Starting to resent the label "Aspie?"

Page 4 of 6 [ 92 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

sigholdaccountlost
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,207

23 May 2007, 1:57 am

Xenon wrote:
You know, this discussion sounds a lot like the debates some Star Trek fans have over the terms "Trekkie" vs "Trekker/Trekkor"...


True, True, True.


_________________
<a href="http://www.kia-tickers.com><img src="http://www.kia-tickers.com/bday/ticker/19901105/+0/4/1/name/r55/s37/bday.png" border="0"> </a>


Kilroy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,549
Location: Beyond the Void

23 May 2007, 8:56 pm

I hate being an aspie :roll:



sigholdaccountlost
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,207

24 May 2007, 4:36 am

LostInSpace wrote:
I know in some professions (ex. psychologist, SLP, etc.) it is not considered PC to say an "autistic person" or anything like that- you have to say "person with autism"- it's this whole "people first" thing- you're supposed to put the person first. Ex. "person with a hearing impairment" rather than "hearing impaired person". It's supposed to emphasize that the person has a condition, but they are not defined by that condition.


Except that some people would rather you put it together.


_________________
<a href="http://www.kia-tickers.com><img src="http://www.kia-tickers.com/bday/ticker/19901105/+0/4/1/name/r55/s37/bday.png" border="0"> </a>


manalitwist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 949

24 May 2007, 7:48 pm

I propose dropping the letters altogether and calling ourselves "."


_________________
Make mine a super frapalapi with double cream lots of Aspartame choc chip cookies a lump of lard and make it a big one


Xenon
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,476
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

24 May 2007, 8:02 pm

LostInSpace wrote:
Xenon wrote:
You know, this discussion sounds a lot like the debates some Star Trek fans have over the terms "Trekkie" vs "Trekker/Trekkor"...


Yeah, I never got the problem people have with "Trekkie". I'd refer to myself either way and not be bothered.


I always refer to myself as a "Trekkie". To me, "Trekker" (or "Trekkor") sounds just plain pretentious. It's like they're ashamed to be a Star Trek fan.

(Given some of the excesses that some Trek fans have shown, like showing up for jury duty wearing a Star Fleet uniform, I can understand why. Showing up for jury duty in a Star Fleet uniform is something *I* would do, but as a way of getting myself disqualified. This person was serious.)


_________________
"Some mornings it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps." -- Emo Philips


ahayes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Dec 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,506

24 May 2007, 8:09 pm

I don't like "aspie" but it's so much easier to say than "person with AS"



mariiha
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 223
Location: WP

24 May 2007, 8:14 pm

i was on the hike/bike trails today when i overheard a conversation from two individuals who sounded NT. they were talking about someone they knew like, "oh yeah, she is one of those types of people"...etc. so i'm thinking NT's probably label other NT's :D Guess it's just a collective way of sorting people into specific groups.



LostInSpace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,617
Location: Dixie

24 May 2007, 8:53 pm

sigholdaccountlost wrote:
LostInSpace wrote:
I know in some professions (ex. psychologist, SLP, etc.) it is not considered PC to say an "autistic person" or anything like that- you have to say "person with autism"- it's this whole "people first" thing- you're supposed to put the person first. Ex. "person with a hearing impairment" rather than "hearing impaired person". It's supposed to emphasize that the person has a condition, but they are not defined by that condition.


Except that some people would rather you put it together.


Put what together?



DoubleFeed
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 204

24 May 2007, 9:21 pm

LostInSpace wrote:
sigholdaccountlost wrote:
LostInSpace wrote:
I know in some professions (ex. psychologist, SLP, etc.) it is not considered PC to say an "autistic person" or anything like that- you have to say "person with autism"- it's this whole "people first" thing- you're supposed to put the person first. Ex. "person with a hearing impairment" rather than "hearing impaired person". It's supposed to emphasize that the person has a condition, but they are not defined by that condition.


Except that some people would rather you put it together.


Put what together?
Together: autistic person. Apart: person with autism.



