I interview Steve Silberman about his bestselling book, Neurotribes

Post Reply New Topic

[quote="alex"]I think our unwillingness to speak out about things also hinders our cause. And when we do speak out we are not always the best at doing so in an appealing way".


In comparatively recent decades women, gays, people of colour, ageing people, people oppressed by apartheid, have all rejected and challenged the standard negative portrayals, and, realising their value and right to respectful inclusion, shaped new, positive images, publicising these widely, loudly and actively, without self-censure and shame, and so changed society’s concept of and relationship to them; so then there was space for real conversations, for mutual understandings, for advocacy to be heard and open closed doors.

We can do the same. But first, before you can speak out compellingly, in a way that is meaningful and will be heard, you have to start with what's in your own head, and toss out all the old shame and shaming and stigmas and can'ts that have been internalised and taken root there, and replace it with that fire of inner confidence which can take charge of the narrative in situations, speaking the once-silenced voice, the previously unheard things, which can name what has happened accurately, and what must happen with clarity.

That's what the third wave of women's liberation did: women responded to the call to form small groups to raise their consciousness of how they had been trapped in stereotypes which limited their opportunities and their growth.

Once that "group groundwork" has been established, from it flows that strong inner sense of personal self, the strong realisation of what is possible, the strong desire to engage in the change process, to change both one's own life, that of the group, and that of generations to come. It starts with a vision of possibility, and it seems as if Silberman may have kickstarted that! Ideas tend to meet their time, and when they do, the competent and articulate leaders tend to appear, and the momentum just grows and grows.

I haven't read the book yet, so I would really like to know if these issues are addressed in it, and if so, how. It's the pivotal one as I see it. Steve Stilberman seems to have created a momentum, an opportunity that could be the start of something, if enough people seize the political advantage that could flow from this book's reception.

On transformative moments:


‎The greatest fear in the world is of the opinions of others. And the moment you are unafraid of the crowd you are no longer a sheep, you become a lion. A great roar arises in your heart, the roar of freedom."
— Osho

"The most important day is the day you decide you’re good enough for you. It’s the day you set yourself free."
— Brittany Josephina

"I would really like to know if these issues are addressed in it, and if so, how"

Well, there's a really easy way to do that: read the book!
B19: excellent post, by the way.

Hello!! Thank you for your feedback. The book is at the top of my 'must read' list. I'll spread the news down here.. rather like an old time missionary! - the book's flown below the media radar around here so far, so I'll kickstart some conversations You are very welcome to come on down for a visit and do some interviews ?

Reading the interview, I can't wait to get my copy.

I think it's great that a best seller is covering the topic of neurodiversity, and explaining the important place of 'conditions' like autism in contributing to human development.

Unfortunately I find it sadly ironic that I regularly see on internet forums outside of sites like this, the terms 'autistic' or 'sperg' being thrown about in a derogatory manner, no different from the insults 'ret*d' or 'spastic'. Ironic because of just how prevalent autism, or at least sub-clinical levels of autistic traits have been in the development of practically any technology throughout history, and most especially things like programming langauges and the network protocols that form the foundation of the internet. If only those insulting, ignorant people could understand what their world would be like without autistic people.

-

My own introduction to the term 'Asperger's was in fact due to its link to programmers, mentioned in the appendices of Eric S. Raymond's 'The Hacker Jargon Lexicon' ('hacker' as in solver of problems, especially those relating to computers, as opposed to 'hacker' as in breaker of security, which would be better termed 'cracker' similar to 'safe cracker'), although to me at that point it was just a meaningless word, and I only understood it later, after reading a science fiction book that had autism as a theme, seeing some of the personality traits in myself, wondering if there were less severe forms of autism, researching this, coming across the term 'Asperger's, and of course then remembering it being mentioned in the Lexicon, something that described a programming culture I could already strongly identify with, if somewhat remotely.

It described the birth of the open source movement, and what would become the internet; in places like MIT, Stanford, Caltech, even going back to the old telephone companies like AT&T and Bell, and the people who formed the cultures that developed in those places, their strengths and weaknesses, and peculiarities, many of which would ring bells to anyone with even a passing familiarity with autism.

Ironic that those with social difficulties have been paramount in developing the worldwide communications systems used so much by those without.

