why do some people consider low functioning inferior ?

Post Reply New Topic

I'm pretty sure that I did just speak for myself, but I'll go ahead and do it again. If there were another version of me, but with better social skills, he would be superior to me. I would be inferior to him. That's what those words mean. That hardly means that I have no value as I am. But it does mean that there are areas I could improve, and it would be better to attempt to do so, rather than hand-wave away my deficiencies as nothing more than a "difference". Liking rock music instead of country music is a difference. Being able to communicate effectively versus not being able to do so is not just a difference. It is a problem that should be addressed as much as is possible.

Not that NT's are all that great, mind you. I definitely don't have that high an opinion of them myself. I could go on for hours about all the things they do that bother me. But for every flaw an NT may have, an aspie is more than capable of matching it. And we get a bunch of other disadvantages on top of that. Sure, there are certain positive qualities than aspies tend to possess, but NT's can just as easily have these same qualities.

Personally, I'm not a huge fan of the labels myself; I'd rather address people on an individual basis. And my judgement says that not being able to read social cues is a problem, and a significant one at that. I literally cannot think of even one situation where not being able to do so is preferable to the alternative. And being able to understand social cues hardly dooms one to the life of a socialite; you could very easily understand the signals and just ignore them. I know that's what I tend to do.

But you have to assume reading social cues is a mandatory skill - otherwise, other skills can balance out that deficit. Lots of people can read social cues that are less skilled than other people in other ways. Well I'm not going to argue with you, if you feel inferior you do, but I wish you wouldn't! Too much corruption and cold hardheartedness out there to compete with my inability to read social cues to make me feel bad about that - (not that i don't get thrown or feel bad for a while sometimes). And that's not to say that means we can't work on it.

This is so true there are people with intellectual disabilities, Down syndrome, or physical disabilities that can socialize way better the we can . Even if nts don't want us to know that.

I think we agree more than you think. Like you said, one can certainly possess other qualities that make the inability to read social cues seem less important. You can certainly lack the ability to read social cues and still be a far better person than someone who can. That was never in dispute. But if you were to compare two nearly identical people, whose only difference they had was that one could read social cues and the other couldn't; there would definitely be a distinction as to which one is better and which one is worse. And the one who could read social cues would be the better one. He simply has a skill that the other does not. And you'll have a tough sell to make if you want to convince anyone that being unskilled is equal to being skilled.

I believe you are missing the point no two people will ever be exactly alike except for one distant aspect everyone nt, disabled, as, autistic have different strengths and weaknesses and assuming that would be the case is just making up a hypothetical scenario and is not realistic.

Perhaps this kind of comparison doesn't quite work when comparing two different people. But I am convinced that it can be used when comparing how we are now to past versions of ourselves. For example, I've spent the last several years studying and practicing social skills, and they're much better because of that. As a person, I am superior to how I was as I was younger. My younger self is inferior in comparison to how I am now. My friends and family will attest to this fact, even if they wouldn't necessarily agree with the phrasing. And yet, a recognition of the flaws I used to have doesn't have to be a condemnation of who I was. Acknowledging these deficiencies was an essential step to addressing them. Pretending that these problems aren't actually problems, or that they don't matter didn't help me one bit.

those of us who are still low functioning to any level can contribute to society in all manner of ways.

used to live with two profoundly autistic adults who did voluntary work for a national trust park in cheshire, they also went to a mainstream college,they had a bigger work ethic than many NTs.


--
being low functioning we require twenty four hour support but we arent inferior for it-every human needs support in some way,anyone who thinks we arent of equal worth are delusional aspie or NT zealots who can only make themselves feel better by putting people with bigger problems down,its their problem not ours.

Basically just re-wording some ideas that have already been said in this thread.

Utility is the driving force behind the society I live in. I have had it hammered in to me that success is about getting things done, accomplishing, doing. And we're humans and we figured out long ago that working as a group accomplishes many things better than working individually. So when suddenly there's someone who doesn't work well with others or within the norms that society has, for whatever reason, their potential and/or actual utility to the world is seen as less.

There's nothing wrong with the above I don't think. Where the issue lies is that because we view utility as so crucial and so important, (indeed it causes inordinate amounts of stress for plenty of people), we then judge individuals by their utility. In fact, some people are so pressured to accomplish, to be useful, they can often have serious problems devoting time to other areas of life, like being a good spouse or parent. They feel that their own self-worth is defined by how much they accomplish, is it really surprising that this sort of person then also judges YOUR self-worth by how much you outwardly accomplish? I mean, it's great that some low-functioning autistics can still have a really strong work ethic and can still manage to contribute to society in notable, recognizable ways. But not all autistics do or can do. Not all NT's can or do either (well, depends on the definition of NT I suppose...)

Addressing the bullying on the bus scenario, it's all groupthink, ostracizing people who are different, and about not being able to understand the crucial difference between communication deficits and inability to think. But of course the ability to communicate in some way, shape or form is the only measure of intelligence we can ever have about someone besides ourselves.

but as i mentioned before imo this type of thinking is not completely accurate. As we age we become wiser,however you are not always superior then your younger self. For example I may be more aware about social skills but now I need to wear glasses when I was younger I had perfect vision.

Smart comment. Thanks.

The thread is rather ambiguous as to what the original poster means-mainly because the title, and actual original post, are saying two slightly different things.

The title asks "why do some people consider low functioning inferior?" which is a tautalogy. Its like asking "why do some people consider bachelor's to be single?". "Low functioning" by definition means "inferior in functioning".

But inferior in functioning isnt the same as being inferior as a person.

In contrast to the title- in the post she is asking why do some people, even some on the autism spectrum, stigmatize low functioning autists and distance themselves from them? Which is a fair question. Just because they function less well than you doesnt mean you have to distance yourself from them.

People who are on the higher end of the autism spectrum mostly want to distance themselves from the stereotypical low-functioning autistic individual. There is ignorance in the general public surrounding autism, the image that popped up in most neurotypical minds of the autistic population is the toe-touching, hand-flipping, non-verbal mentally handicappdd adult who have an obession in one area. Unfortunately, we've seen some harsh critism from even regarding a spies people on the lower end of the autism spectrum. I've argued before on this forum to have more lower-functioning auties particplating on Wrong Planet in order to erase the stigma that low-functioning indiviauals can't be intellent or they have to feelings.

Yes, there's a misconception borne out of lack of consideration. There some major IT companies willing to recruit autistic adults with computer skills. With time a larger % of so called lower functioning people will be absorbed into IT related roles.

Since contributing to WP I've noticed many Aspies do claim to have solidarity with their fellow Auties lower down on the DSM spectrum. I can't comment on how real is that solidarity? do they actually spend time with Auties? do they make friends with Auties?

The honest reality for LFA people is that there's probably little difference in engaging an Aspie or NTs. If anything NTs are going to feel less self-conscious than an Aspie as they won't have the hangup over the disability tag or drawing attention to their own social shortcomings/deficits.

Everyone is inferior in the end when they are withering away on their death beds.

What I believe Is that if we're going to stand up against originations like autism speaks we have to stick together and love each other high functioning or low functioning aspie or autistic.