Horrific Article in NY Magazine

Post Reply New Topic

I don't like the image this writer makes of Asperger's at all.. It didn't seem to be much understanding in what he wrote, just suspiciousness after suspiciousness after suspiciousness, coupled with some very disatisfying examples. I had to stop reading. Why did he colour the diagnosis that way without addressing the core of it.. just list all the questionable sides of the diversity around Asperger's without mentioning what Asperger's really is.. just a lot of cultural missteps and inconsistencies caused by others, not people with the actual struggles. It was a hurtful article, I didn't like it. Some points were also misunderstood.

Journalists... sigh. Articles that have been cobbled together using Google and random quotes from nobody's that are then used to educate the masses are the reason people are so misinformed.

Perhaps everyone shouldn't be so obsessed about getting a diagnosis, but simply recognise that everyone sees the world differently and we are all on the same scale. It seems like people assume the model is: [NT][austism spectrum]. NTs aren't all the same either.

That Ben Nugent guy really annoyed. I am an aspiring novelist myself and I don't see how being an Aspie could hinder that...

And, you know, just because it might be culturally hype to assume that so and so might be autistic, it doesn't mean that autism is overdiagnosed. Autism is only diagnosed by mental health professionals. If some journalist thinks that Obama or Romney are autistic - even if he really, truly believes it and is not making it up for media attention - it doesn't meant he diagnosed them. I don't think Asperger's is overdiagnosed. In fact, it's probably underdiagnosed, especially in women - reason for which I never got a Dx until the ripe age of 25...

I also believe there's nothing wrong with acknowledging autistic traits in NT people. Rather than assuming that, say, Obama is an Aspie (which I don't think he is), maybe it's fair to say that he has some Aspie traits. I don't know Obama too well, so I cannot say whether he has autistic traits or not, but I do know plenty of NT people who have some Aspie traits. Just as I, myself, have some NT traits. Just as autism is a spectrum, neurotypicalness is a spectrum too. In fact, in my opinion, there is a huge spectrum, ranging from extremely NT - NT with some Aspie traits - mild Aspie - Aspie - HFA - LFA. And yes, if one looks at it like this, everyone is on this spectrum...

_________________
Probably 75% Aspie, 25% NT... and 100% ADHD

Aspie-quiz results:
Aspie score: 138 of 200 / NT score: 78 of 200 => Very likely an Aspie.

The article is dangerously inaccurate and offensive.

One of the claims the author is making is that Asperger's is overdiagnosed. If anything, it is under diagnosed in adults.

There was a part in the article where it claims that adults get a diagnosis as a "meal ticket." (Page 4 of article) What a joke. Disability payments are hardly a "meal ticket." I don't think the author or the psychologist interviewed are living in reality.

I'm sick of the "character flaw" model being pushed in this article. I'm also sick of the "Oh, you suspect you have Asperger's? No, you really have mental issues," attitude being spouted as well.

I couldn't read through the whole article as I found it hurtful. The article isn't worth my time.

I skimmed through. Seems like a lot of blather and assumption without any numbers. His only citation for this is the general "AS might affect as many as 1 in X number of people". Which doesn't mean anything. That is not the Dx rate. I don't mind an article about overdiagnosis of a disorder if the article cites actual numbers of actual diagnoses per year suggesting that conclusion. It remains a fairly rare official Dx as far as I know.

There is also some really screwy conjecture about the DSM-V changes on the last page.

I've read all 7 pages and I don't agree with anything that I've read. I also find it extremely offensive.

1984.

I found it a well-written and informative article that made some highly valid points, especially this
section:-

"when the hyperspecialist has displaced the generalist and everyone is Matrix-ed into the Internet, it’s an Other-deriding tool to soothe our cultural anxiety about the ongoing power shift from humanists to technologists. As the coders inherit the Earth, saying someone’s on the spectrum is how English majors make themselves feel better."

I appreciate a well-written article - it all depends on how much you like the written word as an art form.

I didn't find any of it offensive; it seemed to be saying use of the diagnosis has become far too generalised and wide-ranging so that the people with a real disability are being drowned out by the people who see it as 'cool' to say they have Aspergers, as if it's just some mild form of personality quirk. If a person really has Aspergers, how can this be offensive to them? The article's on our side in my opinion.

I liked that they said Simon Baron Cohen wasn't that good on genetics - I've often had my doubts about him.

The term Asperger's has literally become a joke, and it's becoming worst and worst.

I don't hold out much hope for the term "autism" (DSM-V). That's slowly going the same way.

I think a real problem is that most people are still very badly informed about the symptoms of AS. You can see it in that article. Most people think it's all about being rude and looking weird. Very few know that sensory issues are a big part of it, or bad motor functions. Here, AS basically gets reduced to "bad manners". If you actually understood what AS is about, then maybe you wouldn't accuse so many people of it.

NTs are starting to compare themselves to us? What's next? A unanimous decision rid the words Autism and Asperger's because of all the commonality? Are they gonna start labeling us Crazy, Depressed, Psychotic, Insane, etc.? Are they gonna go back to basic primitive treatments like yelling "START ACTING RIGHT!! !" at us?