LostInSpace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,617
Location: Dixie

24 May 2007, 10:43 pm

DoubleFeed wrote:
LostInSpace wrote:
sigholdaccountlost wrote:
LostInSpace wrote:
I know in some professions (ex. psychologist, SLP, etc.) it is not considered PC to say an "autistic person" or anything like that- you have to say "person with autism"- it's this whole "people first" thing- you're supposed to put the person first. Ex. "person with a hearing impairment" rather than "hearing impaired person". It's supposed to emphasize that the person has a condition, but they are not defined by that condition.


Except that some people would rather you put it together.


Put what together?
Together: autistic person. Apart: person with autism.


That's the whole point though. You're not supposed to imply that they are defined by their condition. They are a person first, autistic second. Although I suppose different people have different preferences, the form that is considered to be more sensitive is "person with autism." It's meant to discourage seeing people with a certain condition solely as a member of that group, to emphasize their individuality.

I mean, clearly, just to read the posts on this board, that is a real problem. It is too easy for professionals to form a single mental image of what being "autistic" means, and thus not be open to the wide variety of expressions it encompasses. In speech pathology, it is also important to remember to customize your therapy for each individual client. For instance, if you have a nonspeaking client with autism, you don't just slap a bunch of crappy PECS cards into their hands- you evaluate their environment, their level of understanding of symbolic representation, what their day-to-day needs are, etc. They may communicate better with color photographs of things in their environment than with crappy, abstract, black-and-white drawings that are meaningless to them. Or they may be ready to begin spelling out words. You don't know until you treat them as an individual, rather than solely as a member of a group.



Arbie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,381

24 May 2007, 11:47 pm

"Aspie", "Aspergian", "person with aspergers" etc. I would be thrilled if they would just remember my name. ;-)



sigholdaccountlost
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,207

25 May 2007, 4:31 am

LostInSpace wrote:
DoubleFeed wrote:
LostInSpace wrote:
sigholdaccountlost wrote:
LostInSpace wrote:
I know in some professions (ex. psychologist, SLP, etc.) it is not considered PC to say an "autistic person" or anything like that- you have to say "person with autism"- it's this whole "people first" thing- you're supposed to put the person first. Ex. "person with a hearing impairment" rather than "hearing impaired person". It's supposed to emphasize that the person has a condition, but they are not defined by that condition.


Except that some people would rather you put it together.


Put what together?
Together: autistic person. Apart: person with autism.


That's the whole point though. You're not supposed to imply that they are defined by their condition. They are a person first, autistic second. Although I suppose different people have different preferences, the form that is considered to be more sensitive is "person with autism." It's meant to discourage seeing people with a certain condition solely as a member of that group, to emphasize their individuality.

I mean, clearly, just to read the posts on this board, that is a real problem. It is too easy for professionals to form a single mental image of what being "autistic" means, and thus not be open to the wide variety of expressions it encompasses. In speech pathology, it is also important to remember to customize your therapy for each individual client. For instance, if you have a nonspeaking client with autism, you don't just slap a bunch of crappy PECS cards into their hands- you evaluate their environment, their level of understanding of symbolic representation, what their day-to-day needs are, etc. They may communicate better with color photographs of things in their environment than with crappy, abstract, black-and-white drawings that are meaningless to them. Or they may be ready to begin spelling out words. You don't know until you treat them as an individual, rather than solely as a member of a group.



You know, this sounds a lot like the discussions over 'brainstorm' that was held a while ago.


_________________
<a href="http://www.kia-tickers.com><img src="http://www.kia-tickers.com/bday/ticker/19901105/+0/4/1/name/r55/s37/bday.png" border="0"> </a>


aspiebegood
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 150
Location: Canada

27 May 2007, 8:24 pm

Actually, I don't think Asperger's should necessarily be pronounced with the native German pronunciation of "gerr's", because this term "Asperger's" was brought into popular culture not through German culture but through an anglicized route and so it can be argued that the Asperger's should be pronounced with the anglicized "jer's" like "Folger's" rather than "gerr's."