-

Oh, and my first proper internet program was written in PERL (not JavaScript): An internet chatroom, using POST and CGI.

These days I'm programming in Lua, but still writing programs that help non-autistic people communicate with each other.

Does the book have anything about non-Asperger-type + high-functioning autistic people?

What do you see as the difference?

I just bought the book. You can get it on Amazon for $11.90 + tax. What a deal.

I knew it would not be long before the 'most vocal parent hogs' who have done their utmost to dominate the media narratives over time with their 'blackwashing' negative narrative of autism and autistic people in the Autism Speaks style attempted to shout down the counternarrative and attack Silberman's approach directly. This was as predictable as daffodils in Spring (which are very lovely here are the moment). So here is one of those predictable pieces by a Ms Lutz - note that she is affiliated with a foundation that has a vested interest in the disaster version narrative - preaching the traditional poor-me-saddled-with-pathetic-children jeremiad of such parents, trying to spread their infection to counter the 'antibiotic' of Silberman's observations:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in ... ing-autism

Oh how they must hate being confronted with the counterbalance.. it strikes at their very identity as martyrs. The percentages she cites sound unfounded in truth and fraudulent to me, part of the PR slurs that the Jeremiahs consistently disseminate.

Lutz is the author of a book advocating ECT as a cure for autistic children - as if she has discovered a miracle cure (on a par with MMS - another form or torture/punishment wrapped up in the guise of therapeutic treatment). She is an ardent self-justifier and self-promoter. The other side of ECT, as a 'barbarous practice' is discussed here:

https://intcamp.wordpress.com/ect-kids/

And someone else who anticipated the backlash against Silberman...

http://greenmanramblings.blogspot.co.nz ... ainst.html

Is this the only page that mentions aspergers? http://catb.org/jargon/html/weaknesses.html It does seem to be fairly out of date on it's description of aspergers.

I haven't read the book but I've read online that part of its message is to highlight that autism is a difference rather than a disability, and if it rarely talks about LFA, you've got bias there.

Personally I find it grating when people say that autism is not a disability, because there are so many simple things my friend cannot do and yes, he hates it. I understand that for many here autism is only a difference with a lack of acceptance being their main problem, but for people like my friend it downright sucks. His parents suffered too.

I love to express this view because I'm blasted for it and that feels engaging - I am for acceptance (especially personal), but to me autism as a whole is not desirable, just as ADHD, OCD, anxiety etc. are not. If I were to have a kid I'd want them to be as normal as possible so that they (and I) would live easier and happier lives. Why the f**k would I wish for them to suffer from sensory sensitivities, a lifetime struggle with social development, and a hefty percent chance for them to be born with intellectual disabilities? So they can join an online club and feel good about (often imaginary) positive symptoms that the rest of the population do not have? lol..

I accept the fact that I have tics, OCD, am gay and all, because they can't change. I don't accept the tics and OCD as positive things, because they are only ever irritating. Being gay feels positive to me because it shapes my personality and has no downside (literally, unlike autism) outside of societal acceptance, though I would choose to have been born straight if I could have. Autism largely seems impairing to me and the diagnosis requires that. As one ages I suppose it gets better but would it not be arguable that one is no longer autistic but BAP or even just wired differently? If the context of autism were not a medical diagnosis (completely hypothetical and impossible), how would it be differentiated from quirky NTs?

The way I see it, no impairment = no autism, just autistic traits. A person can feel more anxiety than the average person but not have a full blown anxiety disorder, and yes, they can improve with age/experience. Oh so many times have I experienced the wrath of those that feel they can relate to serious anxiety issues simply because they're afraid to stand up for a presentation or talk to girls or whatnot. Anxiety does not suddenly become a normal, happy thing, that's stupid and detracts from the negative (and BY FAR the most important) aspects of its nature.

Older adults that suffered alienation etc. when they were younger and finally found their group to fit in to is an overall positive thing? FFS give me a break. Yes it's great to finally identify with something and feel like you belong but even if people were accepting of autism that wouldn't mean that the lack of social skills and other issues would suddenly disappear. Imagine if you weren't born autistic, you wouldn't know this life and quite likely all the rejection, sensory issues and other pains that came along with it.

