Psychology Today: Biased Asperger's Article!

Post Reply New Topic

Not really. These hypotheses of being left over genes from hunter-gatherers/neanderthals are just terrible, they don't even make sense. And I don't think they are even valid. I think the Neanderthal hypothesis was debunked a while ago. People with autism have higher rates of learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities and epilepsy. The behaviours seen in autistic people are also seen in children with intellectual disability, chromosomal abnormalities and kids with other neurodevelopmental disabilities.

Everything is pointing to autism being a constellation of brain abnormalities. Not some romantic view of being descended from hyper-aware hunter-gatherers. As much as some people would love that idea. It's just that lately the concept of Asperger Syndrome has been hijacked by sometimes well-meaning people, but by people who probably belong to the broader autism phenotype, or colloquially known as just nerds(NTs), in my opinion. I don't care what inept clinician gave them a diagnosis.

These people do more harm than good. They're not helping those of us who are struggling, they're making it even more difficult to be taken seriously. It's true that our society makes it harder, and the disabling effects of autism more pronounced. However thinking that autism wouldn't have been a negative in another time in history is just speculation, and it's probably incorrect. I think social/communication skills would have always been important no matter what time in history.

---

Acedia, personally I think we need to quit looking into the past and look towards the future. Do we need the past to justify ourselves? Yes, let's learn from the past but why do we need the past to define ourselves in the now? Yes, we do need treatment for certain things like executive dysfunction but let's treat the things that impair us from living lives in a way we can help make things better for humanity as a whole. Let's live authentic lives.

Marty has admitted that he cannot and the results of his center by his own admission proves this. Why use him and that organization if they have produced a shoddy product? Let's go to places in we can provided techniques so the end goals can be to live authentic lives, pursue our own interests and help others.



We can't be something we're not. It's ridiculous though to be ostracized picks his tea up to drink and sticks his pinky out wrong. If one holds his jacket in the incorrect and socially inappropriate way then one is considered ret*d even if he is bothering no one. Marty does have some points like staying on tasks at our jobs but what Marty said and Rascals quoted as one of the main issues is beyond ridiculous. Why does this matter to people so much?

There comes a point in which the demands are absurd and to much and maybe it is time to say no to some of them.

While I am glad Mr. Nemko has seen some light and has stopped writing about disabilities however the blog and his reaction with all of it's negative assumptions and ableism is still their for potential employers to read. A few lines about what nuerodiversity is does not change the overall negative slant of the blog. Employers who do not know much about the spectrum would be less likely to hire us after reading that. Employers who already hold negative thoughts will have them reenforced. As has been mentioned in other posts Mr. Nemko is part of the system. He has a record of success in that system. He speaks in language that make employers comfortable and willing to trust him. If the blog staying around costs one person on the spectrum a chance at employment that trumps whatever value their is keeping it around as a testament to ableism. Remember while keeping it around may have some value to people on the spectrum as a demonstration of ableist values in the cooperate world, it might discourage others on the spectrum because it is a spectrum after all.

I didn't say anything about Neanderthals? I was saying that the pollutants (including too much wheat/grains), the incredibly rigid structure that is in place because of the amount of people on the planet, the amount of information instantly available, and the prejudices put forward by the use of negative disability discussion in the media have made it a LOT harder to have our brain type. The more people in a society, the more the owness tends to be on "fitting in", but I think it is TRUE human nature to embrace diversity, like most Aspies do. How do you think we became all different races around the world, all made up of different early human species. Part of it is that we mixed with different types of humans and inter-bred instead of just killing each other as some species would have. Nowadays we are all encouraged to be too selfish, because it is advantageous to protect ourselves.

Do you know about genetics? Just wondering if you have researched the genetics of human evolution? It is fascinating, and there is probably some truth to the Neanderthal theory, just not as simplistic (as the only red-head in my family, and the most obvious aspie I love this idea but it doesn't sound great when it's simplified. As usual is is enforced prejudice- the incorrect view of Neanderthals as ugly brutes- which makes it so distasteful).

I'm definitely no expert, but i think it's about "memes" (genetic obsessors please correct me on all this- it'd take me hours to google to check myself and I've just woken up!), which are like temporary changes in genes which evolve quickly (over generations rather than millions of years) to help us adapt to specific changes in environment and, now were more advanced, in social ways. My (v sketchy) theory is that our basic genetics are typical, but the more temporary genes are not the ones more NT people have which allow them to just 'fit in', and put aside their basic, animal nature to LOVE unless confronted by an immediate danger. Nts do this in order to protect their family, and therefore their own genes, within a modern society where we have to fight for resources rather than benefitting from sharing resources and ideas. We are just meant to live with other people like us in, as I said in my last post, a less structured (hierarchical, paternal) society.

