Labeled Autistic & The War On Autism
12 Dec 2010, 10:20 pm
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4RjJKxsamQ[/youtube]
I try to find some humor in things. If people thought the war on autism was against people I'd call that a purposeful excuse to complain in the past because people will mal-interpret things for political reasons. The autism community propaganda is so thick that I never really believe much and what I am sure I can believe from science others don't want part in. As the abortion issue has been highlighted and some organizations confront the prenatal testing for autism the more I want to do with traditional autism advocacy and stay away from other kinds of advocacy.
Ultimately fighting over words is very wasteful to me and is a cycle of down right madness. I never though I was a puzzle when people called autism a puzzle when others became upset over it. I never thought people hated me even though I cost people money. Does autism itself speak? Autism is a concept about a person that is different then so called normal. Can an organization claim autism speaks? Kind of if they are representing advocacy but others complain they are not included where it is implied aspects of them are said to be speaking or so I understand of it because autism is very much part of a person. Ultimately people will bicker, complain, fight and create distractions from more important matters and I think allot of self-centered bull can be avoided.
I believe people that fight consistently are a waste of my time and the time of the publics. My approach has been successful by keeping out of the mess and speaking to the public without concern to it because if people don't want to get along and have no plan to get along they are the war against autism in part. I believe those that attempt to distract myself and others with constant bickering are in a war not for or against autism but with themselves. The real war on autism is the inequality, lack of inclusion, lack of support for those with autism in need and those that distract from these very important matters whom for years have plagued outreach potentials when they should have helped. With as much energy spent on silly words and phrases societal change can be manifested by those whom bicker for the quality of life, integration when chosen and as well as increased potentials of those whom are in fact alive and are in need.
The autistic label I don't think ever was meant to be an identity. When others call me it I consider it derogatory, stigma and de-humanizing as it was some diagnostic label assigned to me that was created by others. Most people with autism do not call themselves this. Any other disability people would not want to be identified with it on average. I am not sure why other then for reasons of awareness people actually want to be called a disorder.
Nathan Young
13 Dec 2010, 2:23 am
On a personal level, I don't particularly like labels applied to me either. I do see a need for them in the diagnosis of a disorder. If the disorder was not defined and labeled it would be very difficult for those needing SSDI or SSI to qualify for benefits to survive in the world. The other advantage of the label and definition of the disorder is, if you are diagnosed and work, you can get assistance in job placement, get environmental accomodations in the workplace, and be protected under the Americans with Disability Act.
The label Autistic is important to help an uninformed person to understand why someone might be displaying behaviors of hand flapping, walking on their toes, and grunting because they are not capable of verbal communication. It is a better name than what some mean spirited people might come up with. This is not as much of an issue with people higher on the spectrum.
I don't see the icon of a puzzle associated with Autism as anything offending. I don't consider myself a puzzle, but in many cases people with autism are indeed a puzzle to the people that care about them. I think the icon of a puzzle represents the need to understand the differences that a person with Autism has. It is more applicable to people lower on the spectrum.
I understand that there is some disagreement on some of the views the organization "Autism Speaks" has taken, but I think the name of the organization is just a play on words, since there are people with autism that do not have the ability to make verbal communication. Whether or not a person agrees with everything they do, I think their main intent has been to provide a greater awareness and understanding of the condition and to raise funding for treatment. In other words, in my opinion, the benefits this organization has provided to people on the AS, particularly those lower on the spectrum, outweigh any negative aspects that may be applicable to the organization.
13 Dec 2010, 2:51 am
The label Autistic is important to help an uninformed person to understand why someone might be displaying behaviors of hand flapping, walking on their toes, and grunting because they are not capable of verbal communication. It is a better name than what some mean spirited people might come up with. This is not as much of an issue with people higher on the spectrum.
I don't see the icon of a puzzle associated with Autism as anything offending. I don't consider myself a puzzle, but in many cases people with autism are indeed a puzzle to the people that care about them. I think the icon of a puzzle represents the need to understand the differences that a person with Autism has. It is more applicable to people lower on the spectrum.
I understand that there is some disagreement on some of the views the organization "Autism Speaks" has taken, but I think the name of the organization is just a play on words, since there are people with autism that do not have the ability to make verbal communication. Whether or not a person agrees with everything they do, I think their main intent has been to provide a greater awareness and understanding of the condition and to raise funding for treatment. In other words, in my opinion, the benefits this organization has provided to people on the AS, particularly those lower on the spectrum, outweigh any negative aspects that may be applicable to the organization.
I was expecting to be blasted by someone and a constructive reply happened. I have some really good ideas for local integration frameworks. I am doing a mass mail to all the autism society of america chapters about it very shortly. Person with autism is good enough and where I live calling someone autistic is frowned upon which I agree with. The person is a person not a label. It respects individuality better.
