"Living With Autism II: Perpectives" for Forbes

Post Reply New Topic

I know what I saw, too. And I've actually discussed it with Amanda when she was last active on WP.

I don't think that caring for the truth is "concern trolling," but I believe that the people who try to discredit Amanda are not interested in the truth. That they use bits and pieces of the truth to serve as the foundation for their harassment doesn't mean the whole thing is true. The best lies draw from the truth.

I don't think there's any point to further discussion with you. I've already wasted enough time before learning that you support an internet bullying campaign against a disabled woman, never mind that the entire premise of the discussion here is that you said a lot of autistic people should shut up because they're not autistic enough for your standards.

What a way to demonize me. I've been diagnosed as disabled, and I didn't go to some gifted school when I was like 13, as I was struggling with reading comprehension and other learning problems then. I don't care to talk of her as long as others wouldn't mention her as proof that low-functioners don't want cure. I won't let that go.


Again, you claim I said "a lot" of autistics should shut up, as you argue that with emotionalism. How could I be thinking they should shut up if I debate them, which involves back and forth discussion? They're not disabled enough to pretend to represent the highly disabled. I didn't say they weren't autistic enough.

I'm more autistic than youuu aree!

Nah nah nah naaah nah!

Back in the 60's there were programs on autism that are way worse than what is shown today where it painted a bleak picture of autistics having no future. Such a great way to treat your children from such an early age. If there is nobody that will encourage us to do better and stand up for us then we're left with the same people that think institutions are the best idea. We're left with people who tell parents "Your child will never speak, will never make any friends, will never go to college." That is not the right way to treat someone. Setting their life up for failure the moment getting that diagnosis. Scaring the parents. Some are so scared by those words that rather than challenge it, they accept it as "doctor's orders".

Autistics are here. The world has become an overly bright place thanks to florescent lights, more cars, more motorcycles, more people. Nobody can just look at me and tell "autistic" and alot of that has to do with the lack of actual knowledge on autism people still have. They think they are gaining knowledge by watching demonizing talk shows but really they aren't getting much. They think only showing the worst of the worst cases of autism that they are learning what autism is but really they are learning just one part of the spectrum.

If you don't think being a high functioning autistic meaning you can speak but you still have sensory issues, you can't relate to most people, you're thought of as stupid on one hand but really bright on the other hand, you have difficulty keeping jobs or even getting one thanks to personality tests, you don't get someone to help you like an aid because hey at least you can speak and people don't understand why you are stimming or think taking you out to THEIR favorite place with a lot of noises and bright lights should make you happy but they fail to understand you aren't having a good time and they think you are acting like a baby somehow means you are no longer on the autism spectrum because at least you can appear normal in some scenarios then you have a very limited view on what autism as a spectrum is. It's not easy even as a high functioning autistic. Strangers don't get it.

All they see on tv are the most severe because the ones who are running those programs want people to think that is all autism is so people will be fearful of autistics for their own agenda.

If you have autism as a toddler a baby. You don't have coping skills. You might be verbal or you might not be. Our traits are similiar based on observations such as spinning, lining up toys rather than play with them in a neurotypical way, screaming, meltdowns. I haven't seen a single tv show that expresses concern for the autistic child but instead babying the parent and showing sympathy for the parent. The bad child. This is encouraging parents to accept themselves as victims rather than reach out and ask someone "What is really going on in my autistic child's brain?" to gather an empathetic understanding of the child.

The last thing that is needed for an autistic child is encouragement to view the child as a bad person and the parent as a saint. That child needs an understanding. How many cases of parents have killed their autistic child then used "my child had autism" as their defense. Then how many parents come in and express sympathy for that parent? Murder is murder. Stop treating us like lesser beings for experiencing the world differently. This is a clear LACK OF EMPATHY. You cannot put yourself in our shoes because you haven't been there yourself. You can put yourself in neurotypical shoes only. It's very rare that people actually have that form of empathy I've discovered.