I don't think it's as simple as the basic darwins theory taught at school, because in the case of humans they would have killed any other tribes they came across and eventually died out completely. We integrated, and USED our differences before hierarchy became too important, some people got more power over more others, and we needed religion/rules/laws to enable us to keep surviving and thriving.

And this may be an extreme view, but i believe now we have almost reached the peak of scientific discovery we need more people who use LOVE as their primary emotion, and non-conformity as their style of living, to ensure that the overly-selfish humans at the 'top of society' don't end up completely destroying the world, and these people are currently seen as autistic. The world is not separate from us- we come FROM it, and it has ways to make sure it survives, just like everything else in the universe.

[quote="] People with autism have higher rates of learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities and epilepsy. The behaviours seen in autistic people are also seen in children with intellectual disability, chromosomal abnormalities and kids with other neurodevelopmental disabilities..[/quote]

You are buying in to the fact that these things are 'problems' to be eradicated. If you live in a society where writing is not important, or even dangerous, then no-one would care if you were dyslexic. If you live in a society with no enforced prejudice then no-one would care if you didn't walk/talk/act like the others. You would be allowed to discover your own strengths. And if you were born completely unable to do anything physical at all, then maybe you are born to bring out the caring genes in your family, to enable that family to survive in the future. If were born in a certain way, I believe it is always for a reason. Just because we can't SEE a person 'doing anything for society', or contributing financially, it doesn't mean they aren't using their '6th sense' to help the people/world around them. The fact we've just actively noticed a collective consciousness/subconsciousness in our society shows that we don't fully understand how our brains/bodies/societies work. I know it sounds impractical/illogical, but it is my belief, or 'religion' and what religion isn't idealogical, naive and hopeful?

Oh, and suffering is always relative, even physical pain. People feel pity for me because I grew up with such severe eczema that I sometimes could not walk, sleep, do anything but scratch my skin off, but the only pity I felt for myself was when others ponted out how awful it was and I compared my experience to that of others. I picked up on the stress of people around me trying to 'fix' it (something I'm sure you all experienced as people with autism in a world where people think it is a massive problem not to, say, automatically respect authority). People don't grow up in the arctic constantly feeling sorry for themselves for being cold, they just adapt their perception of what is cold, and use their resources to keep themselves alive. We are all far too mollycoddled and pitied.

Once or twice a day, it seems, someone shows up here with a post like this: "Hi, I'm 42, I'm a dad and husband, and I was just diagnosed and my head is spinning, halp, I think." These people are employed, they're functional, they're massively annoying to those around them perhaps, but they aren't the people Marty's talking about. And given how many seem to be streaming in the door -- I'll count myself among them -- I think it's hella premature to say that 60-80% of those with ASD are unemployed/unemployable. I think at this point we just don't know. I think in some regions of -- I don't even like the 2D-ness of "spectrum", I'll say "autism space" -- that it's very likely true. But in the entire region, no, I doubt it, particularly given recent diagnosis rates in children.

What I *do* think the autism space looks like to outsiders is that as a whole, there's massive inability to exploit talent/ability. Those of us who are employed generally aren't in high-level jobs with massive earnings even if quite bright, educated, talented. I just had a morose note from my ex about how he's essentially turned into handmaiden of people he went to school with whose careers went somewhere. I've just spent nine months making anemic-but-okay money for someone with my ability/education, and it damn near killed me, never want to do that again. At least once a week, someone urges me to go get a PhD despite my advanced age and the fact that I have no earthly use for a PhD. We don't do as expected, don't tolerate the social strictures and demands of that level of employment, and generally -- as cubedemon keeps rattling on about -- aren't interested in living that way.

That's the great mystery to most people, I think. A way of life is shown to them: if you're talented/bright/able, then naturally you'll do XYZ and reap rewards, live like a doctor or a high-powered whatever or write 16 scholarly books because it's what one does. Except we don't, haven't any interest in it, think it sounds dreadful. That's unusual. It's especially unusual to a hyperactive charlatan like Marty, whose nirvana is Won All Prizes and Flashiest Car, and who thinks he's got a win on his hands if he's managed to shove someone into business at the tippy-top.

It's 9 am, I'm in pajamas drinking coffee and ranting away on a website. This is happiness to me. In a couple hours I'll get dressed and wander off to work, where I'm having a bit of a rest after a year of insane activity, and then, with the child off at a sleepover, will mooch along downtown to watch a bleak and funny movie (PS Hoffman's last) on my own, squashing my irritation at how loud the audio is. Then I'll come home and pootle along with some projects involving people I seldom actually see, and maybe watch an episode of Yes, Minister, which is funny to watch and decidedly unfunny to live.

