This person's

> actions

> > > showed us that he is at the least a reasonable human being who thinks

> > > about

> > > what he does. He may never have considered the matter before, but he

> is

> > > thinking about it now. That is our goal, is it not? To get people to

> > > understand?

> > >

> > > Don't alienate him by giving him both barrels when he already took

> steps

> > > by

> > > changing what he said. Anyone can make a mistake unthinkingly, you and

> I

> > > included. Give the benefit of the doubt here and save your energy for

> the

> > > real offenders like the nutty professor bitch.

> > >

> > > That being said, there is no reason you couldn't write a pleasant

> letter

> > > saying you were glad he changed it and would he consider writing

> something

> > >

> > > about stereotypes. The idea would be to open a dialogue with someone

> who

> > > is

> > > inclined to listen. We want him to keep listening, so we adjust our

> > > actions

> > > to this end.

> > >

> > > Z

> > >

> > > <http://zola.livejournal.com/>http://zola.livejournal.com/

>

> > >

> > > " What are we going to do tonight, Brain? "

> > > " The same thing we do every night, Pinky. We're going to try to take

> over

> > > the world!! " ---Pinky and the Brain

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Zola wrote:

>...The fact that took it down tells me he is more likely to avoid these

>sorts of things in the future, and that's why I felt that continued

>sanctions were overkill. As I said, I see nothing wrong with a pleasant mail.

Do we know *why* he took it down? Maybe he realized his error. Or

maybe somebody told him he might get sued so he took it down but will

be spreading the same prejudice elsewhere.

Jane

[Guest guest]

At 07:22 PM 6/16/2006, Jane Meyerding wrote:

>Do we know *why* he took it down? Maybe he realized his error. Or

>maybe somebody told him he might get sued so he took it down but will

>be spreading the same prejudice elsewhere.

By whom and on what basis? An opinion post on the internet? Sorry, covered

by the First Amendment. If he was worried about getting sued, he would be

more worried about being accused of libel by Ann Coulter because he's

dissing her, that he dissed us is secondary, and he put the post right back

up, reworded.

We don't know, we can just look at what happened, which is several people

wrote him and he not only took down the post, he reworded it to be clearer

as to what he meant. Given the speed at which it happened, I'd be more

inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt because he didn't make a big

stink or argument, he just changed it.

See, what I worry about is us making the mistake of magnifying every battle

to the point that every battle is life or death. Starhawk had some

interesting things to say about that aspect of what she calls " the

self-hater " in Truth or Dare. I know you read a lot of femnist philophy,

did you see that one?

I'm saying " how far do we want to go? " Or better yet, if you made a

mistake, and corrected it immediately, would you appreciate having your

nose rubbed in it further? That's an NT game, I would think we could do

better, personally. This is a wonderful opportunity to open up a dialogue.

There's plenty of idiots out there that wouldn't even have updated their

post, and we should save our ammo for them.

Z

http://zola.livejournal.com/

" What are we going to do tonight, Brain? "

" The same thing we do every night, Pinky. We're going to try to take over

the world!! " ---Pinky and the Brain

[Guest guest]

I wrote wrote:

> >Do we know *why* he took it down? Maybe he realized his error. Or

> >maybe somebody told him he might get sued so he took it down but will

> >be spreading the same prejudice elsewhere.

and Zola responded:

>By whom and on what basis? An opinion post on the internet? Sorry, covered

>by the First Amendment. If he was worried about getting sued, he would be

>more worried about being accused of libel by Ann Coulter because he's

>dissing her, that he dissed us is secondary, and he put the post right back

>up, reworded.

I did not say " Maybe he took it down because he realized, accurately,

that he might be sued. " I said " Maybe somebody told him he might get

sued so he took it down.... " A person can act (people often do) on

the basis of incorrect information, which they may believe or may not

want to take the trouble to check out. And it was only an example,

anyway. As far as I knew at the time I wrote that query, there was no

reason to assume the taking down of the piece had anything to do with

the AS element. The fact that he re-wrote it without the AS, as I

learned later, does make it logical to assume it was the AS garbage

that caused him to act. Doesn't say anything definitive about his

motivation, though, as far as I know.

>See, what I worry about is us making the mistake of magnifying every battle

>to the point that every battle is life or death. Starhawk had some

>interesting things to say about that aspect of what she calls " the

>self-hater " in Truth or Dare. I know you read a lot of femnist philophy,

>did you see that one?

