This feels a little counterproductive...

Post Reply New Topic

Okay first let me say I am not knocking the researchers or the research really, this is just a question that's been bugging me and I want some input on it. Does an NT trying to explain to an NT how someone with AS feels or why they act a certain way seem a little odd? It just seems to me like someone who has been totally colorblind from birth trying to tell someone else in the same situation what red looks like for someone who can see red just fine only doesn't speak the same language as the other two (did that even make sense to anyone other than me, I'm even a little confused by it lol). Are there many people on the spectrum doing the research? Personally I'd love that job just for the fact I might be able to figure myself out in the process but then again it might cause the problem of being too close to the image to see the picture (can you tell I think visually lol).

Indeed. Especially since the Model T researcher is basically out to find what the theory predicts so he can get it past the peer-review Old Boy's Club board, checking it against the reference rather than reality.

Two examples:

I do linguistics. One day a colleague, working with a bunch of students learning Language X, meets a word nobody in the group knows. Professor says, well, let us look it up in the dictionary. Student says, hey, we have Ahmed [a speaker of the language] here. Why not just ask him what it means? The Professor told this story as if the student had done something amazing HE would never have thought of.

Confderence - trying to set up a curiculum for Community X. Group includes several representatives. of the Community. Big professor repeats many times, We cannoy make a cecision, we don't know what these peple want. This in spite of the fact these people were telling us what they wanted.

Is "No Diagnosis without Representation" a motto?

You are forgetting the strong drive towards career security

I have done outside jobs for NT's all my working life because I know I would hate to have to spend even a week in an NT environment. Too many things going on to make sense of, for me,
and I would end up falling out with them once they detect my difference.

They find it preferable to do research work to doing menial tasks. Hence if they can take the longest way around to answering a question then there is more security in their career and they get more funding for their research projects.

They do not like this pointing out to them . Nor do they value a quick solution to a problem.
They enjoy working on a problem like they enjoy eating a good meal and find it rude to suggest they eat faster.

I certainly am not pleased with some of the things they claim. Part of the problem though is they focus a lot on children so some of their claims can fall short pretty quickly on adults.

I used to not have much if any empathy for people. My mother saw that in me as a child, and I remember it clearly. Now I have some empathy though. I feel as I get older I gain new things that I never used to have. It IS called a "developmental delay", although for some reason people think of it as a permanent thing rather than just a delay. I know though, this isn't always the case as some things will never be perfect or much easier. Dealing with people will always be a problem for me, even I were good at it!

It just feels to me that they make little effort working with the autistic community. The job security comment above would make sense as to why. The longer for them, the better. It doesn't matter to some people who has problems, so long as their own interests are secure.

Just have to say I know EXACTLY where you are coming from. I felt this way too much while reading articles written by those I assume are NT (just by the style of thought process). It is all over Wikipedia articles, it just drips with it. I found a book once I picked up that read like a bunch of medical papers collected and organized in book form (which I think it actually was, because the book went nowhere except to just mention a bunch of symptoms in random order and compare them to other symptoms). By the way thats another pet-peeve I have with NT thinking; the cross-referencing nature of it without meaning or obvious purpose.

I got frustrated reading that book (which I don't remember the title.) I'm sure it was simply titled "Aspergers." They're creative like that Lol. I was so frustrated because I could see the things they were mentioning, except from my point of view I could see WHY the things they mentioned made sense to ME. To them they characterized them as random, or without cause. I saw them exactly as they were, almost logical. If they tried turning outside of their own mind and projected themselves a bit into the person they would realize there was a connection.

I too used the analogy to myself that they were color blind. And they didn't see it. In fact they never will. How do you explain that to them? It's like a major disconnect and I'm not even sure how to get information across, when they seem to speak a totally different language anyway.

I'm happy to run into this thread. It confirmed something for me. I don't feel so alone on this one.

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know of any books written from the aspie side?

I'm gonna write. No NT will tell me what I feel!
We have phrase in Polish gadać jak ze ślepym o kolorach - talk like about colours with blind one.

Now I help people with Autistic/Aspie children and they are surprised that it's not the same as they read in books. And that they understand books not properly.

That would actually be an awesome project for the whole WP community. We have enough writers on here and there's plenty of NTs on here too to bounce stuff off of to make sure it makes sense. Aspergers by Aspies! (or maybe it was just a little too early for that Red Bull....)

Nope. More AS people should write about AS.

Yay for Red Bull, btw, I love it too

Temple Grandin wrote some.

Couldn't agree more. I always liken it to being black and having to rely on white men to stick up for your rights.

Only we have the inside story. Neurotypical input is useful, but they should run it past us for correction before it goes to press. We are the ultimate authority on the subject.

Thanks . It sucks that the library here doesn't have anything by him, but I added some of his to my Book Mooch list. Any fellow moochers on here by the way?



True, and in a more logical world they probably would. But since many people in charge of that sort of stuff are both stubborn (and sometimes a little lazy) I say we don't wait around for the ethereal them to figure out how useful that logic thing is. Seriously anyone up for writing a collaborative aspies insider look book? I'm game (mind you we better have a grammar snob on board if I'm writing because I am horrible at spelling and run ons).

Possibly.......and I'd more than likely qualify as a grammar snob. One possible approach would be to identify and test a few of the more questionable NT assertions about us - could maybe get WP aspie members to vote on the assertions, and see whether there was a reasonable consensus that in some respects the NTs have got it wrong. I think it'd need some kind of statistical data like that, otherwise the NT experts would just say that their opinions are more accurate because they've seen a lot of cases while we're just basing our conclusions on the experiences of one or two aspies. Might also be worth thinking about "ego bias" - if an outsider asserted something unflattering about us, our collective Aspie voters would probably be biased towards denial, if you see what I mean.

A good title might have been "Autism Speaks" but I gather it's been taken by a NT group who might well be a rich source of controversial assertions about us. I don't know a thing about them except that they've royally pissed off a lot of Aspies on WP. There has to be a reason. There's also some unqualified woman out there putting it about that married Aspies somehow manipulate their NT partners into a (something like) fate worse than death....I'd love to see something in print as a balance to that.

For barbedlotus - I'd recommend the hour long presentation Temple Grandin gave that's on youtube. I watched it the other day and was like a little bug to a light - completely captivated. It's one hour and 12 minutes - that's the one you might like.

I think the idea of Asperger's - In their own words kind of publication is a great idea. And someone mentioned above, the emphasis on children - it doesn't go away, so we need more info out there for adults. They didn't know that much about it when I was a kid, so everything was the hard way - I'm sure there are tons of adults out there who have special concerns because of that, so we need books with that in mind.

I found the same to be true with ADHD. There are a few good books out there on the subject, but not many. If anyone wants my favorites, just PM me.

I think a book about Autism by Autistics is a great idea. However, while I'm not against the idea, I question if it can have any effect on the people who should read it (NTs) because, NTs don't study something in order to understand it, they study things in order to control it.

I fear that you guys may have fallen into the same trap that NTs themselves have fallen into (thinking that others always share your overall objective). Studying things in order to fully understand it is an Autistic trait, and not considered of any importance by most NTs. NTs only study things in order to know how to control, destroy, or change things. Their motives are preset before inquiry begins, and their conclusions can only take a limited path with such a mindset.

I fear a book about Autism by Autistics may seem like a foolish indulgence of awkwardness, rather than a dictionary from the source. I wish I am wrong.

Somewhat paranoid! But all is possible.