*sing* "We don't need no cure..."

Post Reply New Topic

Not any more...which ever side of the cure debate you stand on...

Because...

As long as we see ANY consultant psychiatrist (at random), regularly enough, we WILL be helped sufficiently by whatever they choose to offer (or inflict upon) us.

The fact that a great many of us have spend decades discovering that even the most well meaning shrinks do at least as much harm as good, is irrelevant...and that is not just because we are defectives who need to have their decisions made for them by real people (though, of course we are), because the fact that a lot of consultant shrinks (usually the ones still in the "fit to plead" range) are happy to admit, that, apart from social skills training and treatment for secondary conditions (like depression), if required, they don't actually have anything to offer us is equally irrelevant...and they are REAL people with a right to think for themselves.

I know this because a person who works as a psychiatric nurse in the UK ambushed me with this vital information on Sunday.

Unfortunately I was in their home when they took it upon themselves to inform me that I must abandon everything I know, and all I have ever learned to the contrary and let them dictate my belief system from now on, because my personal code of honour does not allow me to tackle someone too much in their own home.

What I wanted to say was:

"Who on earth do you think you are and what on earth do you think you are talking at?" but that didn't feel right in their own home.

I did try to point out that it is only "help" if it works, and you really have to ask people what they need, and listen to the answers, to know what works for them. This seemed like an alien concept to them. It was as if you had better be helped by what you were told to be helped by, OR ELSE, and NEVER MIND what you actually needed.

That attitude isn't about "help" it is about covert bullying under the guise of "help".

When I tried to point out that it was no different for this person to decide what was best for autistics than for autistics to decide what was best for this person they reacted as though I had suggested something disgusting and obscene.

That (as far as I know) this person was once let loose on helpless autistic children in a post war zone, and now (as far as I can gather) may still work with, and have a hell of a lot of power over adolescents at present, leaves me chilled and horrified.

Sufface to say that, after the briefest of sojourns, this person's name has been firmly crossed off my Christmas card list...it's just a shame that the vulnerable people they have power over every day cannot do the same too.

M

Alright yer

Incidentally, this person wasn't a bad social choice I made...

It was a prospective in-law who had only met me 36 hours before and the first actual conversation they ever had with me...and the whole thing was if anything, crazier and more invasive than the way I posted it. Not least in that, in spite of having worked with autistics, this person honestly didn't seem aware that there is a vast difference between autism and mental illness...and seemed oblivious to any sense of either boundaries or other people as equal to them.

I was honestly just shocked that they don't have psych evals to filter out people like that to protect the vulnerable.

...and I mean still shaking 24 hours later style "shocked"...

M

Last edited by mechanima on 03 Feb 2009, 7:40 am, edited 1 time in total.

The only problem is that most people here would say "We DON'T need a cure"!

Me too...(GOOD GRIEF!! Have I ever even hinted otherwise?)

***ME NO CUREBIE - NEVER, not at gunpoint***

But, apparently, we can be so easily, reliably, and randomly managed by prospective in laws who don't even know us, THAT is irrelevant.



M

"sings" "hey curebies leave aspies alone!,all in all its just..another brick in a wall"

i can not understand any of this.

no reply necessary as it is just a statement i make.

You used dubble negation, and by doing so you said that you need it, it's a slangexpression to use two negations and still mean "no".

Means no:
"We don't need a cure."
"We need no cure."
"We don't need no cure." (Slang.)

Means yes:
"We don't need "no cure"." (I devided this a little to point out the differens.)

Nah,

IMHO the hyphen ended the clause, and "never" became a reinforcing descriptive clause not a double negative.

Regardless...

Trying to "cure" someone of autism is like trying to cure someone of being born in Alaska...it may make some things harder, and other things easier, but it is still the only perspective you had from which to become who you are...ever...

Doubt if prospective in-law is a "curebie" either...after all...a "cure" would reduce the pool of people they can convince themselves they are superior to...

Everybody sing:

Another Threat to our Souls (KenG. Based on Pink Floyd's "Another Brick in the Wall Part 2")
======================================

We don't need no curbie mindwash
We don't need no thought control
No anti-aspie propaganda
Curebies, leave us on our own
Hey! Curebies! Leave us on our own!
All in all you're just another threat to our souls
All in all you're just another threat to our souls

We don't need no curbie mindwash
We don't need no thought control
No anti-aspie propaganda
Curebies, leave us on our own
Hey! Curebies! Leave us on our own!
All in all you're just another threat to our souls
All in all you're just another threat to our souls

("Wrong, Do it again!"
"If you don't act neurotypical, you can't celebrate autistic culture.
How can you celebrate autistic culture if you don't act neurotypical?"
"You! Yes, you behind the bikesheds, stop stimming laddy!")

Penny finally drop...

I derived "We don't need no cure" from a song called "Sweetest Hangover" that goes a whole lot like this:

***
If there's a cure for this
I don't want it
Don't want it
If there's a remedy
I'll run from it
From it
***

I am soooo with you guys. It's just the latest round of witch-hunting.

