Neither greater, nor smaller

Post Reply New Topic

No and obviously not. That was the humor and entertaining part of the subject on the side. How about reply to the obvious debate.

Well make a debate rather than make pointless asides and make potshots at people all the time with no reason except ego.

It takes a pride-mite to make a mountain out of a mole hill and to depict only the worse of the worse in problems that are not there to try and get their way. Sorry won't work on me. I have autism myself and the whole I am insulted so I get my way and your a disability bigot for disagreeing with me doesn't work on me. The practical world needs practical and level headed solution for equality. Not the push your way agree with me or your a horrible person bullying.

Find some new tactics in argumentation as the ones you have presented are obsolete.

What are you talking about? I was calling you arrogant, not trying to see the worst in everything because for the most part that is your personality, arrogance.

I didn't say that. I said you were self contained in your opinions and took potshots at other people with no just reason and for no good cause.

Practical and level-headed solutions for equality don't include attacking other people with self-righteous arrogance like you do nor do they include making absurd statements like about bullying and pointless, vapid opinions besides about other's personal nature.

I actually just woke up and thought you were the other person that started with the G.


No not pot shots but the arguments of social fact. You have many pot shots yourself including calling others the R word. While your not a pride-mite the idea that star trek is off limits to humor is wrong headed. There have been other subjects in which star trek was brought up directly. Uploading a poem of Data singing a song just for something entertaining there is nothing wrong with that. I relate well with Data myself.

Try arguing the points of the post as you had already bowed out once I called you on your lack of sensitivity of individuals with disabilities yourself. Somehow star trek must be a way of getting back at me. Just doesn't level up with your foul mouthed R word name calling.

If standing up to folks like you that use the R word is self-righteous then I'll proudly be self-righteous only in that regard. Then you play victim of it. Your not very good at advocacy especially if you think it will go over well with people with disabilities themselves.

The real subject is conspiracies against compassion and compassionate adaptation by self-advocates and why they do it. They have humiliated compassionate efforts and summed it up to pity and so on. These folks must be understood for the sake of progress.

I just figured out that you can see on peoples profiles whether or not they are diagnosed. According to Gedrene profile he is not diagnosed. Therefore as I have been told not to take them seriously I won't. Especially with the whole R word thing I'd think someone really diagnosed with autism would know better or least I'd hope.

i will agree with gendrene on the fact that you ci do sometimes come accross as arogant and i dont recall anyone using the r word and im pretty sure ive read the whole post

i will agree with gendrene on the fact that you ci do sometimes come accross as arogant and i dont recall anyone using the r word and im pretty sure ive read the whole post

Look in another one of his recent posts.. People like that shouldn't be advocates.

Well I'm sorry if I come across arrogant I usually reserve that for people who call compassion pity and will not see any reason to otherwise. Arrogant in my mind typically does not wish to rationalize but I can see how in detailed reasoning coming to conclusion and asking for counter arguments with as much detailed thought could appear arrogant and make my own analytics appear more important to the thoughts of others who would rather not provide such insights to protect their views that confront progress. At this point I'm just frustrated with the expectations of some others that I be insulted at so many things and use abortion politics to smear others and really lie to others about autism for the sake of peer pressured pride..

The different between self-confidence and rationalized and explicit argumentation may simply appear arrogant to other who are otherwise stuburn and perhaps arrogant themselves. To me the likes of ASAN who push their agenda's on others otherwise they are disability bigots and so on is to me the height of arrogance and intolerance. Finding ways to counter that requires similar yet different behavior. Confidence and explicit debate of detail is required and humor has been found in culture to ease social divides.

ar·ro·gant
adjective /ˈarəgənt/ 

Having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities
- he's arrogant and opinionated
- a typically arrogant assumption

Other have tried to instill I am capable of much more and when I determine my pursuits to have worth much more is accplished.. I think you are confusing self-determination with arrogance as my self-determination has clearly accomplished as well as others whereas to think I am incapable or lessor capable would result in less just as with others. So I have to think that the word arrogance is incorrect when applied to myself. I've even declined awards in such. I'd think philosophies which instill I am akin to Einstein would be self-diluting enough for an arrogance type of definition but I am not sure how many actually buy into all that other then for the self-esteem benefit.

Tough subject but I'm not protesting people saying they are pity and bigots in an arrogant fashion. Be careful with calling balanced and accomplished leadership arrogance. There is a difference between arrogance that happens to accomplish and that of inciting PR that accomplishes with the help of others in fruitful ways. The idea that together with the mainstream "we" together can create change for inclusion may seem more important then it is.

