Autistic girl kicked off flight because captain was uncomfor

Post Reply New Topic

Moromillas, making a distinction between "maybe you'll do what I want after someone is at risk of getting hurt" and "do what I want or someone might get hurt" just demonstrates that you do indeed have autism. In NT communication, you can't see any daylight between the two statements.

I don't, and haven't, because that is a straw man, constructed using gross misquoting...

The unique "ability" to warp the facts into something totally different, only to pretend that it's reality, demonstrates that you're neurotypical, but I won't ever say you "have neurotypical".

/sigh
Hopefully the suit is sooner rather than later...

Nope. Diagnosed with autism, but I happen to be a person with the ability to adjust my own blinders.

Your attacks on my argument lack any force. What gross misquoting?

In that case, take your blinders off so you can see the quote.

A straw man isn't an argument that carries any weight. Oh, right, so it was just "paraphrasing", and just happened to turn into something with a completely different context.

I guess you and I will just have to disagree about whether there is a significant difference between the two.

A straw man is actually a false representation of your opponent's position, made to be easily discredited, just like a straw man is easier to knock down that a living man.

Yes, yes it is, which you did -- in the same post as the definition of a straw man.

You're saying that I was making a distinction between "maybe you'll do what I want after someone is at risk of getting hurt" and "do what I want or someone might get hurt"

Which I never made, nor postulated. That's a fabricated position that you made up, to pretend that's my position.
I'm already quite familiar with the straw man argument fallacy, you don't have to be so condescending as to tell me its definition, thanks.

So, neither one is a threat, or a meltdown with scratching doesn't put anyone at risk of being hurt and anyone should be expected to understand that?

Neither one is based on reality.

Too slow with my edit:

So, then, anyone should be expected to understand that a meltdown with scratching doesn't put someone at the risk of being hurt?

Not buying it. It sounds like someone will get hurt, and it sounds like a threat to me.

I'm hoping you're seeing this, and also the need for a case that definitively proves that meltdowns aren't random violent outbursts where "the autism" takes over, as there's more than a few peddling that crap.

I'm not saying the captain was right, but:
"“I just kind of said, ‘You know what? Maybe after she has a meltdown and she’s crying and trying to scratch, then you’ll help us,'” Beegle told the station."
This was incredibly stupid on her part. After 15 years this mom should realize that threatening others with your autistic child's behavior is a really bad idea. Hell, even someone without an autistic kid should realize that. And yes, it would only possibly be taken as a threat in that context: "give me what I ask for or my daughter will misbehave!". It's a completely irresponsible thing for any parent to say. Other people hold you responsible for your kid's behavior, and won't respond positively to a parent who tries to shift that responsibility. I'm autistic and I realize that!

NT parents can be so stupid sometimes. I get the impression they're just trapped in this view of themselves as martyrs to their autistic offspring and the rest of the world somehow owing them - the parents - special treatment. Autistic people don't have a right to get violent on planes if we don't like the meal, and I doubt anyone here would say we do, but that seems to be what this mom was thinking when she made threats on her daughter's behalf. It's disgusting.

Except that quote is not a threat, but something that elicits sympathy...

“I just kind of said, ‘You know what? Maybe after she has a meltdown and she’s crying and trying to scratch, then you’ll help us,'” Beegle told the station.
Has a VERY different context to...
"give me what I ask for or my daughter will misbehave!"

Yes it was stupid for her to say that, but it shouldn't be stupid to talk about that stuff. The same can be said for alluding to being gay, many years ago. Yes it's quite stupid, but it shouldn't be stupid.

Since she is going to sue I hope it this suit is the precedent setting moment of acceptance you expect and not the public relations disaster that will cause more discrimination that I expect.

I hope it won't reinforce the stereotype that people on the spectrum get violent when they don't get what they want which is what the mother made it sound like.

I used to do the same thing as you. Say something and deny saying the other because I did not say that. For example I would tell my brother he is chubby and then say I never said he is fat, I said he is chubby. Or the time I said in 7th grade I wish I could slap the art teacher and I got a day of suspension for that threat. I said I never said I will slap her I said I wished I could.

Now I realize there are different ways of saying things that mean the same thing.

There is no mincing of words, there simply isn't a threat here. That's why the family was so shocked and befuddled when they were kicked off, because they made no threat.

The hedging is coming from people that want to believe it's a threat, contrary to the facts.

People seem interested in gross misquoting, well here's an analogy that's comparable:
"Perhaps after someone slips and cracks their head on the tiles, then you'll put down a wet floor sign."
OMG! They're threatening to make people fall over, to crack their heads open! Er, no ... no they're not, that's nonsense.

In no other situation would that phrasing be considered a threat. Yet when you mention anything AS related, it's suddenly a cause for alarm. All you have to do is mention stimming along with the word 'meltdown' and that's more than enough for people to warp reality, and distort the facts into a situation where AS people are going to become violent and someone is going to get hurt, and it's disgusting. Disgusting and monstrous that they can't even check what the family meant by scratch and meltdown should they not know what she's talking about. No, they just assume, then make up their own definitions, and their own context. Just fill in the blanks with made up crap, so you can use it to discriminate. Or worse still, get the idea from the various propaganda sites that portray a meltdown as a kind of Berserker trance.