Wake up people! There is no such thing as Aspergers.

Post Reply New Topic

As much of a gross over simplification as that which defines the tendency to agree/go along with whatever the dominant opinion in any group is as "good social skills"? Or actually quite a reasonable assessment in comparison?

.

Last edited by ouinon on 10 Mar 2009, 7:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

Well, it's not a disease. I agree there. And there's some subjectivity. And yes, it's a social construct in a sense (as said earlier in the post, though I didn't quote it). Though I would personally say it differently. It's a human idea that may not exactly match up to reality, or may point to a collection of things rather than a thing. It's a label for a set of behaviors.

It is, however, quite real.

What exactly is real about "it", if "it" is neither objective nor a disease?

Behaviours are obviously "real".

And the term "aspergers" is as real as all words; "god" for instance, or "love" or "free" or "ether" or "phlogiston" or "the four humours" or "Zeus" or "deviant" or "invert" or "primitive".

But the use of this word, "aspergers", ( which means a disorder/abnormality ), for a group of people, based on how closely their behavour corresponds to a set of criteria of abnormality invented/decided on by society, is social control and oppression in action.

The word is used to justify society's exclusion of a group of people, as it once used to justify the oppression, slavery, and killing, of black people, by equating them with children or animals because of their physiognomy, nakedness, and colour, and "scientific" experiments supposedly measuring/proving their lower intelligence, poor executive skills, etc etc etc.

.

Last edited by ouinon on 10 Mar 2009, 7:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

You stated that if biological tests were used then we would be diagnosing using an ability, and one of the biological markers is delays in audio processing, and nothing you said ruled it out as a test.

You simply cherry picked one half of the evidence, extrapolated from it something not true of the other half and applied it to the whole. Whether or not visual acuity is an ability delays in audio processing are not and could be used to test for autistic spectrum disorders among the hearing.

As much as a gross over simplification as it would be to claim that "good social skills" is simply a tendency to agree/go along with dominant opinion.

...to lock or not to lock

I believe Junior1 is a troll, and based on that this thread should be locked.

On the other hand, his topic has generated a huge response, and an interesting collection of posts. It could be interesting to see it continue.

Usual rules apply, of course, as spelled out in WP's TOS.

Of course, a more-experienced mod may overrule my decision to let it continue.

Ed
Forum Moderator

Cherry picking, funny how that has become a term of criticism, when it is such a lovely activity.

Society decides which behaviours are labelled abilities, and which ones are labelled, and experienced, as disabilities, and people get sidelined, with the medical profession providing the "scientific" justification. It doesn't matter what we can and can't do, it is social pressure which determines which ones are valued and respected at any given time.

And to disguise its discrimination/bias, pretends that those behavours which are currently out of favour are "real"/objective disorders/disabilities.
.

Last edited by ouinon on 10 Mar 2009, 8:19 am, edited 2 times in total.

I was excluded and it was deemed justified by the immediate social group before the label was applied to me and before the label was in the DSM.

I was extensively harmed because the label was not believed.

I have not experienced any exclusion particular to the label having been applied.

The label can conceivably be used to require (with the force of law) that I not be excluded on the basis of the traits the label describes.

Exactly my point; first of all the social pressures arise which sideline, and then the medical profession provides the justification when the exclusion becomes too obvious to ignore.


More likely because of social pressures/biases/priorities which no longer tolerated/allowed for your differences/vulnerabilites and no longer valued/respected/wanted your abilities/capacities, ( or not enough to pay for them with the restrictions that your inclusion/full-health would require anyway ).


No, its effect is more on society as a whole, to reinforce confidence in a certain way of being, and to "encourage" as many people as possible, as many people as can humanly manage to, to conform to those standards of behaviour.


It can, ... conceivably. It took homosexuals almost 100 years to do so, and even now their rights are still not established.

.

The evidence does not support your point. The exclusion existed without the label and the exclusion does not apply to everyone who the label applies to (in fact some people with AS attract particular nurturing as described by Tony Attwood).


No, because the label was not believed.

You have not a single fact about what you are claiming to know better than me in regards to my own personal circumstance; is this supposed to give an impression that you do not jump to hasty unsubstantiated opinions in the complete absence of sufficient information from which to deduce a conclusion?

The fact is with the label I can potentially by-pass the unexamined biases of non-believers who would otherwise harm me, because without the label they will not believe my differences and vulnerabilities are what they are. The label and the concept it conveys facilitates the recognition and meeting of my needs.


This is simply not true. Most people have not heard of AS and before AS was in the DSM getting accommodations from society was certainly not easier. I am unaware of AS having any effect of causing non effected persons to confirm to particular standards of behavior, nor am I aware of any evidence that overall the application of the label to individuals has a nett effect of increased compliance with such standards.

