Asperger's syndrome - I hate that name
Asperger's Syndrome - Sink forever in to a world of isolation and dependence. That's what it means. The phrase itself when invoked probably causes more problems than it solves. I shall make it clear now that I don't really believe that I have a syndrome. The only life-changing disease I ever had is acute pneumonia, and fortunately it didn't change my life because if it did I would be dead.
If you don't like me showing the similarity between a disease and what aspergers syndrome says then you are wrong for stopping me from telling the truth as most people see it. What Aspergers Synrdrome basically means is that we are broken and need to be fixed and so should out of hand be quiet and take our suffering as being our fault and noone else's. If you really are like me then you know this to be a complete load of s**t. Physical and mental assault by mean, self-interested and hateful children is what we recieve and it is always a sizeable minority who do so. Even for those who glide through by ignoring such histrionics feel that life is irreparably made greyer by a world that refuses to play a sane game, a sort of massive conceit that plays against you held to a greater or lesser degree by your peers. The real result is that you end up bitter, mean or sad or just plain deluded that you really can blame yourself like a child whose parents are divorcing, but in this situation people really do believe that you are to blame. You are to be fixed, not helped. And if it's too difficult you are ignored, kept on a sort of dole and support system that abets noone
If you have gotten through this you are somehow abjured of your aspergers, the only identity you had that mattered. Race, colour and creed pale in comparison, or they should. Those who have been cleared of it do feel like they have lost their identity even if it was a disparaging one because we should have an identity and not one bound by flawed diagnostic tests that place the onus of the blame on your body, when you have had every reason to doubt, show fury and challenge the world around you. Even you, who may have been of less capable, you may have noticed the extreme desire of people to stick to an invisible status quo even if that means your torment is a part of it, a torment you never intended and most certainly can show that when you were agressive, it was because you were provoked; but people somehow twist this in to you showing an unreasonable response. And so as hundreds of children, aspergers or not, take suicide around the world out of despair people continue to perpetuate their faulty, sugary, shallow, inflexible moral code.
To presume we will in the end be better is a farce, but to presume that the current situation proclaims we are worse is a farce as well.
Joined: 28 Jul 2011
100% Agreed with your sentiment...
I have stuggled with feeling the LABEL of "Asperger's" is shameful and I cannot disclose it to ANYONE as my parents and the INSTITUTIONS have associated it with helplessness, broken brain, lacking common sense, etc.
I am not blaming these people for my 'sufferings' because a lot of it is because I cannot find 'interest' in 'other people' like supposed 'neurotypical people' can, and often feel existentially alone and depressed for no good reason...
Also the fact the label of the disorder is made fun of, I have heard it made fun of on TV shows even...
I feel resentment because, with the labels, the Prozac funnelled down my throat as a child, and "THEM" not helping my "DISORDER" with speech therapy etc, as a child, has left me STILL "BROKEN" and COMPLETELY resentful of certain psychiatrists, people, etc, etc...
However in the end I DO associate with the general "ASD" "Autism" label as an umbrella term for my eccentricity and feeling of neurologically having a social/ safety/moral judgement/impulse control/ anger/emotional control "hole in my brain".
So... I don't reject AUTISM as a label... But there is so much, so much baggage associated with it, that I REFUSE to disclose it to ANYONE i meet.
Joined: 5 Oct 2008
I would not hesitate to disclose my diagnosis to anyone who is on the spectrum himself or has extensive experience with people on the spectrum. But other then that it can only cause misunderstanding, the concept that people have of autism will be so different from your own. Even here my image of autism is probably totally opposite to the ideas that others associate with a diagnosis. Its very true what you have said. If i disclose my diagnosis i am doing it to express a piece of my identity. Having aspergers traits affects every experience you have wether it is a tiny or big influence it all adds up in the end. Experiences combined with your genes make up the person you are today. So yes i think its a major part of who i am.
Disclosing your diagnosis can have a similair effect to revealing you have a wooden leg hidden under your pants.
And that is totally not the response im hoping to get when i do so. People wont get the point that it is not something separate to your identity like a big bag of sand you always have to carry around on your shoulder.
Best advice i heard so far is from tony atwood. Explain yourself without leaning on the autism label. So in that way you can create a NEW concept in the minds of other people instead of taking an old one filled with bullshit and trying to mold that into something that applies to you.