Back to my friend, he hates it. He HATES it. Sure, he has above average talent where math is concerned, but other than that he feels like an NT with issues and he seems that way to me too. IN OTHER WORDS, a HUMAN with issues. He had violent meltdowns, severe sensory issues as a child (some still persist), a massive resistance to change, AND COULD NOT SPEAK FOR 6 YEARS. but wow just a difference lol

hope that it's understandable why this makes me mad, I'm only a raving lunatic to some degree

The first copy of "The Jargon File" I got my hands on, came buried in the files of a copy of Slackware Linux I bought on CD, which must have been when I was about 13, so it's probably about 25 years old. Since then the file has been published as a book, and the Lexicon itself has been updated to reflect more modern hacker language, but I guess the appendices were overlooked.

You are to not in a position to decide how our generation should feel about bieng diagnosed uber late. From what I read here most of the it is only a gift aspie superpower stuff is coming from younger adults not our generation. I feel my autism shapes my personality in the same way you feel your gayness shapes yours. If you grew up when I did MAYBE you would look as bieng gay as an impairment. After all the DSM listed homosexuality as a pathology. Most people thought bieng gay meant you automatically tried to teach the "gay lifestyle" to young children.Gays were relentlessly bullied. I was bullied as a straight person because I did not have girlfriends and people thought I was gay. So on occasion did homosexuals who propositioned me. When I told them I was straight they started shaking begging me not to tell anyone. I have read people saying It is easier to fake straightness then to fake neurotypicality. It depends. Not so easy if you have an effeminate voice or butch appearance.

Interesting read. I'd like to suggest one correction however. In one part, it is stated "But I realized that I did not have to invest so much energy in what neurotypicals do all the time, which is what I would call reputation management. You walk into a room, you figure out who the powerful, cute, or cool people are and then you try to impress them; and neurotypicals put a lot of energy into that..." Actually that's what neurotypical EXTROVERTS do. As an NT Introvert, who is a also member of a few Introvert forums, I feel I can safely make the statement that "reputation management" as described is not something we Introverts think of doing when we walk in the room. We are usually wondering why we came to a place full of people we don't know or hoping we don't get stuck making small talk or wondering how long we have to stay before it wouldn't be considered rude to leave.

If somebody has been alienated etc. all their life that isn't a good thing. As an isolated event discovering a diagnosis and finally fitting in is great, but that's after a lifetime of what would have otherwise not been nearly as much suffering.

As I said I am gay and am fine with it at this point, but if I was born again I would want to be born straight - in that sense I do view it as an impairment. I would also want my kids to be straight. I wouldn't want to be born with autism or any other disorder and think that anybody who would want to must really have had a case that shouldn't actually be a diagnosis, but their traits. I have at times considered that maybe it is because of the stereotypes of NT people that exist here, that people think being NT would make them ugly, sociopathic, narcissistic etc.

For my friend and his parents autism is definitely not just a difference, so it greatly annoys me when people generalize it as been so. To reiterate what I wrote above in some people (and apparently most on this website), it is just a difference, but then how do you separate that from NT? If there is no impairment, what is the autism? My friend can't enjoy music as I do, can't view motion without his eyes hurting, and is unable to understand abstract concepts, including his own emotions. It makes him feel and interact as if he doesn't care, and yes, it bothers me too, knowing that if I were to disappear it wouldn't really affect him.

I find that there is little acceptance of support for anyone but the suffering autistic person on these forums. Vilifying society, friends and parents in favour of autism simply being a different that requires understanding isn't justifiable. Everybody supports the autistic person (and I can understand that), but only the autistic person a majority of the time, rather than it being a group struggle - and that makes sense, given the perception of autism as a difference rather than disability.

----------

WP is a support site, but I don't believe general discussion should mandate unrelenting support. That's why the haven and all those other sub-forums exist. If this is not how this website is meant to be, and it is truly dedicated to the black and white DIFFERENCE vs DISABILITY or ASD vs NT etc. then I shouldn't bother posting because there will only ever be 1 home team. I am against negativity more than blind optimism but I find they both frustratingly unrealistic most of the time.

I only wrote this paragraph in case my post is misinterpreted, not towards what I have quoted.