Who was making it life or death? All I saw was Ari planning to write

a polite letter. Maybe you are reacting to my " letters needed "

subject line? I still don't see that as an over-reaction, especially

given that I didn't know the page had been removed when I wrote that

post. Saying " something should be done " is not equivalent to

launching an attack (nor to advocating that an attack be launched).

I know about Starhawk, but I tend to be (feel) allergic to most of

the discourse of most goddess-worshiping feminist writing and

therefore have deprived myself of her wisdom (except when I get it

second-hand).

Jane

[Guest guest]

I'm not sure what you mean by that statement about Joe, but it seems highly

inappropriate and uncalled for. What has he done to you?

Following politics as I do in this country, I really don't think Coulter is

one of us. She's part of a group of public figures that make very good

livings off of being as inflammatory as possible, thereby appealing to the

party " base " . I think you're mistaking her overgeneralizations and

judgemental and offensive statements for something that comes to her without

noticing or as an autistic trait. But unless she's remarkably different from

the many other commentators that are just like her, they're really just very

effective means of mobilizing the base and getting extensive press attention

ahead of a new book she has coming out. It's important not to read into

things too far. Ann Coulter knows exactly what the ramifications of what she

says are going to be.

I do generally agree with what you said about female aspies, though I really

can't see Ann Coulter falling under that category at all. It's a topic that

bears further discussion (undiagnosed female aspies, not Ann Coulter).

-Ari

>

>

> >

> > The thing to be upset about is that the entire essay is tongue in cheek.

> > He's using Asperger's as a means of insulting Coulter, not seriously

> > suggesting she may be one of us. THe purpose behind the essay is, if

> > anything, to insult Ann Coulter, by connecting her with us.

> >

> >

> Upon re-reading the essay, I agree with that. I am glad he took it down.

>

> The author would have made a more efficient insult by just noting that

> Joe Mele is an admirer of Coulter

>

> However, Coulter could certainly be one of us. Lots of women aren't

> diagnosed because it is easier to be written off as the B-word or other

> impolite nouns than admit to a syndrome. An obsessive aspie woman can

> just mainstream as anorexic for example. Coulter's extremely judgmental

> outlook and social ineptitude certainly help qualify her to join us.

>

> Jerry Newport

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Jane, you make an excellent point and it's for precisely that reason that I

say that we can't just drop this matter now. I don't think this fellow was

concerned about getting sued, but controversy can be very dangerous for a

University Professor pursuing advancement. He has not yet received the

highest title in his field (Professor, as opposed to the either Assistant or

Associate Professor he holds now) and depending on whether or not he has

tenure he may have reason to be concerned about how a letter writing

campaign or internet-searchable controversy would effect him. He may have

regretted his ignorance and took it down, but he may not have. I'm inclined

to find out more.

I don't feel I'm overreacting here. Now, I'm going to send this person a

polite letter (or alternatively, I may wait till Monday and call and have a

polite phone conversation) and then we will be better placed to decide what

to do next. No one is forcing anyone to do anything and no one needs to

condescend to anyone about this. As Jane said, doing something is not the

same as staging an " attack " on someone. I'll let you know how it goes on

Monday.

-Ari

>

> I wrote wrote:

> > >Do we know *why* he took it down? Maybe he realized his error. Or

> > >maybe somebody told him he might get sued so he took it down but will

> > >be spreading the same prejudice elsewhere.

>

> and Zola responded:

>

> >By whom and on what basis? An opinion post on the internet? Sorry,

> covered

> >by the First Amendment. If he was worried about getting sued, he would be

> >more worried about being accused of libel by Ann Coulter because he's

> >dissing her, that he dissed us is secondary, and he put the post right

> back

> >up, reworded.

>

> I did not say " Maybe he took it down because he realized, accurately,

> that he might be sued. " I said " Maybe somebody told him he might get

> sued so he took it down.... " A person can act (people often do) on

> the basis of incorrect information, which they may believe or may not

> want to take the trouble to check out. And it was only an example,

> anyway. As far as I knew at the time I wrote that query, there was no

> reason to assume the taking down of the piece had anything to do with

> the AS element. The fact that he re-wrote it without the AS, as I

> learned later, does make it logical to assume it was the AS garbage

> that caused him to act. Doesn't say anything definitive about his

> motivation, though, as far as I know.