Joined: 1 Aug 2011
Location: United Kingdom
I have told my best friends about my diagnosis, as disclosing it aided them in understanding my quirks and gave them an insight to how I feel and cope with my difficulties. I'm very skeptical about letting people know about my AS whom I do not trust, as it goes too frequently misunderstood by the general public who may assume those people on a spectrum are "special" or "retarded" or "mental". The sheer lack of understanding of the condition makes it very difficult for people to put themselves in the shoes of an aspie, and the normal NT throws them along with those with other conditions labelled as being "weird". I often wish there was more awareness of AS, but it brings me to another issue. As the OP has stated, the label "asperger's" can be a highly damaging one, for it is described only for the negative traits it can bring to an individual with the condition, and not for any of the positive aspects a person with AS may have. Informing people of your AS can be seen as a plead for help. There's a number of possible reactions, but generally none of them are good. People may see you as someone looking for pity, or as someone who's a freak of nature whom should not and will not fit in with society. It's unlikely people are going to completely overlook your condition and accept you for who you are outside of your condition. Likewise, are stereotypical role models for the autistic spectrum really a good thing? From the general audience's perspective, those who have seen the 1988 film Rain Man, for example, may assume that all autistic people have some kind of superb, savant ability. I do not feel that we should class ourselves as being aspies and instead think of our traits as being part of our character, rather than seeing ourselves of fitting the typical profile of a predetermined condition. We all share things in common, but we are who we are, right?
Personally I feel we should have a name unrelated to the word aspergers since it has had the word syndrome tacked on to the end of it. The taint of association hangs over us like a poisonous smog of bad expectations.
I don't care about this positive/negative aspects thing. The fact is we can be in a far better position if we stop believing these constantly espoused but absurd beliefs that shackle us to the ground, including the ones we made up that often only accomodate a submussive position.
Joined: 27 Aug 2005
Location: My body is in Brisbane and my mind is in the gutter. :D
Which beliefs are those, exactly?
I don't see why changing the name would make any difference. I'd have the same set of impairments no matter what it was called. I'm better off now that I know what's wrong than when I thought I was just smart but inept.
The name is associated with disability because people who are diagnosed with Asperger's ARE DISABLED. It's as simple as that. No significant impairment, no diagnosis.
Any other name would gain the same associations.
Music Theory 101: Cadences.
Authentic cadence: V-I
Plagal cadence: IV-I
Deceptive cadence: V- ANYTHING BUT I ! !! !
Beethoven cadence: V-I-V-I-V-V-V-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I
-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I! I! I! I I I
Well, firstly, syndrome technically doesn't mean a disease. It's often used that way, but literally it just means 'a collection of traits that often occur together'. For example you could have a syndrome consisting of blond hair, blue eyes and pale skin (which is one I happen to have). For example, you can have Waardenburg Syndrome and not be considered disabled, because the only disabling characteristic, deafness, is present in 20% with type I and 50% with type II. Meaning that 80% of people with type I Waardenburg Syndrome and 50% of people with type II Waardenburg Syndrome have an odd appearance but no impairment whatsoever.
And it's not the name that matters, but the attitudes. Idiot and imbecile were the medical terms used for people with mental impairments. (Originally idiot was MR and imbecile was dementia, then they shifted to both referring to different severities of MR.) Then doctors decided it was a bad idea to use as a medical term something that was also being used as a schoolyard insult, and started talking about mental retardation, or retard for short. Then that became an insult too. Recently I've also heard 'cognitively disabled' used as an insult as well. It's the attitudes, not the name, that are the real problem. (I know a self-advocate who hates to be called a retard, but calls himself a 'slow learner', even though retard is French for slow.)
Personally I think we should revamp the whole idea of mental disorders, and instead identify 'categories of people who may need special treatment'. Giftedness causes impairment too if the kid is not given the right education, because psychological problems can result from being educated consistently below your level of ability. Things like underachievement, depression, school phobia, etc. Instead of trying to decide which differences are OK and which are disorders, we should decide instead based on which differences result in different needs from the majority. Either because the person themselves will suffer without some kind of special treatment, or because others will. Whether the difference is good, bad or neutral is for the philosophers to decide, not the psychologists.
Which beliefs are those, exactly?
Did you actually read what I said? Most of what I said is about what people believe.
It would not lull us in to to alien and dangerous idea that we are somehow worse than other people?
I get what you're saying and I think you foirgot to read one part. There's a bit where I say that a difference can somehow pass as ineptness. As I seem to be having no problems reading between the lines when you said smart but inept (which could be read as a contradiction) this only gives credence to the idea that we are different and not deficient
We have it because we have it. That's called circular thinking and it is a logical fallacy.
Any other name would gain the same associations.
Of course it would, if you insisted on sticking on your butt and not challenging the ideas that people have spoonfed you all these years whilst you refuse to wonder about how you might improve your situation rather than just worry about how you suck. It aint gonna be easy for people who are completely unlike their parents and peers in every important fashion to establish themselves but hard is not impossible.