Ultimately I decline the notion of arrogance and myself and consider it merely a political concept in context.The goal however is to assure human rights in a time of otherwise mainstream political instability. when others use issues to confront other issues that well cost people money.

Yes, the use of the R word is by anyone claiming to know what is morally better or worse is disturbing. Obama signed a bill disallowing the use of the MR from any government facility. Even when used in ignorance and not a vitriolic manner, it's off putting and detrimental to any point you are trying to make.

And sorry, I know it isn't in this post but I did read it and did want to make that point when I read it, but forgot until ci brought it up.

As far as disability advocates, I think you have to ask yourself if what you're supporting is helping anyone realistically. Because the point is to make things better and not worse obviously, but I sometimes don't see good results from some advocates and wonder how they think it benefits.

Yes but ci calls himself an advocate. I bet most of the people on here call themselves advocates, well there is one exception I know of, me. I don't think I ever called myself an advocate of anything because what I am doing is pointing out stuff that seems wrong. I never extolled the virtues of the autistic or any of that crap and I never attempted to raise funds for charities in order to improve research and integration. I just rip to shreds anything that doesn't hold up and test everything else with a gleaming eye, put forward my opinions and expect that anyone who expects respect should show respect. Attempting to make strange connections between the morality you believe in and the word ret*d aren't really that relevant. I said it because to be honest I gave as much as I took. No stereotypical revulsion is going to put me off doing something because disagreement with an action has to stand with that action's context, not the action itself and if you can't reasonably explain why what I did was excessive given what I was taking on then I advise you to not make a stereotyped response. Otherwise, I invite you to explain why what I did was excessive.

Yes I am an advocate and so are you. No one I know respects people that speak on issues (advocates) who use the R word. I am not sure if you grasp the complexity of the autism politics. ASAN started out like a good organization but their methods negatively effected others due to their approach. Just the same as some can argue the methods of Autism Speaks have effected individuals negatively. When they combine issues of abortion and ask for social service funding in protests that creates some very deep rooted negative feelings. Even risking traditional supports of such programs with supportive party members over that of other issues. All in all as an advocate the Them Vs. Us mentality I do not often partake in. It creates to many hard feelings when otherwise good and kind approach while more boring and does not incite pre-existing anger thus loyalty lays way for more results becuase who is going to decline supporting inclusion of a human diversity if their are no excuses not to such as abortion issues and the creation of hard feelings.

It is my belief ASAN and alike are a risk to civil rights progresses in inclusion. That and the such advocacy are constructed by advocates who like Ari are already included and yet to seek to benifit from advocacy that really should be targeted to help those who are excluded. If Ari and company creates hard feelings they have less to loose whereas very high functioning people can mouth off and create social divides and not suffer much at all as a result. I see no accomplishment in the cycle of hatred and or despondency no matter who started it. However the likes of ASAN must be dealt with appropriately for the sake of others who have nothing to do with it. If needed I will apologize for their behavior toward the public and otherwise caring people.

Ci

I hope you will enjoy having debates with yourself!

Hi Gedrene. I used the word morally because you used it in your original post. I think I am right in that if you use the R word, you will lose the attention of people because it is derogatory like using racial slurs would be. I am saying to me, it is disturbing and I think that others would probably feel the same way.

It's really good that you are honest. You also have to ask yourself if you are accomplishing what you want. If you are accomplishing in your own mind that your arguments are right, then it wouldn't matter. But if you would like others to see your point of view and possible agree, then it would be better to say things that they can relate to, and using the R word is not something a lot of people are going to relate to.

At least, this is what I've learned from dealing with people. It doesn't matter if you're right, it matters if you can get someone else to see you're right. If you learn this skill, it is very helpful.

As far as the point on advocates, I was just speaking generally and not to you. Sorry for the confusion. I tend to reply to the whole thread as one large idea, so I am also learning how to best communicate as well!

I am not trying to discourage you. In fact, it is admirable when anyone tries to argue against what they feel is wrong. I think complacency is a bigger problem and I think if someone has good advice and opinions and decides not to post them, they are not keeping the peace, but letting detrimental ideas take over.

I enjoy reading everyone's posts and ideas.

Doesn't happen that way.

Ci

I predict that within a few months you will be the only person posting on here as dealing with you, to be frank, is not worth the blood pressure rise caused by frustration.

You sound arrogant and your posts are incomprehensible.

Your delusion that you are an "advocate" or a "leader" does the community a disservice.In addition, making false accusations that posters are members of organisations that you disapprove of, have used the "R word" or have accused you of being a Nazi smacks of paranoia.

I, for one, am heartily sick of it,