Racist Aspies

Post Reply New Topic

Autism is a superior form of human.

Good grief! Americans are sure afraid of this "racist" label, aren't they?

A lot of people have said that racism was the wrong word. Which word should I have used? I don't think there is a word for discrimination against people with neurological differences. Racism never makes much sense, as I already said, because there aren't any traits that any particular race has that no other race has, and everyone is a mutt-breed. But racism is the word people use to describe discrimination against physically different groups of people. And anyway I am addressing this post to people who seem to think of NT as a separate race.

Examples: There was an earlier post titled, "Are Aspies even Homo Sapien?" (or something similar) and there were several posts there saying something about how Aspies are better than NT somehow. There were a couple other posts I saw in the past couple years where the authors said that he wished that there would be a catastrophe or something that wiped all the NT out. I'm sorry for putting my original message in such bad context.

Several people have said it isn't racist to celebrate the differences between Autistics and NT. I don't think it is either and I think I tried to say that. I'm not addressing this post to the majority of aspies. I've only seen maybe half a dozen posts/discussions that seemed to me to be trying to say that Autistics are inherently better than NT (as opposed to explaining how they are different) in the past 3 years or so that I've paid attention to the online aspie community, so it is not that many.

Somebody told me that saying that black people tend to have fat lips is racist. I don't see how that is racist at all. You can take measurements of groups of people who identify as a particular race and you will find that the proportions on the face are on average different. If they weren't then there would be no way to distinguish between "races." What is racist is if you said that people with certain face proportions are more likely to commit crimes than people with other facial proportions. As for it being racist because I use my own lip size as the basis for comparison when I call black peoples' lips fat, I don't give a damn. Using a different reference point would not change the meaning of what I was trying to say.

Again, talking about how people are different if your description of the differences is void of value judgement is not racist, but probably just explaining how you differentiate between the two groups of people. I did not mean to say that talking about things that are used in the diagnosis of aspergers are racist.

Nonsense. Making categories and generalizations is simply how people think - telling people not to is telling them not to think, or at least not to think about those categories you've decided it's bad to think about in this way: judging from your example, living things (doing which would involve forming groups and generalizing in itself).

No, instead of thinking less, people need to think more. They need to think about the categories and generalizations they're making, about what the exceptions might be, what biases they might be in danger of developing, what the consequences could be. We need to deconstruct our categories, try different ones, ask ourselves where they come from and what purpose they serve. Yes, that's a lot of thinking, but it needs to be done.

For example: it is not wrong to notice some people have blue hair and some have green. It would not be wrong if you noticed that all the blue-haired people you knew seemed stupid, either. It would be wrong to stop there and believe it, instead of asking yourself whether, for instance, you were biased in your observation of hair color or intelligence, there was another reason for it (stupid people coloring their hair blue, for instance), you wanted to feel superior as a green haired person, someone told you it was that way, your sample size was very small, etc. People tend to question only those generalizations that hurt their own ego, and to latch onto those that bolster it, which is something to be on guard against. Don't stop thinking, but think about the thinking process, too.

EDIT: To bring it back to the original topic: viewing AS as deficient or superior is a value judgment and subjective. I personally try not to do either, but seeing it as superior could be a deliberate choice on the part of some in order to counteract a lifetime of feeling inferior. The consequences of "pride" in a group that's at a disadvantage tend not to be the same as in a group that has an advantage (explained in the post I quoted before).

Why are you obsessed with race and Aspies??? You seem like a big time troll ! What your damn problem?

I am a racist. I think its natural to be. The reason so many whites are not racists is because the white race does not have a functional emotional soul on an ethnic level. Just look at hitler how he attacked his own kind with homosexuals and ret*d people etc. Racism should include total tolerance for your own race. Otherwise racism fails and the failure of racism is what we see in the white race. Racism among white people is not tolerant enough towards all white people to form a strong unified body. So infiltrators can come and take over the societies and promote destructive multiculturalism like the Jews do nowadays. The Jews are racist, they stand up for their own ethnic group first and foremost. That is why they succeed. But the white man does not necessarily at all. He attacks his own kind. Just check what happened in hitlers germany.

Among other races you can make comparisons. The cambodians failed to create a racist society an ethnic national identity. They also attacked their own kind. Pol pot did kill disabled cambodians and intellectual cambodians. The vietnamese succeeded in creating an ethnic society. They dont kill off their ethnic vietnamese homosexuals, disabled or those with a different religious views.