13 Dec 2010, 4:12 am
Let's see who else responds. The constructive idea making of alternative ways to perceive and the political dynamics of it. How are solutions to essential issues found and made simple and very unbiased. How to facilitate improvement as efficiently as possible and thinking outside of the box whenever possible. On this initial post I found ways to utterly slam and likely shock a few people that have in the past experienced certain mentalities. If solutions might be found on this post then people can animate the ideas.
Adult transitions and employment supports. Hybrid Employment facilitations designed to employ people with developmental disabilities. Provide idea input from others and critically think out the theories improvements. Create hope where there was none before in concept.
13 Dec 2010, 9:12 am
Do you have any background knowledge in disability studies or the wider disability movement? I say this not as an accusation but as an honest question. Most disability studies textbooks will explain why most disability rights movements eschew 'person first' terminology. I've been brushing up on the topic myself, so I happen to have a few such books on me.
From Rethinking Disability: Principles for Professional and Social Change:
"We do not subscribe to person-first language for a number of reasons. First, we note that such language is primarily used when the descriptor is undesirable. Second, the structure of person-first language implies that the disability is located within an individual."
It's not standard amongst most disability rights movements or groups. The National Federation of the Blind rejects it. The Deaf community definitely rejects it. You are advocating for what is arguably a move backward, from accepting that someone can be positively affirmed in their identity as a member of a community based around what is considered a disability, into acting like a disability is something so negative that it has to be seperated from the person. It seems so medical model to me.
13 Dec 2010, 1:33 pm
From Rethinking Disability: Principles for Professional and Social Change:
"We do not subscribe to person-first language for a number of reasons. First, we note that such language is primarily used when the descriptor is undesirable. Second, the structure of person-first language implies that the disability is located within an individual."
It's not standard amongst most disability rights movements or groups. The National Federation of the Blind rejects it. The Deaf community definitely rejects it. You are advocating for what is arguably a move backward, from accepting that someone can be positively affirmed in their identity as a member of a community based around what is considered a disability, into acting like a disability is something so negative that it has to be seperated from the person. It seems so medical model to me.
Oh yes I am well versed but autism is different then individuals who have hearing and sight impairment as the adaptation toward the world is singularly profound whereas autism is multi-diverse. Labeling someones identity against their choice in the context of developmental disabilities can be perceived a poor judgement and lead toward self-esteem problems. For instance I do not call someone Palsy or ret*d whereas saying I have autism is a better fit. For instance when media assumed to call me a label as a person it was not yet educated in the differences between how I was born and the reason I got my label. Demanding others take on a label for reasons of culture is no excuse and individuals should in my respectful opinion should have a choice in the matter. It is my choice to be how I am and lead the life I want even in advocacy and to standardize a stereotypical phrase upon my identity is just wrong and misplaced.
For reasons of adaptation one need not fixate upon a label near as much as those with profound singular disabilities of senses. As autism is so very diverse there is an argument. Firstly the label itself can be perceived offensive as this is how I was born in multiple ways that cannot often go away and the label is itself a stereotype. However to respect that I believe the label ethically should be secondary if at all present when I choose for it not to be. It does not make the differences any less accepted or not accepted especially if I do not emphasis them in daily life as who I am so emphatically but am that I am along with it. I would really hope others would respect this and stop automatically calling me a developmental disability which is just odd and disrespectful. I think it's entirely political and long to confront it.
Where I live in my community I feel and am treated very positive. I don't think people need to be forced to accept any concept or identity phrase should they not desire it themselves as it would be a removal of the advancement of human dignities and respectabilities. Ultimately it is just a word and there are more important things then the pride of a disability concept with regard to how it is subscribed.
13 Dec 2010, 6:34 pm
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muTOROt30_o&feature=related[/youtube]
Beyond the label debate which is well disputed and in the personal choice favor is there something else we can talk about. It seems as if people involved in advocacy can be very passionate about certain topics that ultimately have little effect for those in need like identities. However what about civil right in perspective of community based inclusion awareness frameworks. While I have a model I am confident in and will be fully enticed as the months progress where I live what about other places. Real change takes time and common sense approaches cannot be dependent upon special interests of course. It will take genuine people without self-interest bias to truly create change.
If bickering over words and other minor issues is enticed over that of more important human rights and diversity issues I will apply a new phraseology. Instead of detractors of the autistic community like people used to call others the curebies I will highlight in an awareness campaign "pride-mites" and "distractors" just to entice some attention to more important issues. I like my job and my job is to grab your attention.
People are best to solve their own problems and for those similar who are less fortunate.
Nathan Young
13 Dec 2010, 9:03 pm
Since you indicated that you were not sure why others would want to be called a disorder, I offered what you indicated was a respectful opinion.
I think "jolt's" opinion was factual and respectful.
In my opinion this statement is somewhat disrespectful of those that may disagree with you on topics. In my opinion, a difference of opinion does not necessarily indicate a certain mentality. I as an individual may research an interest and report a finding that I do not necessarily personally agree with, but the opposing view is important because it opens our minds to other viewpoints that allow us to see a bigger picture. It seems a little overly agressive to me that you indicate you "found ways to utterly slam and shock" people that may have different viewpoints or as you describe "experienced certain mentalities". This seems to be the tone of many of your posts. And some of the videos you post, in my opinion, amplify this tone. This may be why you got feedback that this was annoying.