To a guy like Marty, that's an awful life, because it's not full of people saying how great you are, and admiring all the things you've got. To a guy like that, it's an outrage. He's an extreme case, but then he's also a fake. The only reason to pay attention to him is that he's got himself a megaphone that lots of none-too-bright types actually pay attention to. Most people listening to him, I think, know he's a blowhard. It's the other ones we have to worry about.

Censoring Marty Nemko isn't going to make these ideas go away. They will still be held amongst employers and many neurotypicals in general. I'm actually glad that he has articulated many of the prejudices and brought them to the surface. If him and others like him don't do this then these prejudices just fester away and remain unchallenged.

The average person in wider society knows nothing about the Neurodiversity movement, so anything that draws attention to it is positive.

I think that it's vital that we bring our arguments into the public arena. The Neurodiversity movement won't get anywhere until we have a public debate with wider society. I think that the hardening of a few people's bigoted ideas, and the discouraging of a few people on the spectrum is a small price to pay to get our arguments out there, and challenge the prevailing views.

Looking at the posts on this thread, only a small minority of people on the spectrum accept his ideas and take them seriously anyway.

I don't like this trend in recent years to censor offensive opinions. I think a healthy society is one that allows free and open debate on all kinds of subjects.

Yes, I agree with this too.

I don't it when people refer to Autistic spectrum conditions as a disability. Some aspects of being on the spectrum are disabling, some are neutral, and some are positive and beneficial. To bundle all these traits up and to put them in the category of "disability" is too simplistic.

We should treat the negative parts of being on the spectrum as disabilities, and the rest as differences.

It is not censoring. Dr. Nemko is free to publish his blog, yell his opinions in the street etc. As a private company Psychology Today can publish or not publish whatever it sees fit. An article by a person using Dr. in this magazine leads an air of respectability that posters to an online forum or in a comments section do not. I knew the neurodeversity movement is having trouble but if the best we can do is get our arguments out there having Dr. Nemko s saying they we are ungrateful and don't bother talking to us unless you are a masochist we are in way more trouble then I thought. Preventing autistics from not getting jobs is more important then making a political point. What is the political point? Confirming what we know all to well and say in some way on here everyday. I just hope you are not part of the collateral damage that you find acceptable.

I think you overestimate Marty Nemko's influence. Even if it remained unchallenged, I strongly doubt it will lead to thousands of people on the spectrum getting sacked from their jobs. When I read his article, I see him clearly losing the argument, and becoming more and more shrill and defensive and throwing the toys out of his pram.

I think this article is great because it shows the typical bigoted arguments against people on the spectrum get challenged and defeated. We should aim to have more of these moments in the future.

When you seek to censor ideas you do not like, it shows a lack of courage of your convictions. I think our arguments are strong enough to withstand public scrutiny. Censoring ideas like Nemko's won't improve the lot for people on the spectrum. Challenging and discrediting them in public will.

I agree that's not great that the Neurodiversity movements only exposure to the mainstream is people like Nemko denouncing us. But it's a start and it's certainly much better than being overlooked. In his response, Nemko acknowledges an alternative perspective exists. Which will be news to many disinterested observers.

Don't censor bad ideas, challenge them!

I don't think keeping the article there will result in thousands getting sacked. It will probably result in a few not getting hired in the first place. I see hate banned against most other groups by private entities I see a financial price being paid by people who spew negative stereotypes against most other groups but Autistics are supposed let people spew anything about us because we don't want to "censor" (which this isn't, it's potential customers giving negative feedback about a company). It is not that I lack the courage of my convictions, but what I do lack is faith in the future success of the movement following failure, after failure, after failure. I am glad we drove him away from posting anymore about disabilities and finally win one it was nice to see, but why stop at that point and accept less then most every other group?. The gains of gays and blacks came in part because companies know there is a financial price to pay for allowing things a part of the potential customer base don't like. I did say in part because part of this reason is people were convinced logically also.

Well, it looks like he took down all of his articles. I asked him thorough questions and asked him to give specific, concrete examples. What is he afraid of? In fact, what are people afraid of when it comes to autism and aspergers? Why are they wanting to cure us so bad? Why don't we ever hear this for things like schizophrenia, bipolar, Williams syndrome? Why? What is it about us that differs from other disorders?

Good question. It is like people are afraid of us.

I could be wrong, but I think people are more afraid of schizophrenia. i had a friend [now deceased] who "passed"for having aspergers because the stigma was not as bad.

Hmm interesting. Neither is fair though. It is a small part of both populations that acts out and causes disturbances. And with the availability of effective medications and a greater understanding of these disorders it will probably lessen.