Parents demanding sympathy for themselves and not caring about their child do not deserve sympathy. How about understanding the child for once. If you can't and you think this is all about YOU and YOURSELF and YOUR FEELINGS and YOUR EXPECTATIONS NOT BEING MET....give your child to someone who does care. Do not murder or belittle or do nothing to help your own flesh and blood out.

On the inside there are actual feelings and thoughts. On the outside, you don't see it so therefore it doesn't exist to you. This does not mean you talk bad about your child because in your mind, your child just doesn't process it and doesn't understand what you are saying meanwhile later on, the child is hearing what you said OVER AND OVER again prompting a meltdown. Then you have already forgotten about it and you're scratching your head and saying "Gee, why is my child having a meltdown now!"

That isn't to say all meltdowns occur over that and only that. There are several reasons. Everyone can relate to autism if they thought about it. You have fears, don't you? Try kicking up the fear meter. Ever been afraid of dogs because you had a nightmare that one bit you? Well if you are not verbal, the parent is seeing this child suddenly having a fear of dogs out of nowhere. The child can't express why. The child had a nightmare about a dog. That fear lasts for a long time unless the child has a nicer dream or someone talks him or her out of the fear.

The point is not short. The point really is quit using the most severe autistics to spread fear and give a small picture of what autism is as if those who can speak aren't really autistic themselves. If left up to just psychiatrists and parents who really don't understand our brains, we get fear campaigns, more enticement for bullies to harm us out of fear of the unknown or because the tv told them that we're just a drain on society (that is the general view) and the theory of cold abusive mothers who drove their child to be autistic would probably still be considered the reason.

I prefer today over the 50's and 60's ideas of autism and it took courage from those on the spectrum who did learn to speak to give insight of what it's really like having autism and how wrong those theories were that we need to be locked up in institutions, cold abusive moms etc..


Verdandi wrote:

They don't have dominant influence. Parents and professionals do. Any autistic adults who speak up get told they're too high functioning to be in a position to speak up as an autistic.

Higher functioning verbal autistics can't be treated like puppets. Non verbal but those who can type have shown their intelligence and can speak too. Are they ready to listen to those who can type? Do they also have a right to communicate what it's like for them? All of our life experiences are different. Through our own life and challenges faced and lessons learned is what makes us all different. Our experiences shape our perspectives just like normal brains.

i dont get why people assume its so easy to be high functioning.i came from the state hospitals,group homes and homes for boys.i never went to college and i think a lot of aspies and hfa's had this experience.read my post on the "jenny mcarthy and jrc"thread and read the letter about the gaebler childrens center

Interesting. His case is extremely rare and unusual.

TheSunAlsoRises

I understand. I'm hearing you loud and clear.

TheSunAlsoRises

After looking up Gaebler Childrens hospital-

Read about sexual abuse, being drugged everyday, the cold cell, laying there naked in restraints. Verbal abuse.
There is a graveyard near the place with small stones with patient numbers on them.
A patient murdered another patient dismembering her body and burying them keeping 7 of her teeth.
Some of these children were placed there because their parents were drug addicts and could no longer care for them.


Here is a gallery of the abandoned place and some people posting comments share their story-

http://www.opacity.us/gallery138_control.htm



Then I stumbled on this video which is recent of another hospital. The staff of these hospitals should not even be hired but I suspect these staff members view this as a way to torture people without being questioned and getting away with it. Perhaps the staff members who act this way are just bullies. In some cases, I've read of the more empathetic and caring staff members being fired as if there is something wrong with being nice.



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byw0J3TICfI[/youtube]

This is against my better judgment, but I'm impulsive:

I'm not demonizing you. I am responding to the words you've posted in this thread. I don't know what gifted schools have to do with anything. I never said you weren't disabled or even made any judgment about how disabled you are.

I didn't mention her as proof of a low functioning adult who doesn't want a cure. I mentioned her as an adult who would technically be described as low functioning, who is demonized as insufficiently autistic to speak up on her own behalf. She doesn't say no one should ever have or want a cure, so I'm not even sure a cure is relevant. And you probably should let that go because the stuff you're referring to isn't true.

aspie48 mentioned her as an advocate, and said nothing about her stance on cures.



