Board index › General Discussion › General Autism Discussion

"Aspergers" - Should the name be changed?

Page 5 of 7 [ 101 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

fiddlerpianist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,821
Location: The Autistic Hinterlands

02 Jun 2009, 1:59 pm

AnnePande wrote:
fiddlerpianist wrote:
AnnePande wrote:
Maybe it would be more accurate to call it a condition with both disabilities and advantages?

It's not really a question of accuracy; it's a question of connotation. One person's objection to the word "condition" will be another's objection to the word "syndrome." I think "condition" is just as medically associated as "syndrome" (which, a_spock_darkly, I do not debate). I think that words such as "variant" however completely miss the point. If there is nothing deficient, then why bother to categorize at all? Why seek diagnosis?


My focus was not as much on the word "condition" vs. "syndrome" as on the "both disabilities and advantages" thing. I don't mind the word syndrome, and would be more prone to prefer that to "variant".
I think it's wrong to deny that there are disabilities in AS. But also just as wrong to make it sound like it is nothing else than disability.

Yes, I absolutely agree. From disability comes capability.


_________________
"That leap of logic should have broken his legs." - Janissy


Xs142
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 60

02 Jun 2009, 2:00 pm

fiddlerpianist wrote:
Xs142 wrote:
fiddlerpianist wrote:
AnnePande wrote:
Maybe it would be more accurate to call it a condition with both disabilities and advantages?

It's not really a question of accuracy; it's a question of connotation. One person's objection to the word "condition" will be another's objection to the word "syndrome." I think "condition" is just as medically associated as "syndrome" (which, a_spock_darkly, I do not debate). I think that words such as "variant" however completely miss the point. If there is nothing deficient, then why bother to categorize at all? Why seek diagnosis?


Because society has a set standard for 'normality' that the Asperger personality 'variant' doesn't fit properly.

Sorry for the confusion. Those were rhetorical questions.


Perfect forum for that my friend. :lol:



AnnePande
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jul 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 994
Location: Aarhus, Denmark

02 Jun 2009, 2:20 pm

Xs142 wrote:
fiddlerpianist wrote:
Xs142 wrote:
fiddlerpianist wrote:
AnnePande wrote:
Maybe it would be more accurate to call it a condition with both disabilities and advantages?

It's not really a question of accuracy; it's a question of connotation. One person's objection to the word "condition" will be another's objection to the word "syndrome." I think "condition" is just as medically associated as "syndrome" (which, a_spock_darkly, I do not debate). I think that words such as "variant" however completely miss the point. If there is nothing deficient, then why bother to categorize at all? Why seek diagnosis?


Because society has a set standard for 'normality' that the Asperger personality 'variant' doesn't fit properly.

Sorry for the confusion. Those were rhetorical questions.


Perfect forum for that my friend. :lol:


I didn't get either that they were rhetorical questions, but I saw your post, fiddlerpianist, before I could have posted a concrete answer. :lol: (But then again, it could hardly be a question pointed to me, as I'd never written that there was nothing deficient, haha.)

Oh the joys of being an aspie! :P :alien:



Mikhaillost
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jan 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 285

02 Jun 2009, 3:01 pm

No. I like the name. I think it gives me something to laugh about when I feel bad. Maybe I am the only one that likes the jokes. Besides, he is kind of important.



pandd
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jul 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,430

02 Jun 2009, 4:15 pm

Psygirl6 wrote:
First of all No there is nothing wrong with my reasoning. Second of all I am not trying to be snobbish. i am just pointing the difference how Asperger's and autism are different that is all.

This to me though is like claiming beans and vegetables are different, because a cabbage is a vegetable and beans are quite different to cabbages.

If there are different diagnostic categories within the Autism Spectrum (and there are), it cannot be true that by describing conditions as "Autistic" it is assumed there is no differentiation between say Kanner type Autism and Asperger type Autism.
Quote:
I am sorry you had trouble understanding that. I am just making a point that How asperger's is different from classic autism, through my experiences. How their autism affects them and how, because I have my asperger's those thing do not affect me.

Your Autism does not effect you the same way it effects everyone else with Asperger type, much less the same way it effects everyone with some other type.
Quote:
It has nothing to do with snobbery or being better than everyone. I would never do that to anyone.

I am sorry you were misunderstood.

Quote:
I just want to say that I am sorry that everyone may have felt offended about my first post on this topic.

In my opinion it would be offensive to imply Kanner Autists were inferior, but you've stated plainly this was not your intent or reasoning, but rather a misinterpretation.



mechanicalgirl39
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,340

02 Jun 2009, 7:09 pm

activebutodd wrote:
MONKEY wrote:
dalekaspie wrote:
god syndrome



Now that I like :wink:
What about:
awsome-itis
cool syndrome

Anyway seriously though, I don't think it should be changed, I'm fine with the name.


