Is this ableist?

Post Reply New Topic

Unless you'd need to be working this man to do your phd, then his opinions don't matter in the least, especially if they're low opinions.
He's probably like most people and doesn't really have any idea what aspergers or autism is and is he's alluding to aspies it's unknowingly.
Well, that's what I would assume.

My dad was probably aspie - he had close to zero common sense and was pretty dysfunctional within the family.

Academically he was a high achiever, got his phd early with ease and became head of dept.

Couldn't change a plug and was an emotionally absent husband/dad.

If you want to go for a phd, don't be put off by the comments of those who might feel threatened by your intelligence...

What the head of grad studies says is true, you need to be smart + have some kind of common sense (this involves mostly learning how academia operates) + manage your time + mix of various skills.

All you need for a phd is academic competence.

For the most part, yes. It also helps to be able to defend your research thesis without getting emotional about it.

One of my former bosses failed the verbal defense portion of his PhD exam because he could not tolerate anyone (even tenured professors) challenging his methods and conclusions in even an academic way -- that was just his own pride and insecurity manifesting; otherwise, he was sociable, competent, didn't "stim", and never had a meltdown (that I know about).

I'd include that within my definition of academic competence

I have to agree with the people who say he probably isn't talking about autism there. You're making too many assumptions.

No I don't think it is. He was just speaking the truth about what you need to be good at a PH D. It's true you do need certain things for certain something or for a certain job. My aid wanted to be a veterinarian but she found out you needed to be good at math so that was her roadblock there and she couldn't pursue it. She is NT. One of my aspie friends wanted to be a cop but he found out all the training they have to do and he can't run due to his cerebral palsy in his back so he wasn't able to pursue that career.

I also met a stranger once and she wanted to be a paramedic but what stopped her from pursuing it was she has a problem with seeing blood and broken up bodies and she would have to learn to deal with all that and because she can't stand the sight of it, she didn't pursue in it. To be a paramedic, you need to have a strong stomach and be able to handle seeing torn up bodies and blood and bones sticking out of people because that is what can happen in car wrecks.

And of course there are jobs people in wheelchairs wouldn't be able to do because of what kind of job it is and there are jobs that deaf people may not be able to do or blond people so I don't think it's ableist what the professor said. Especially if someone said, "to be a police officer, you need to do lot of training and running is one of them." Okay so basically anyone who isn't able to run wouldn't be able to do that career. My husband wouldn't be able to be one either because of his feet and it would be too painful for him and he wouldn't be able to run far or fast.

So are you over reacting, I would say yeah because you took it too personal.

No. The professor was just listing qualities that they believe are needed to complete a PhD.
It's like saying "if you can't move your legs, you'll find it damn hard to beat Usain Bolt in a race".
Or "if you have poor social skills, you'll have trouble making friends".
The whole idea of disability is that it makes things more difficult. Ableism is not the same as acknowledging that sometimes people are bad at things, and that that may affect their success in certain endeavours.

My take on what the guy said is that he was trying to counter the notion that you can only undertake a PhD if you are super-intelligent. He was speaking to a group of under-graduates, presumably with the aim of encouraging them to consider applying to do post-grad studies. Many people think that they aren't intelligent enough for that, even though they are, and he was trying to be inclusive and to encourage people who might dismiss the idea of a PhD to consider it seriously as an option.

I think the guy's comments are being over-analysed here. You need to bear in mind his audience and his objective in speaking to them about post-grad studies.