zuckerberg is "borderline autistic"????

Post Reply New Topic

That might be what you see on paper, but, then you have people who have gone out of their way to help others, to use their minds to aid humanity. Very caring individuals who want to be of benefit to others.

By "on paper" do you mean, virtually every peer-reviewed paper on autism ever written?

Again, I'm not saying that there aren't any Aspies that live up to the rose-colored archetype. I'm just saying that it's so incredibly idealistic that the vast majority of Aspies surely do not live up to it.

That, finally, is my point. If those who are so quick to throw this archetype up were held to its standards themselves, they wouldn't be considered autistic, either! They'd be run-of-the-mill "bad" people with personality disorders, intermittent explosive disorder, sociopathy, etc. Aspies just don't understand the risk they run by promoting this rather silly and idealistic archetype. They undermine their own status as autistic individuals.

The world is in a strange place.

Last edited by alone on 18 May 2010, 6:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

My point is, you don't know for sure what people are like so why make assumptions about them?

I guess you just don't get it.

Your guess is just a guess because yes, I confess, I do get it. You are going by the criteria used to diagnose children and apply it to adults.

Poke, i don't get how "not sociopathic" is a "rose-colored archetype"

i don't mean this to be a game of semantics, and i'm not sure what you're so wound up about; but as far as i can understand, the point of this post was to defend against unsavory stereotypes, to dissect why someone would call someone autistic (as an insult) who obviously is not autistic but displays cold-heartedness and manipulation. whether anyone who is autistic is capable of being conniving, etc is irrelevant. the statement made about Zuckerberg (who, incidentally, i think is an ***hole) was meant to discredit him, and consequently discredits (and makes a blanket statement about) those with autism, thus, was inappropriate and should be retracted.



Assembly, maybe it's because those in the public eye unfortunately create the "public impression" of what autism is. but i'd like to hear your thoughts.

pinch me so I wake up and realize someone didn't write something this bigoted. 60's gays were just trying to keep from getting the snot beaten out of them, not to mention arrested; they wanted everything gays today want (if you are talking U.S. timeline) and they are actually the forefathers/mothers of the gay rights movement that you apparently have some exposure to, however limited. Apparently the human race operates on the premise that anyone with reproductive organs is entitled to have/sire children and that is exclusive of sexual preference, not to mention age of majority, economic/emotional/mental stability, freedom from chemical dependency or even taboos against incest and inbreeding, so I'm not sure how children figure into your argument. I brought up the media group because I am seeing this autism/sociopath theme alot lately and it needs to be addressed, and LGBT groups have orgs that address bigotry and defamation, as should autism activists. Awareness is one of the ways that can transform society...not sure what other methods for 'change' you think there are without making people aware of how ignorant they are. I am not sure what your reference to 'gnomes' understanding the motives of the gay rights movement refers to, but I *am* sure I don't want to understand it.

Last edited by alana on 15 May 2010, 9:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I wrote on this earlier today, but my post didn't get much attention.

I think that applying AS/HFA to great historical figures and celebrities is often the NTs way of telling us that we need to feel better about ourselves because they believe that otherwise we would have no sense of self worth whatsoever.

I think that I am capable of accomplishing great things on my own and I already have without looking to some renowned scientist or artist who very well may not have had AS/HFA at all.

This is really how the gay rights movement works. Anyone who goes against the whole religion which they have manufactured is immediately denounced as a bigot, regardless as to what their argument actually is. In the meantime - we suffer the consequences of the fact that they squat on a big chunk of the equality pie, which should be our chunk instead.


Its another ridiculous demand. By the way - the argument that I used there appeared in the national press some while back. So explain to me why a group who cannot prove or otherwise demonstrate that what they are asking for goes beyond a mere lifestyle choice, should have everything on a plate. Like, religions, for instance. The scary thing is that their gospel is being treated as fact.

Most of todays autism activists are a joke, in all honesty. Tell me what they have done for education, my rights and my opportunities. Autism speaks, despite having opposite intentions, has done a lot more. The neurodiversity movement has no clear message, apart from the cliche of tolerating difference. Frankly, where has that cliche ever worked?

if you are arguing against gay rights, you are a bigot. just like someone would be if they argued against your rights, as an autistic.

homosexuality is not a "manufactured religion."

opinion is not fact, and when one's opinions about another group of people are based on stereotypes and intolerance, it's damaging to the individuals in that group.

that's what this post was about in the first place.


if there really was such a thing as equality pie, EVERYONE WOULD HAVE A PIECE. that's where the word "equality" comes in.

in short, if you expect to be treated as a human being, despite the fact you belong to a minority that some perceive as abnormal, you'd best do the same to others whom fate has cast into similar predicaments.

I'm not sure why you would feel the need to summarize the rose-colored archetype as "not sociopathic" when I went out of my way to describe it on its own terms: a harmless logical introvert who couldn't hurt a fly if they wanted to.



And how is it that you know that he is OBVIOUSLY not autistic? You're comparing him to the--wait for it--rose-colored archetype!

Oh I am not arguing directly against gay rights - I have no direct objection to most of it. What I object to is how their rights have become ahead of our rights, as disabled (or "disabled") people. Their difficulties are a property of their own choices (someone does not have to announce that they are gay in a job interview for instance) as opposed to our own. How have their opportunities in effect become ahead of our own? This is the fundemental problem, gay rights have come at our expense.

So tell me where did this whole "gay culture" came from. Did Abraham leave it behind after his session being stoned on the mountain? It is a religion, for all intents and purposes.

It is opinion that someone is born gay - something which gay people parade around as fact. Indeed, this idea is used as a "fact" to justify gay rights demands.

Really you have missed the point here. Society becomes more and more progressive each year (we are in a rather unequal society at present). However, there is a limit in how much progress that can be made each year, the limiting factor being how much stomach certain people have for equality. This progress is in effect the "equality pie". The reality is that there is a competition for progress and I would rather that the segment of the pie which is going to gay rights be spent instead on disabled rights. That is all.

I expect life to be put ahead of lifestyle choice.

Is being a nonsensical bigot a lifestyle choice?

I have no idea. But what I do know is that coming up with ad homs is not a valid way of debating, except for sore losers who are incapable of constructing a proper argument.

You are concerned with a proper argument?



It is opinion that someone is born gay

I expect life to be put ahead of lifestyle choice.

So it's only an opinion if it contradicts what you hold to be true.



As I said--nonsensical bigot.