>

>

> >See, what I worry about is us making the mistake of magnifying every

> battle

> >to the point that every battle is life or death. Starhawk had some

> >interesting things to say about that aspect of what she calls " the

> >self-hater " in Truth or Dare. I know you read a lot of femnist philophy,

> >did you see that one?

>

> Who was making it life or death? All I saw was Ari planning to write

> a polite letter. Maybe you are reacting to my " letters needed "

> subject line? I still don't see that as an over-reaction, especially

> given that I didn't know the page had been removed when I wrote that

> post. Saying " something should be done " is not equivalent to

> launching an attack (nor to advocating that an attack be launched).

>

> I know about Starhawk, but I tend to be (feel) allergic to most of

> the discourse of most goddess-worshiping feminist writing and

> therefore have deprived myself of her wisdom (except when I get it

> second-hand).

>

> Jane

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Ari

I think that jerry was joking by his use of I think after more than a

year of seeing jerry in action. I think I can see when he is joking.

>

> I'm not sure what you mean by that statement about Joe, but it seems

> highly

> inappropriate and uncalled for. What has he done to you?

>

> Following politics as I do in this country, I really don't think Coulter

> is

> one of us. She's part of a group of public figures that make very good

> livings off of being as inflammatory as possible, thereby appealing to the

> party " base " . I think you're mistaking her overgeneralizations and

> judgemental and offensive statements for something that comes to her

> without

> noticing or as an autistic trait. But unless she's remarkably different

> from

> the many other commentators that are just like her, they're really just

> very

> effective means of mobilizing the base and getting extensive press

> attention

> ahead of a new book she has coming out. It's important not to read into

> things too far. Ann Coulter knows exactly what the ramifications of what

> she

> says are going to be.

>

> I do generally agree with what you said about female aspies, though I

> really

> can't see Ann Coulter falling under that category at all. It's a topic

> that

> bears further discussion (undiagnosed female aspies, not Ann Coulter).

>

> -Ari

>

>

> On 6/16/06, Gerald Newport <wholphin48@...<wholphin48%40hotmail.com>>

> wrote:

> >

> >

> > >

> > > The thing to be upset about is that the entire essay is tongue in

> cheek.

> > > He's using Asperger's as a means of insulting Coulter, not seriously

> > > suggesting she may be one of us. THe purpose behind the essay is, if

> > > anything, to insult Ann Coulter, by connecting her with us.

> > >

> > >

> > Upon re-reading the essay, I agree with that. I am glad he took it down.

> >

> > The author would have made a more efficient insult by just noting that

> > Joe Mele is an admirer of Coulter

> >

> > However, Coulter could certainly be one of us. Lots of women aren't

> > diagnosed because it is easier to be written off as the B-word or other

> > impolite nouns than admit to a syndrome. An obsessive aspie woman can

> > just mainstream as anorexic for example. Coulter's extremely judgmental

> > outlook and social ineptitude certainly help qualify her to join us.

> >

> > Jerry Newport

> >

> >

> >

>

>

[Guest guest]

Ah, well if you aren't offended then neither am I. After all, it was about

you, so I think you have a right to determine if it was offensive or not.

Sorry for misinterpreting your words, Jerry. I do hope you won't hold it

against me.

-Ari

>

> Ari

>

> I think that jerry was joking by his use of I think after more than a

> year of seeing jerry in action. I think I can see when he is joking.

>

>

> On 6/16/06, Ari N. <Aneeman@... <Aneeman%40gmail.com>> wrote:

> >

> > I'm not sure what you mean by that statement about Joe, but it seems

> > highly

> > inappropriate and uncalled for. What has he done to you?

> >

> > Following politics as I do in this country, I really don't think Coulter

> > is

> > one of us. She's part of a group of public figures that make very good

> > livings off of being as inflammatory as possible, thereby appealing to

> the

> > party " base " . I think you're mistaking her overgeneralizations and

> > judgemental and offensive statements for something that comes to her

> > without

> > noticing or as an autistic trait. But unless she's remarkably different

> > from

> > the many other commentators that are just like her, they're really just

> > very

> > effective means of mobilizing the base and getting extensive press

> > attention

> > ahead of a new book she has coming out. It's important not to read into

> > things too far. Ann Coulter knows exactly what the ramifications of what

> > she

> > says are going to be.

> >

> > I do generally agree with what you said about female aspies, though I

> > really

> > can't see Ann Coulter falling under that category at all. It's a topic

> > that

> > bears further discussion (undiagnosed female aspies, not Ann Coulter).