Who Taught You To Hate Yourself? http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt77445.html

In "Asperger's from the Inside Out," Michael John Carley claims to be an Aspie, but speaks with such a thoroughly brainwashed, NT-bias that I think a better title would have been “Uncle Mike’s Cabin.” He spends a lot of time suggesting strategies for tolerating and getting along better with crazy people and how to be more like them and, most importantly, how to get in line and kiss their butts. Can you say “Stockholm Syndrome?”

I am now reading Tony Attwood's “The Complete Guide to Asperger’s Syndrome,” and I can't get through a page without saying, “Huh? What kind of convoluted, twisted-inside-out nonsense is that?” I got your Gordian Knot right here, pal: The premise is flawed.

(Ptolemy was the astronomer who, starting with a geocentric model, developed that convoluted mathematical system that accurately predicted the movement of planets and stars without letting go of the basic premise that the Earth was at the center.)

As far as Asperger's is concerned, Tony Attwood is a new Ptolemy. In his own, NT-biased way, he describes an outward appearance fairly well, but does not seem to have talked to a real-live Aspie at all. What we need is a new Copernicus.

When our dog chases a squirrel, it eventually runs to a tree and vanishes into the third dimension. It's magic. These are mysterious forces at work that are beyond his comprehension. All he sees is the ground and all he knows is that the squirrel is not behaving in a way that is convenient for the dog.
By the way, while I am quite fond of the dog, I can still see the situation from the squirrel’s point of view. (It’s that old Theory of Mind thing that they don’t want us to have.) How can we persuade the squirrel to come down? Maybe we can’t. Maybe it fully understands what the dog wants. Maybe it consciously chose to run to that magical place. Maybe it doesn’t want to play. And maybe it has a good reason.

The Psychology of Asperger's could be simplified. It could be accepted as a valid, alternative experience. I'm not talking about patting the kid on the head and saying transparent, stupid to things in an attempt to build the kid’s self-esteem on lies. I'm talking really. Look up. The squirrel is still there. Really. Seriously. Take a brake from the ridicule, the excuses, the egos, the lies, the punishments, the power games and look up. It's right there. Which part don't you get?

If you can't accept the premise, then none of the trivial details we discuss will lead to anything useful.

I'm a canary in a coal mine, and the treatment for me is simple: get me out of the coal mine and I'll be fine. Keep the drugs, excuses and convoluted adaptations. And acknowledge that fascism hurts everyone. I don't want to be a field hand or a house slave or a master. I want to abolish the system entirely. To acknowledge that, as a basic value, fascism is bad.

Malcolm, why did you leave us? We need someone with that kind of attitude, but to speak for Aspies.

ROCK ON!!

Pity I didn't figure out how to say that instead of:

"I just hope you don't despise the people you work with the way you despise me"

I have also read Tony Attwood's book, I thought that the majority of it was reasonable and well written but written from the point of view of a top down NT man. When I first heard of Tony, I did not think well of him because he was linked to Maxine Aston. After reading some of his work and looking at some of his peer reviewed papers I have come to the conclusion that while Tony is not all perfect, he is an OK person who has some worthwhile things to say in his book. I think that Tony is far smarter and higher up the food chain than Maxine.

My main complaint about the book by Tony is that he does use the term "meltdown", as the "autistic b***h from hell" says this is the wrong term to use. I have never heard of any aspie or autie who can boil water and melt zirconium, we need to use a better term than meltdown. A meltdown is short hand for a core melting event in a nuclear reactor which is a different matter to a person who is troubled by their emotions.

Also to my horror, Tony did enlist the help of Maxine Aston when writing the chapter on aspies and romantic relationships. I think that to use her as a source of information and advice on this topic is not wise. The words of the late Basil Hume "We were clever but not wise" came to mind when I read the chapter in the book. While Tony might be clever he may have been unwise to trust Maxine's judgement, I would suggest that Tony should find some other sources of information to help him form his judgement.

If you do not find Tony Attwood to your taste, perhaps you should read what a bottom up neurologist (Oilver Sacks) has to say on the subject of autism (both classic and aspergers).

PS. <sarcasm>If anyone here can melt zirconium metal (melting point 1855 oC) with their mind, then please PM me I would so love to know how you do it.</sarcasm>

Ah, the power of understatement...

I like meltdown...

I DO meltdown...

But I think that is more because I am me than because I am an Aspie...

M

I have to laugh...

I have a creepy, online stalker, who likes to post lists of links to my posts...I have no idea why...probably to show that she is following me around. I can't really reciprocate because, even when I see her posts, I can't be bothered reading them.

They are always yards long fantasies about how fascinating, talented, beautiful and not remotely narcissistic she is...except the ones about me that are just 50% malice, and 50% trying to find a way to convince herself that I am as fascinated by her as she is by herself.

What is funny is that she has recently added a link to this post...I can't help wondering if she realised that the first thought in my mind during the incident described on the OP was:

"Oh hell, they cloned my looney Canadian Stalker, and let this one have access to vulnerable teens in the UK instead to act out upon".



Except it isn't really all that appropriate to laugh at the idea of two emotionally abusive bullies let loose on vulnerable teens...is it?

M