"Malice and Asperger Syndrome"

Post Reply New Topic

Maybe it is provoking such violent ( in some people, not me !) and extreme ( ? ! !) and confused ( me!?!) reactions because it has put its finger on something which exposes very dramatically ( literally) two widely diverging paths taken by people with ASD in early infancy , leading to two very different and in many ways antagonistic approaches.

I know that I went one way for instance , the "narcissistic personality" (disorder) as highly mobile vehicle for negotiating life , which lasted until my mid twenties when it began to crack , and then exploded, leaving me in the slow blinking state of ,( hang on a mo'.. who/what does that remind me of , apart from the end of The Wall as already remarked elsewhere!!... hmm?) a visible ASD sufferer tho it took me almost 15 years to realise that my increased anxiety , incapacity in social situations , inability to work, sensitivity to noise and general paralysis was actually ASD rather than depression.

But while I was NPD I was less nice ! ! ( Though I don't think that I could/would have done it without the "heady/out of body" pseudo-opiate effects of gluten on my wheat-intolerant-system.)

I think the article has quite definitely failed to distinguish between the two kinds of "disruptive/destructive/hurtful/harmful" behaviours. It's a very confusing article as a result.

Last edited by ouinon on 17 Oct 2007, 10:55 am, edited 3 times in total.

I think perhaps Tantum has found an aspect of Aspergers that requires more than this short article to fully explain, is all. I would assume that he is either planning, or already has, a fuller piece, and this is more of a summary than a complete and exhaustive dissertation.

Nevertheless, he does say at the beginning that MOST aspies are not at issue here. He is talking about a sub-group, and only a subgroup. I dont think he is trying to suggest that ALL aspies are malicious at all, merely identify a single part of spectrum behaviour that does afflict some of us.

An exhaustive piece would no doubt include in-depth statistical analysis, test subjects, comparison with NT behaviour etc etc etc. This piece as it stands bears most resemblance to an OP on this very forum, in which vague ideas are put forth for discussion. It could also stand as the opening of a real life discussion.

Everyone is capable of malice, and sometimes it appears inexplicable. What he seems to be trying to do is isolate if there is any reason why an aspie would act in a malicious manner, if it is actually malicious or not, and assumably from that, work on a treatment or other option to reduce this likelihood in certain aspies who DO display malice, or determine if it is merely a human reaction/action, rather than a spectrum-based one.

Categorically he is NOT saying that all aspies are evil, and I think it shows great misuse of the term to apply it to him. We arent talking about Dr Mengele here (and even he would deny being evil, claiming his work was for scienctific purpose.)

Would people have reacted with outrage if this article was about "Collecting Stupid Bollocks and Aspergers" ?
Thats something everyone is capable of, aspies do as well and to extremis, and can cause issues.
Would we be calling him evil if it was about "Not Liking To Hug and Aspergers" ?
It is in OUR interest to isolate parts of spectrum behaviour, because it increases understanding of the spectrum as a whole, and like it or not, some parts of that spectrum ARE debilitating, bad, and generally unacceptable.
Citing the previously mentioned "wine-making" incident.. an apparently malicious act, carried out in misguided innocence, that brought about damage and difficulty for all involved.... a better understanding of AS might have prevented the event taking place, and thus saved a lot of hassle.

WE are not stupid, so lets not act like it eh? Less of the knee-jerk reactions would be nice.

I totally agree!

This is exactly what I have been thinking. That it makes super new discussion material of something very important. In fact since posting up this thread i have made some really exciting discoveries about my own history as ASD sufferer, which I am very grateful for.

I just said in my recent post that the article made a mistake in lumping stuff together because I thought that that might partly explain the reasons for the hostility, (and less patronising than my thinking it was because of people being in denial!! )

Otherwise like you I don't understand the fury it seems to provoke. I see it as a stimulating piece of (relatively) original thinking /research; to be investigated further. I wonder what else he might already have come up with?

Last edited by ouinon on 17 Oct 2007, 10:41 am, edited 1 time in total.

Honestly I can't take anything seriously or get past the ludicrous "psychopathy" statement at the beginning of the article. How can we take it seriously when it makes such a massive mistake/assumption about who we are right at the beginning?

Which statement is that ? I can't find it . I've had a good look at the article but can't see that.

( My own mistake in translating the title of a source article by Asperger as "Psychopathic autists" was corrected almost immediately after many (! !) kind people pointed out my error in translating it thus ! !)

Maybe I'm just getting confused by all this-ignore me!

So...is this kind of negative behavior actually COMMON with people with AS? I had difficulty brining myself to read this-it sounds like some of the people described are sociopaths-maybe in addition to having AS or whatever else. I'd sure never do anything like what's being described.

Mr Tantum is welcome to my (Irish) landline number to discuss this ANY time he likes.

In fairness, perhaps I SHOULD let him have a copy of my personal views on shrinks...just for balance.

And I trust Alex to decide what should, and what should not, be locked without my input.

M

Locked is fine. But if it gets deleted, I cant refer him to it, and theres no saying what might occur between now and january.

I sense you may be letting your personal views of shrinks get in the way of being objective about the article, and in fact taking the whole thing rather too personally.

I suggest skipping those then. The article is more about how 'malice' is in the eye of the beholder then that it equates ASD with sociapathy.

Dumb question: how much does this matter?

Admittedly, I'm NT: I'm trying to understand my little brother better, and it's kind of nice to know that some of the stuff he did when he was little was more than him being a brat because he could get away with it. It's good to have him make a little more sense. But, on a practical level -

Both Aspies and NTs have malicious behavior, and they both need to be taught better. That was true before this article came out, and will be true no matter what further research does or does not take place. And all children need an understanding; that hasn't and won't change. So except in providing NTs with an extra sliver of patience when dealing with Aspies, I don't see how this matters all that much. How does or should this knowledge actually change behavior?

And another point: malice requires intent to do harm, not intent to see what happens. Therefore, an act interpreted as malicious when committed by an Aspie with no comprehension of the existence of other people's pain cannot be a true act of malice.

I can remember seeking revenge on my brothers when I was a kid. When they piss me off because they would touch my doll house and make a mess or touch my playhouse or anything I was playing with, I get back at them by doing something and say my brothers did it and i enjoy watching them getting into trouble and being spanked and sent to their rooms or to bed early as a puinishment. Then I get over what they did and move on. I can also remember doing things but when my mother would get mad about it, I knew I was in trouble so I blame it on my brothers instead so I wouldn't be in trouble. But lot of the times it didn't work because my mother knew it was me. But as my brothers got older, they stopped touching my stuff that belonged to me so my revenge stopped.

I also hit my freinds when I get mad at them or when they wouldn't listen to me so I give them a spanking. They get mad at me of course and leave and I can remember getting in trouble with my mother for hitting. It took me till I was 10 to figure out only parents can spank their kids, kids can't spank other kids because my mother had finally told me that. She waited that long to tell me.


I did lot of s**t to kids when I was little and wouldn't understand why they were getting upset or what their problem was even though I see them crying or them yelling at me telling me to stop or "beth no." Then my mother come out and yell at me and punish me. Then she started to give me the same taste of my own medicine and then punish me because the punishments weren't working before.

Gimme a minute to think this through properly...

Er...

No...



M

PS...anyone care to fill me in on what my "personal views of shrinks" actually ARE? Answers, on a postcard etc...

YES! That's exactly what he's trying to explain! He isn't saying that all aspies are malicious or anything remotely like that. He's trying to explain that actions of aspies can be SEEN as malicious by other people, and that it might not register as malicious in their heads.