I am not bringing this to your attention because I am angry at you or think I am smarter than you are. There is nothing wrong with being passionate about a viewpoint, but when a person speaks respectfully to everyone in the audience, the feedback will be more constructive, on what I see as valuable goals indicated in your paragraph below.
Adult transitions and employment supports. Hybrid Employment facilitations designed to employ people with developmental disabilities. Provide idea input from others and critically think out the theories improvements. Create hope where there was none before in concept.
I am interested in hearing more about what you have done in outreach efforts you describe in the above paragraph. It seems that this is your area of expertise. I do not personally know about the real world applications that are related to these outreach efforts. This may help me and others come up with some additional ideas that may be of benefit to your effort.
13 Dec 2010, 9:25 pm
Having an effect for social awareness kind of like Autism Speaks does..
In the real world we do not walk around calling people labels and online people do that to each-other. It is a matter of ethics and no one would enforce that. The label topic where I live is not relevant. If on the other hand I were to visit where you live and someone was to call me a label I'd happily dispute it until they are blue in the face.
On the issue of what I do in my job I will have the outline completed for public release in the next 30-days. Based upon strategies that have created the distribution of 15,000 disability works candles in an area of just over 130,000 I am launching a full on civil rights inclusion campaign with the help of media, broadcasting and business organizations. This has to do with sponsored inclusion employment for those that need job coaches to develop skills and to experience normal. There is many psychological components.
If anyone does not want to be called a label no one has to be. That's a social clique thing and in person I don't believe anyone would force this upon me or anyone else for that matter. Hell call each-other pink with purple poke-a-dots for all I care.
21 Dec 2010, 3:08 am
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHuFMsPyzc0&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]
http://www.compassionateintegrations.or ... works.html
Introduction
Community Frameworks & Implementation
Humboldt Includes is the first ever developmental disability employment inclusion framework that visibly and with general awareness entices and makes aware to the public sponsored inclusion by local businesses on a macro level. It is designed for individuals with substantial disabilities as defined by California Law and whom were born with a developmental disability or said difference. In premise it is an all encompassing transitional inclusion campaign working with various local social service agencies specializing in Lanterman Act supportive employment inclusion. All agencies are welcome to participate and any new agency may apply without fee or complex requirements.
Special rules have been created to insure special interest does not take advantage or adversely influence the campaign. Agencies profiting from inclusive support services cannot fund the Humboldt Includes project and it is designed to be extremely low overhead. Agencies are licensed to allow the placement of door and or window stickers at sponsoring businesses. Businesses can qualify as sponsors for as little as thirty dollars a month during the recession. As it is community driven as well local community members can be part of the civil rights inclusion project by providing local businesses with information and ask they support diversity in the community.
Bumper stickers will as well entice awareness of autism with the Humboldt Includes slogan. Capturing the attention of locals including businesses by means of media, broadcasting networks and the assistance of our neighbors. Some resellers will provide bumper stickers and magnets to regular supporters of the Humboldt Candles project at a cost of around four dollars for the stickers and the magnets will be free. Other avenues will be explored as time progresses as such a campaign will require the eventual fundraising such as catered dinners and speaking arrangements by professionals in the social service field.
The core functions of the inclusion supports however are already funded by the state and the federal government. Humboldt Includes does not need any funding what so ever to provide inclusion support staff to individuals with disabilities as agencies are already funded. Humboldt Includes will not fund agencies to do their job but rather assist with a unique, progressive and innovative campaign that has never been implemented before. Acquiring skills, being part of normal and enticing the community to embrace a hospitable diversity by realizing the diversity that comprises our community and nation. A spokesman has been hired and the campaign is entirely managed by me, what the media has called the mastermind behind the employment candles.
The Humboldt Includes project will inspire the public and create an example for other areas. It is by means of this project and it's ethics that neutralize special interests that inclusions will be made more possible. Special interest while a vague term in the past fifty and more years has for the most part failed to inspire, capture the attention and culturally motivate the public like past civil rights movements. It's a ground breaking campaign that has entailed pulling many strings and has required a substantial social strategy to implement. The campaign will officially begin in the middle of 2011 and progress on into 2012 with no compromise of the ideal of a community awareness saturation and cultural standardization. Failure is not an option and effort will be tireless and be unavoidable with the help of friends in the community.
Sincerely,
Nathan Young
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQwfxKJe1k4[/youtube]
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Autistic families and autistic individuals in NT families |
15 Jun 2025, 10:02 pm |
| The Autistic Self |
19 Jun 2025, 8:03 pm |
| Autistic Perceptions |
01 Apr 2025, 10:21 am |
| Sometimes I Hate Being Autistic. |
25 May 2025, 9:08 pm |