Before they were named as a group they had no chance of establishing rights as homosexual people. Furthermore it is a poor analogy because objectively the biggest problems they faced were entirely societal, whereas my sensitivity to noises/foods etc is not caused by society and would be a cause inconvenience and discomfort with or without society.

I am unsure what you think the relevance is anyway. Without the lAS abel even the legal fact of those rights are not there, with the label they are. You stated the label was created to exclude, then it became the label merely justified already extant exclusion, but now it is merely the label might not achieve non-exclusion really quickly....

Well here's another thing to maybe think about ...

I'm not entirely sure aspergers is a result of social misunderstanding or negative social experiences. The reason being is that the human brain is conditioned, and has been conditioned for a very long time.

However, it seems for us the conditioning/learning process is either severely or slightly (depending on the person) affected which can show in a variety of different ways from a very young age (though evident more specifically when your older). Some people are clumsy with dire coordination (and have been since toddlers) others hardly say a word, some just shut off, others still really struggle as fully fledged adults.

However, being perfectly honest and drawing from my own experiences, some traits I have carried all through my life since I was months old. They have certainly not been picked up recently, neither have they been 'made up' by the diagnosis that they clearly fit. If there wasn't a problem affecting the process of logical development, the symptoms wouldn't exist (though I've no idea what may cause this) or even if it is a problem at all?

However, what I do know going by my own experience, is this. If you take a close look at an aspergers diagnosis, it may be possible to break down that diagnosis and understand it better. By doing this, you can then set out to work on improving what you struggle with and start getting a little normality back into your life at your own pace and time. I personally found medication to be useless, because again it's not a disease or something that goes away with medication. With the right understanding, help and support there could well be light at the end of the tunnel for this complex issue.

A wonderful saying I believe to be true is that you can't walk a bridge without foundation in place. The community should be working closely in understanding and helping people with aspergers. This will help them develop the basic essentials that they need to lead a normalish life what ever that may be, because they can...

You're all posting in a troll thread.

Maybe so, but it's actually a good thread to discuss and quite a lot of posts here.

Providing people keep behaved of course

And you wonder why I'm not interested in what you have to say about your pet theory in another thread.

Lots of things are real that aren't diseases. This message board. The computer I'm typing on. Asperger's doesn't have to be a disease to be real anymore than my computer does. If you think it does, then the burden of proof is on you to show that.

It's something all together different than a disease. A difference. A deficiency perhaps.

Another metaphor to illustrate the point. A broken leg is not a disease.

And I didn't say it's not objective. I said there's some subjectivity. Two different things. Subjective and objective aren't black and white one or the other. It's not that simple.

Exactly. It applied more and more as society changed in a certain direction. As more people became clearly excluded it became necessary to "explain" this, and rather than examining, and admitting to, the social pressures which caused some people to experience disability and exclusion the establishment has preferred to justify it with "scientific" proof of "disorder".


Precisely as some "lucky", ( generally middle-class ) women were "nurtured" by their husbands and family so long as they were ready to confess themselves "weaker", or in some way inferior, requiring special care.


See above. Women who were willing to accept the description of women as innately/inherently weaker etc, received support and understanding.


Not in recent times, no. Just as homosexuality was viewed with increasing disgust/intolerance for quite a while, ( in the repressive Victorian era ), before sexologists invented the term for their behaviour, so people whose behaviour falls into the AS description experienced increasing hostility/incomprehension in the 30-40 or so years before Lorna Wing brought the term to the attention of the world.

But if you read literature from the 19th century, and before, people whose behaviour would now receive the AS diagnosis were treated as normal members of society, depending on what sex they were. AS men did ok, AS women not so well.


Your point relies on accepting that there are affected and unaffected, as if it were a fixed population. The increasing numbers diagnosed reflects increasing pressure on people to accept the label, and receive "nurture appropriate for a weaker being", or "get their social act together"/conform.


They didn't need to so long as society accepted them as simply part of the great variety of human types. And at many points they have been.


And where does all the noise come from, and the chemicals, and the high-starch/refined carbo etc diet come from? It doesn't come into being on its own; it is society which creates the environment in which you live. And right now it is inimical to people with hyper-sensitivities. And society shows little or no signs of giving up on those things which cause us so much distress.
.

Last edited by ouinon on 10 Mar 2009, 9:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

Of course.

Please reread my post. My question was, "What is it about "Aspergers" which is real"? I believe it is its use as tool of social control, justification for oppression/exclusion.



.

And I thought this was ennui.....meanwhile the Seance is proceeding! Dr. Hans Asperger channels (merely quoting here...) "Poo poo on you, Neurotypical."

<Lab Pet sees dead people>






I did ask ADA for a fainting couch. Does that count?