Yes but what is the vernacular understanding of syndrome? Is it harmless characteristics or freakish mental monstrosities?
I understand. There's a slight problem. I don't have dementia, I am part of a group of people who only express negative characteristics because people with a different brain structure say we do and then we believe that and that causes the raft of other problems. To say that a social organism with a different pattern fo behaviour to its parents will not encounter insurmountable odds is foolhardy. That's life. But somehow accepting a blind fate that barely seems true is no better.
I don't have a mental disorder. >:[
Mild mental retardation used to not even be considered a disability. Those people were just 'a bit dumb', but it was no real problem. (They make perfectly fine manual labourers, after all.) Henry Goddard, a eugenicist, coined the term 'moron' in 1910 to describe a group of people previously considered normal who he saw as undesirables that needed to be weeded out of the population.
I find many autistics fight for their own rights while ignoring how many others are getting the exact same mistreatment and it's just as undeserved. We could have a functioning society where the average IQ is 60. It probably wouldn't be as technologically advanced as ours, but it would work just fine. Yet we consider someone with an IQ of 60 disabled, because our society is constructed in such a way that having such a lot IQ puts you at a big disadvantage - mainly because of education becoming more and more important to a good-quality life. Pretty much the same is true of HFA/AS people.
How is this at all a reply?
According to society's definitions, you do have a mental disorder. So do many other people whose differences are not inherently bad but are seen that way by society. I'm saying instead of going 'I'm different from those weirdos' (thereby acting no better than the people who oppress you), we should throw out the entire idea of mental disorder and just talk about different needs. You`re no better than someone with ADHD, or with an IQ of 60, or a deaf person. To claim you are is insulting to those people, just like a Chinese person saying that Asians should be accepted but not black people.
Joined: 5 Aug 2011
I don't have anything that could be connected to mild mental retardation. You are just affirming what you believe as gospel truth by what you refer to. Any other point of reference you can't understand.
How do you actually know that most people with an IQ of 60 actually aren't capable of reacting efficiently to survive in a normal environment? Even further, how do you know that the IQ system actually puts intelligence on an actual scale rather than just lumping together all sorts of disorders with it?
According to society's definitions, you do have a mental disorder.
It's a reply because it's a response to what you said. If you must rely on making outlandish statements I'd prefer you to keep your statements to yourself. Also as a response to the second point: just because a person says something that doesn't make it so. Just like how referring black people as an inferior race is now relegated to desperate inbreds and internet trolls the amazing capacity for humans to take anything different, screw it up and then call it inferior is limitless. Need I remind you that the word slave is a racial epithet? How about the use of the word savage to denote native americans? Asperger's syndrome is just a 21st century term for Humans to bash on something they don't understand because their still limited outlook has blinded them from true understanding until it is too late.
No I am not. In fact I don't think I ever said such a thing, like ever. So either you're presumptuous or you're psychologically projecting on me to display your own faults and if you try to use the racism card on me for no reason again I'll forget you had ever spoken to me.
Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Location: up s**t creek with a fan as a paddle
OK, I thought your 'I understand. There's a slight problem. I don't have dementia' statement was saying that what I said about terminology didn't apply because dementia and MR (the conditions I was referring to) are different in value than autism. But maybe you misunderstood my analogy use as meaning I was claiming you have the conditions I was using as an analogy?
I was not suggesting you have dementia or mental retardation or anything like that. Just saying that society reacts to those conditions in similar ways to how they react to autism spectrum conditions. And since we face the same problems, we should fight the same battles instead of saying 'I'm OK but those people aren't'. If you agree with the last two statements, then my comments were unnecessary.
Joined: 5 Aug 2011
The OP makes sense.
I am a professionally diagnosed paranoid schizo and seem to have a lot of traits associated with aspergers/autism.
I stumbled upon this site one day and a LOT of what people were feeling applied to me.
I never talk about all my issues because I'm used to nobody in the IRL world caring about what I have to say.
Still even today a certain posters were describing things they do that I have done for years.
Looking for a legit work at home opportunity and once I get that I will start ordering my food online if it is affordable so I can have my solitary peace.
Suicide is not a cowardly act, it is a courageous one. It takes a huge force of will to overcome the hardwired instinct to survive at all costs.
|Asperger Syndrome, Asperger's Syndrome or Aspergers Syndrome||
13 Feb 2012, 4:56 am
|Could this mean I have asperger syndrome?||
21 Jul 2013, 8:32 am
|Asperger's Syndrome or Asperger Syndrome?||
14 Feb 2011, 3:55 pm
18 Jun 2006, 6:35 am