Hmm... How about 'God Mode'? That'd be great! But I'm not fussed either :D



By the way, I like your username! :)


_________________
'You're so cold, but you feel alive
Lay your hands on me, one last time' (Breaking Benjamin)


fiddlerpianist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,821
Location: The Autistic Hinterlands

02 Jun 2009, 7:14 pm

Xs142 wrote:
fiddlerpianist wrote:
Xs142 wrote:
fiddlerpianist wrote:
AnnePande wrote:
Maybe it would be more accurate to call it a condition with both disabilities and advantages?

It's not really a question of accuracy; it's a question of connotation. One person's objection to the word "condition" will be another's objection to the word "syndrome." I think "condition" is just as medically associated as "syndrome" (which, a_spock_darkly, I do not debate). I think that words such as "variant" however completely miss the point. If there is nothing deficient, then why bother to categorize at all? Why seek diagnosis?


Because society has a set standard for 'normality' that the Asperger personality 'variant' doesn't fit properly.

Sorry for the confusion. Those were rhetorical questions.


Perfect forum for that my friend. :lol:

My NT side is definitely showing today. :)


_________________
"That leap of logic should have broken his legs." - Janissy


Skilpadde
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 27,019

02 Jun 2009, 9:02 pm

AJCoyne wrote:
Dubai is suddenly Mumbai!


Nope, Dubai is still Dubai. Bombay, however, is now Mumbai.



I think Asperger’s is fine as it is, even though I think Asperger is a harsh sounding name.

Hans Asperger was after all the doctor who came up with the definition of who we are. This took place during WW2, in a time when the nazis wanted to exterminate everyone they saw as inferior, and I have heard that he objected to aspies being inferior. On the contrary, he supposedly spoke up for this group and called us an asset.

Syndrom simply means something that runs together, as the criteria and traits of AS do, so I find it quite accurate.

On a radio show some months ago I heard someone call it Asperger’s phenomenon. That’s the only time I’ve heard that term, though. That's not too bad, I think!



Skilpadde
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 27,019

02 Jun 2009, 9:20 pm

fiddlerpianist wrote:
AnnePande wrote:
fiddlerpianist wrote:
AnnePande wrote:
Maybe it would be more accurate to call it a condition with both disabilities and advantages?

It's not really a question of accuracy; it's a question of connotation. One person's objection to the word "condition" will be another's objection to the word "syndrome." I think "condition" is just as medically associated as "syndrome" (which, a_spock_darkly, I do not debate). I think that words such as "variant" however completely miss the point. If there is nothing deficient, then why bother to categorize at all? Why seek diagnosis?


My focus was not as much on the word "condition" vs. "syndrome" as on the "both disabilities and advantages" thing. I don't mind the word syndrome, and would be more prone to prefer that to "variant".
I think it's wrong to deny that there are disabilities in AS. But also just as wrong to make it sound like it is nothing else than disability.

Yes, I absolutely agree. From disability comes capability.



I don't see AS as a disability. We differ in social behaviour and how we do things, but that's what it is to me, a difference.
There are cultures in which it is deemed inproper to seek eye contact. Are these cultures disabled? Most of us have difficulties with lying. In India it is considered rude not to be able to help someone, so if you're asking for directions they would rather point you in the wrong direction than tell you they don't know the way. That's a cultural trait that in a western individual would be seen as a personality problem.
The Swedish sociologist Mats Børjesson sees AS as a cultural phenomenon.

And, yes, Anne-Pande, transability should definitely be an official part of AS.



ignisfatuus
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 5 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 261
Location: Canada

02 Jun 2009, 9:36 pm

A_Spock_Darkly wrote:
The title "Aspie" sounds juvenile. I prefer "Aspergian."


I agree, but "Aspergian" is only slightly better. What I find amusing is the person who coined "aspie" has that as a credit on her website. I would hide the fact if it were me.

Perhaps even more amusing are the experts and journalists who drop "aspie" as if they are in the know and part of a secret club. I cringe every time I see this.


_________________
"The world is only as deep as we can see. This is why fools think themselves profound." - R. Scott Bakker, The Judging Eye


Callista
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,775
Location: Ohio, USA

02 Jun 2009, 10:48 pm

I don't know why you guys are so worried about names. I say either "autistic", "Asperger's", or "Aspie", and they all feel neutral to me. We may end up simply being called "autistic", if the spectrum gets smooshed together in the next DSM, and that could solve the name problem--at least I hope it would; they are almost guaranteed to divide it into "mild/moderate/severe/profound", and that comes with its own stereotypes. (Besides, where do you put somebody with a severe disability and a genius IQ? They do exist, and on the spectrum more often than off it.)

Re. Psygirl's day program... I wonder if maybe some of those people are violent because they're sick of being treated like animals. Because if I got treated the way I hear about some people in group homes and other institutions, I think I'd either just shut down completely or else start biting people. You get patronized and marginalized and told you're hopeless long enough, and there comes a point where you just can't take it anymore.

I'm not discounting the possibility that they may simply have gathered the auties who would've had problems with violence anyway. NTs can be violent, too, after all; if you gather enough NTs with violence problems together, you'd probably start assuming they're all violent, if you didn't know any better.