_________________
37 male, AS diagnosed, and loving it!


DoubleFeed
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 204

27 May 2007, 8:39 pm

LostInSpace wrote:

That's the whole point though. You're not supposed to imply that they are defined by their condition. They are a person first, autistic second. Although I suppose different people have different preferences, the form that is considered to be more sensitive is "person with autism." It's meant to discourage seeing people with a certain condition solely as a member of that group, to emphasize their individuality.

I mean, clearly, just to read the posts on this board, that is a real problem. It is too easy for professionals to form a single mental image of what being "autistic" means, and thus not be open to the wide variety of expressions it encompasses. In speech pathology, it is also important to remember to customize your therapy for each individual client. For instance, if you have a nonspeaking client with autism, you don't just slap a bunch of crappy PECS cards into their hands- you evaluate their environment, their level of understanding of symbolic representation, what their day-to-day needs are, etc. They may communicate better with color photographs of things in their environment than with crappy, abstract, black-and-white drawings that are meaningless to them. Or they may be ready to begin spelling out words. You don't know until you treat them as an individual, rather than solely as a member of a group.
Yes, I know. I don't really care what anybody calls me, though. The approach is what is important.
I'm of the mindset that if somebody is trying to figure out the most nonoffensive label for me, they are NOT thinking about how best to bridge the gap between me and them.



LostInSpace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,617
Location: Dixie

28 May 2007, 3:12 am

DoubleFeed wrote:
LostInSpace wrote:

That's the whole point though. You're not supposed to imply that they are defined by their condition. They are a person first, autistic second. Although I suppose different people have different preferences, the form that is considered to be more sensitive is "person with autism." It's meant to discourage seeing people with a certain condition solely as a member of that group, to emphasize their individuality.

I mean, clearly, just to read the posts on this board, that is a real problem. It is too easy for professionals to form a single mental image of what being "autistic" means, and thus not be open to the wide variety of expressions it encompasses. In speech pathology, it is also important to remember to customize your therapy for each individual client. For instance, if you have a nonspeaking client with autism, you don't just slap a bunch of crappy PECS cards into their hands- you evaluate their environment, their level of understanding of symbolic representation, what their day-to-day needs are, etc. They may communicate better with color photographs of things in their environment than with crappy, abstract, black-and-white drawings that are meaningless to them. Or they may be ready to begin spelling out words. You don't know until you treat them as an individual, rather than solely as a member of a group.
Yes, I know. I don't really care what anybody calls me, though. The approach is what is important.
I'm of the mindset that if somebody is trying to figure out the most nonoffensive label for me, they are NOT thinking about how best to bridge the gap between me and them.


If you'd ever worked with people with disabilities though, you'd realize how strong the connection is between the language professionals use and their attitudes towards their clients. Trust me, someone who says, "He's PDD" or "She's sensory" is probably not going to have the most helpful mindset. They're the type who blames every bump in the road on the person's disability, rather than stepping back and looking at their approach as the professional. The key to therapy is, if something isn't working, you need to figure out where the miscommunication is and modify *your* approach. You shouldn't be saying, "Geez, this kid is so low-functioning! It's impossible to teach him anything!"

I'm sure that a lot of that is simply their language reflecting their attitude, but it can't hurt to remember to use the proper language as a reminder to have the proper attitude. Anyway, once you get into the habit, that's it. Get into the habit of using the right language, which should be drilled into you during grad school, and get into the mindset of treating the person as an individual. It's not like your clinician is obsessing about the correct language to use, and is therefore not focused on your treatment, or something like that.



LostInSpace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,617
Location: Dixie

28 May 2007, 3:17 am

aspiebegood wrote:
Actually, I don't think Asperger's should necessarily be pronounced with the native German pronunciation of "gerr's", because this term "Asperger's" was brought into popular culture not through German culture but through an anglicized route and so it can be argued that the Asperger's should be pronounced with the anglicized "jer's" like "Folger's" rather than "gerr's."


How many people have you heard pronounce it that way? I have *never* heard anyone pronounce it with a "j" sound, and I've been around a lot of professionals who work with Aspies and auties. Both my parents are psychologists who have worked with Aspies, and they pronounced it with a "g" sound as well.

The word "Freudian" is also anglicized, but no one says, "froodian".