Well, "emotionalism" doesn't have anything to do with the validity of an argument. If you're not emotionally invested in the outcome of an argument, why say anything at all? And why mention my emotions when you use such loaded terms as "greedy," "selfish," "elite," and "self-serving" in your first post alone. If you want debate and discussion, why open with ad hominem? If you'll look back, I have not insulted you, but rather disagreed with the methods you're using to discredit what they say.

If this isn't about how autistic they are, why do you keep referring to them as high functioning, highly able, successful, and the like?

That's actually rhetorical, because like I said, I'm not interested in discussion with you.



I didn't qualify when I said "any autistic adults who speak up." I didn't qualify that because it doesn't matter how well you function, you're going to be told that you're too high functioning to speak for those autistic people who really do suffer from autism. When Amanda Baggs came up in this thread, she was immediately referred to as having been "exposed," referring to a disinformation and bullying campaign online to allegedly reveal her as someone other than who she really is. To prove she's not really autistic so that what she says can be dismissed as irrelevant.

So the answer is: It doesn't matter. If you speak up, if you don't say what they want to hear, someone somewhere is going to say you should shut up, that you're not impaired enough, that you're very high functioning if you're autistic at all, that other autistic people are more worthy than you.

im glad you read the article.i personaly never went there,but knew many kids that did

a few posts on this thread are bordering on personaly attacks,so lets chill out a bit

I did not think it was too bad until I got to this part:

"Companies should able to make a place for us in their organizations, but they should also be free to dismiss us if we don’t act appropriately. So we need to know how to act. A person with Asperger can teach themselves to fit in. It’s my contention that most anyone can learn to modify behavior so he won’t be disliked, whereas someone who is (for example) black or gay or Jewish cannot change those attributes. That makes our situation fundamentally different from those other forms of discrimination.”

what makes this individual think we can all just change how we act and be normal? sure obviously we can't be outright rude to people like calling them a dumbass like the article used as an example of something 'weird' or 'innapporpriate' one with autism might say. Though in my experiance usually I run into wording things wrong.....not doing obvious rude things. But yeah we cannot change the way our brains are wired so discriminating against us for how our brains are wired is not any more justifiable than someone discriminating against someone because they are black, gay or jewish.

Is that John Elder Robison? Because he has some bizarre ideas about accommodations and demographics. From what he's said, there aren't enough autistic people who could possibly work to justify accommodating our needs, but of course in the US the ADA actually says such accommodations are required. Unfortunately, the ADA is written in such a way that you have to take your employer to court, at which point you might as well just sue them for the income you're about to lose for being fired for taking them to court.

He elaborates in this interview:

http://blogs.plos.org/neurotribes/2011/ ... aspergian/



To put the bolded text into context, WHO estimates that approximately .6% of the population is blind, and 2% has low vision. That is to say, for every autistic person, there's 2.6 blind people. And yet it is not even controversial to accommodate blindness and impaired vision. John's making rubbish arguments and appealing to normalcy.

Also, the idea that autistic people always come across as jerks is also rubbish. It does happen, but a lot of people come across as jerks at times, and many are much less likely to apologize for it than many of us.

If my posts did this, let me know so I know how to modify my words in the future.

i think all J.e Robison was saying was the ADA isnt absolute.i couldnt possably hire someone who is blind to drive my limousines.there are quite a few amputee police officer's but i dont think a para or quadiplegic could be a cop.he was simply acknowleging that some jobs may not be right for autistics.the ADA doesnt garentee absolute right to employment.just that employers must hire on what someone can do,and do not deny employmen based on stereotypical assumtions on what they cant do

It read to me like he was saying that we should not expect any adaptations for our needs. He slightly moved forward in this article to acknowledge that we need some adaptations, but should put a lot of work in adapting ourselves.

Maybe he could come in here and clarify if he so chooses, but what I read, I disagree with.

I don't disagree with adapting, I think that's going to happen with everyone who has disabilities. But I think JER puts a lot of weight on the idea that autistic people should adapt to NTs, and that NTs really shouldn't have to do much to make room for us, even though there are accommodations for people with disabilities only slightly more common than autism without much controversy.

thank you for clarifying