_________________
Reports from a Resident Alien:
http://chaoticidealism.livejournal.com

Autism Memorial:
http://autism-memorial.livejournal.com


fiddlerpianist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,821
Location: The Autistic Hinterlands

02 Jun 2009, 11:07 pm

Skilpadde wrote:
I don't see AS as a disability. We differ in social behaviour and how we do things, but that's what it is to me, a difference.

Yes, it is a difference, but that's severely understating it. While it's not inherently a disability, it is a disability with respect to the cultures in which we need to fit... unless you are living in a remote, exclusive society which consists of only people who are on the spectrum. :)

It is more difficult for people with AS to interpret non-verbal communication than someone NT. This trait is, by itself, not a disability. However, apply it to a culture where non-verbal communication is not only the norm (i.e. pretty much all modern cultures), it's inherent and implicitly learned by those who are NT. Suddenly that trait has become a disability.

From the pragmatic viewpoint, unless you are attempting to fit into culture where this is not the norm, it's sufficient to label it generally as a disability. You can argue from the theoretical that it is not, but that's all you have... a theoretical argument.


_________________
"That leap of logic should have broken his legs." - Janissy


Michjo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Mar 2009
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,020
Location: Oxford, UK

03 Jun 2009, 2:14 am

Using the same method as people in this thread...

I could claim sickle cell anaemia is a "difference" rather than a disability.
I could claim a malignant brain tumour is a "difference" rather than a disability.
I could claim blindness is a "difference" rather than a disability.
I could claim deafness is a "difference" rather than a disability.
I could claim a stroke is a "difference" rather than a disability.

It doesn't matter how many positives something has, if it causes you to be missing something that is present in the general population then it's a disability. People with disabilities can learn to function just as well as someone without a disability or in some cases better, this doesn't change the condition from being a disability, it just implies that said person is gifted in other ways.

Disability = Dis + ability = seperation + ability

It's not possible to have aspergers and not be missing some type of ability, it's part of the diagnosis. If you don't match the diagnosis criteria, (except for the impairment in functioning one, which is there for legal reasons) you don't have aspergers.



AnnePande
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jul 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 994
Location: Aarhus, Denmark

03 Jun 2009, 7:03 am

Michjo wrote:
Using the same method as people in this thread...

I could claim sickle cell anaemia is a "difference" rather than a disability.
I could claim a malignant brain tumour is a "difference" rather than a disability.
I could claim blindness is a "difference" rather than a disability.
I could claim deafness is a "difference" rather than a disability.
I could claim a stroke is a "difference" rather than a disability.

It doesn't matter how many positives something has, if it causes you to be missing something that is present in the general population then it's a disability. People with disabilities can learn to function just as well as someone without a disability or in some cases better, this doesn't change the condition from being a disability, it just implies that said person is gifted in other ways.

Disability = Dis + ability = seperation + ability

It's not possible to have aspergers and not be missing some type of ability, it's part of the diagnosis. If you don't match the diagnosis criteria, (except for the impairment in functioning one, which is there for legal reasons) you don't have aspergers.


But the point is that some of our abilities are just as much a part of the condition / syndrome as our difficulties. It's not just something random beside.



AnnePande
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jul 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 994
Location: Aarhus, Denmark

03 Jun 2009, 7:05 am

fiddlerpianist wrote:
Skilpadde wrote:
I don't see AS as a disability. We differ in social behaviour and how we do things, but that's what it is to me, a difference.

Yes, it is a difference, but that's severely understating it. While it's not inherently a disability, it is a disability with respect to the cultures in which we need to fit... unless you are living in a remote, exclusive society which consists of only people who are on the spectrum. :)

It is more difficult for people with AS to interpret non-verbal communication than someone NT. This trait is, by itself, not a disability. However, apply it to a culture where non-verbal communication is not only the norm (i.e. pretty much all modern cultures), it's inherent and implicitly learned by those who are NT. Suddenly that trait has become a disability.

From the pragmatic viewpoint, unless you are attempting to fit into culture where this is not the norm, it's sufficient to label it generally as a disability. You can argue from the theoretical that it is not, but that's all you have... a theoretical argument.


A question about nonverbal communication:

If the NTs are those who are good at nonverbal communication, then why is it also the NTs who think it gets uncomfortable when there is silence in a group of people for too long??
8)
Just wondering.



Sora
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,906
Location: Europe

03 Jun 2009, 7:18 am

Michjo wrote:
It doesn't matter how many positives something has, if it causes you to be missing something that is present in the general population then it's a disability. People with disabilities can learn to function just as well as someone without a disability or in some cases better, this doesn't change the condition from being a disability, it just implies that said person is gifted in other ways.


I agree with what you're at, but I prefer different vocabulary. You know, modern humanity stuff and all.

The social model of disability is something I definitely prefer above the medical because it makes more sense to me personally. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_model_of_disability

Impairment used as a term for the unique deficits/limitations of people (as variations from the normal can be either not a problem or an impairment), disability though only when actually someone or something disables you as whether you're subject to a person or environment hindering you can change unlike your initial impairment of AS.


_________________
Autism + ADHD
______
The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it. Terry Pratchett