Uncyclopedia and autism?

Post Reply New Topic

If you look at the uncyclopedia article on autism, it's quite entertaining. It's sort of satirical, but it gets the point out. The URL is http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Autism Just don't look at the article on AS. It's quite offensive.

The above quote actually made my day

ahh the first time Uncyclopedia was actually more correct than wikipedia!

I also enjoyed the article on "ASS-burger SIN-drome"

An article on AS? Who gives a FF?

Let's get real here: autism is a state of mind, a different way of thinking, and the establishment don't like this! Yes the article is entertaining, and very professional, but who pays the professionals?

The very people who can't stand the easy going, independent thinking, irreverent mavericks (like me) are also the very people who grab power, every second of their lives, and decide who gets salaries...

If you care, can you even make the effort to get some pointers, and find my e-mail address?

Check out "Neurotypical Syndrome" too at http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Neurotypical_syndrome once again, it's entirely satirical, yet true.

They're both hilarious, IMO.

So most people are stupid?

I can't help wondering at how much effort you guys put in? Sure, it's late, and I'm drunk, and right now, I can't recall the provenance of the bottle I just opened; but I know it's good, and that I will enjoy it...

and I will be back!

Neurotypical Syndrome

Hahahaha!

"Epidemiology

The disease affects as many as 9,600 out of 10,000 individuals, which is clearly alarming, though there are both good and bad news. The good news is that the number of incidences appear to be decreasing; several possible causes for this have been proposed. For example, nutritional improvements in the last few decades may be allowing these poor kids to develop proper neurology. Another possibility is that this is the inevitable result of more and more neurotypicals becoming doctors. The bad news is that there are so many people with Neurotypical syndrome that they have come to take over every area of government and medicine, and may even resort to genetic testing to ensure that only sick people like themselves can exist in the world."

Social Savantism

^
||
||
||
||

hahahahah

When I discovered I was Asperger a couple of years ago, after a near half century of believing I was just not so good at being like everyone else, I stumbled on the the venerable Institute fof the Study of Neurotypicals (ISNT). Apart from having a damn good laugh I realised I wasn't searching for what AS was, but what normal is. I had no idea what I was trying to pretend to be for all those years.

http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/Autism



AE!! !

Perfect description!

Those who insist on the performing of independent double-blind studies on the effectiveness of PTAH (Pet Training Applied to Humans), something that some evidently seriously ill persons with NT for some reason do, need to shut up; clearly, the respectable practitioners and the parents who have their children undergo the therapy know what they are doing.
_

Oh, and did we mention abnormal and damage? There is clearly bad, bad abnormal damage; much, much damage that is abnormal in nature. Abnormal anomalies in the form of damage are expected to be found. Of course we don't have any actual evidence that the neurological differences observed in a generality of those with NT are due to damage or pathology, but clearly, given how weird persons with NT are, there definitely has to be damage.

I've labelled both Uncyclopedia and Encyclopedia Dramatica as Aspie Enemies because of their respective articles on AS.

Uncyc is less offensive than ED, but both of them (especially ED) are wastes of webspace. I ignore both of them - although with ED there is a bit of a personal issue which I won't elaborate on. It has been calmed as of late.