> >

> > -Ari

> >

> >

> > On 6/16/06, Gerald Newport <wholphin48@...<wholphin48%40hotmail.com>

> <wholphin48%40hotmail.com>>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > > >

> > > > The thing to be upset about is that the entire essay is tongue in

> > cheek.

> > > > He's using Asperger's as a means of insulting Coulter, not seriously

> > > > suggesting she may be one of us. THe purpose behind the essay is, if

> > > > anything, to insult Ann Coulter, by connecting her with us.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > Upon re-reading the essay, I agree with that. I am glad he took it

> down.

> > >

> > > The author would have made a more efficient insult by just noting that

> > > Joe Mele is an admirer of Coulter

> > >

> > > However, Coulter could certainly be one of us. Lots of women aren't

> > > diagnosed because it is easier to be written off as the B-word or

> other

> > > impolite nouns than admit to a syndrome. An obsessive aspie woman can

> > > just mainstream as anorexic for example. Coulter's extremely

> judgmental

> > > outlook and social ineptitude certainly help qualify her to join us.

> > >

> > > Jerry Newport

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

At 09:21 PM 6/16/2006, Jane Meyerding wrote:

>I did not say " Maybe he took it down because he realized, accurately,

>that he might be sued. " I said " Maybe somebody told him he might get

>sued so he took it down.... " A person can act (people often do) on

>the basis of incorrect information, which they may believe or may not

>want to take the trouble to check out. And it was only an example,

>anyway. As far as I knew at the time I wrote that query, there was no

>reason to assume the taking down of the piece had anything to do with

>the AS element. The fact that he re-wrote it without the AS, as I

>learned later, does make it logical to assume it was the AS garbage

>that caused him to act. Doesn't say anything definitive about his

>motivation, though, as far as I know.

I didn't see it that way. I was addressing your comment " maybe someone told

him he could get sued " . They might have, but what I was saying is that if

you look at previous entries in his blog, he discusses and disses Ann

Coulter in many entries, and it didn't make sense that he would worry about

an AS person suing him if he wasn't worried about Ann Coulter suing him.

>Who was making it life or death? All I saw was Ari planning to write

>a polite letter. Maybe you are reacting to my " letters needed "

>subject line? I still don't see that as an over-reaction, especially

>given that I didn't know the page had been removed when I wrote that

>post. Saying " something should be done " is not equivalent to

>launching an attack (nor to advocating that an attack be launched).

I showed Ari the words that made me concerned, and he reassured me about it.

>I know about Starhawk, but I tend to be (feel) allergic to most of

>the discourse of most goddess-worshiping feminist writing and

>therefore have deprived myself of her wisdom (except when I get it

>second-hand).

I actually think there is some really pertinent stuff in it. I never found

her to be your average new-agey type, she was a practicing therapist for a

number of years and has good insight to human nature. I liked both Dreaming

the Dark and Truth or Dare, but if you were to pick only one, do check out

Truth or Dare. She talks about social constructs and in my opinion, she's

right on the money. It's very interesting, and it's an alternate look into

power dynamics that can contribute to oppression of minorities.

Z

>__________ NOD32 1.1606 (20060617) Information __________

>

>This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.

><http://www.eset.com>http://www.eset.com

http://zola.livejournal.com/

" What are we going to do tonight, Brain? "

" The same thing we do every night, Pinky. We're going to try to take over

the world!! " ---Pinky and the Brain

[Guest guest]

Zola wrote:

>I actually think there is some really pertinent stuff in it. I never found

>her to be your average new-agey type, she was a practicing therapist for a

>number of years and has good insight to human nature. I liked both Dreaming

>the Dark and Truth or Dare, but if you were to pick only one, do check out

>Truth or Dare. She talks about social constructs and in my opinion, she's

>right on the money. It's very interesting, and it's an alternate look into

>power dynamics that can contribute to oppression of minorities.

Hmmm. If the library had it, I'd probably give it a look-over --

although a reviewer on Amazon.com says " Like most Craft books, unless

you're willing to do the exercises, it won't do you any good. " I'm

not willing. Nor am I interested in the poetry or myth. Maybe I'll

happen across a copy someday.

Jane

[Guest guest]

Well I think that this is par for the course that jerry and ari both well

meaning got caught on a misunderstanding.

Ari thank you for being a good person and sticking up for me!!!