Page 2 of 7 [ 110 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

HighLlama
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2015
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,017

21 Jun 2015, 4:33 pm

Hyperborean wrote:
evilreligion wrote:
But I hope this blog post has some effect and causes people to pause and think. We need to look to gay rights movement for how to do things effectively and we need to look at the farce that is third wave feminism and Tumblr feminism to see how to very quickly erode public support and implode an advocacy movement under its own BS.


Thanks for starting this thread, there has been some fascinating comment as always on WP. You are correct to hold up the gay rights movement as an example of how to make progress. The LGBT community has been constantly villified from all directions, but they have always responded intelligently, reasonably and above all with humour. In fact the gay sense of humour - very dry and ironic - has turned out to be a secret weapon in dealing with homophobia and violence because instead of spitting venom at their opponents and taking offence like so many feminists and SJWs do, they have deftly turned their bigotry back on them and made them look ridiculous - as numerous evangelical pastors know to their cost. As a result, many countries now have same-sex marriage and full equality under the law for gays - while the feminists are still struggling to achieve equality of income, recognition of the rights of rape victims and the right to have an abortion.

I'm sure people with autism could achieve much by taking this approach.


This is a great point, in regard to using humor to be ingratiating instead of creating more segregation by defensiveness. So if someone says you suffer from autism, it might be better to say something like, "I don't suffer from autism, I suffer from people's misunderstanding."



Moromillas
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 455

21 Jun 2015, 7:54 pm

Jono wrote:
The guy who called Thunderf00t a lier....

That's not what I'm talking about.



Jono wrote:
I personally started disliking Thunderf00t after he also started saying things like he wouldn't believe a woman claiming to have been raped until she proved it. However, a woman who claims to have been raped is under no obligation to prove to people on the internet that it's true anymore than someone claiming that their father is dying of cancer has any obligation to prove that.

Surely you're joking? Yes, yes they are obligated to prove that it's true, otherwise it's defamation. The internet isn't a sanctuary against that.

Accusing someone of rape, is quite different to saying that your father is dying of cancer (which can be verified by contacting the hospital). See, the problem with accusing someone that they're a rapist, is that the accusation alone can destroy someones life. Because so many people would believe it without evidence, all it takes to destroy someone's life is a single accusation -- That's why this "listen and believe" BS is quite toxic.



Jono wrote:
Now do everyone a favour and stop using a few internet trolls to slander a whole group.

No. SJW's are by definition awful people. It would be like asking someone to not "slander" those that go around punching people in the head.



Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,600
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

22 Jun 2015, 3:54 am

Moromillas wrote:
Jono wrote:
I personally started disliking Thunderf00t after he also started saying things like he wouldn't believe a woman claiming to have been raped until she proved it. However, a woman who claims to have been raped is under no obligation to prove to people on the internet that it's true anymore than someone claiming that their father is dying of cancer has any obligation to prove that.

Surely you're joking? Yes, yes they are obligated to prove that it's true, otherwise it's defamation. The internet isn't a sanctuary against that.

Accusing someone of rape, is quite different to saying that your father is dying of cancer (which can be verified by contacting the hospital). See, the problem with accusing someone that they're a rapist, is that the accusation alone can destroy someones life. Because so many people would believe it without evidence, all it takes to destroy someone's life is a single accusation -- That's why this "listen and believe" BS is quite toxic.


So, if woman claims to have been raped, are you going to ask to ask for proof before offering sympathy? It's only defamation if she both names he's her attacker and the allegations aren't true. If her attacker isn't named then there can be no defamation because no particular person has been accused. Also, there's no zero-sum game between having sympathy for victims and assuming innocence till proven guilty, they aren't mutually exclusive.



Moromillas
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 455

22 Jun 2015, 4:23 am

Jono wrote:
So, if woman claims to have been raped, are you going to ask to ask for proof before offering sympathy? It's only defamation if she both names he's her attacker and the allegations aren't true. If her attacker isn't named then there can be no defamation because no particular person has been accused. Also, there's no zero-sum game between having sympathy for victims and assuming innocence till proven guilty, they aren't mutually exclusive.

It doesn't work that way. Quite often accusations of rape are used to defame and destroy someone's life, when accusations of criminal conduct are supposed to be poked and prodded within a court of law, and NOT a trial by public opinion.



Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,600
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

22 Jun 2015, 4:48 am

Moromillas wrote:
Jono wrote:
So, if woman claims to have been raped, are you going to ask to ask for proof before offering sympathy? It's only defamation if she both names he's her attacker and the allegations aren't true. If her attacker isn't named then there can be no defamation because no particular person has been accused. Also, there's no zero-sum game between having sympathy for victims and assuming innocence till proven guilty, they aren't mutually exclusive.

It doesn't work that way. Quite often accusations of rape are used to defame and destroy someone's life, when accusations of criminal conduct are supposed to be poked and prodded within a court of law, and NOT a trial by public opinion.


You didn't read what I wrote. Read the bold sentence again. If you claim to be a victim of crime and you don't give any names, then nobody in particular is being accused. It would be a very different issue if the offender was named publicly so that everyone could give their opinion about whether they are guilty or not. Believing that someone is a victim of crime has got nothing to do with accusing someone of criminal conduct. They are 2 different things. Also, yes, anybody can make false allegations about anyone committing any crime. However, there is no evidence that false accusations of rape and sexual assault are statistically any higher than false accusations of any other crime. If you think that's the case, then you need to give a logical explanation about why it should be.

Now the thread has diverged from the original topic but just so that know, this is why I dislike people who claim to be against SJW's.



Moromillas
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 455

22 Jun 2015, 5:00 am

Jono wrote:
You didn't read what I wrote. Read the bold sentence again. If you claim to be a victim of crime and you don't give any names, then nobody in particular is being accused....

Now the thread has diverged from the original topic but just so that know, this is why I dislike people who claim to be against SJW's.

Yes I did read what you wrote, stop being obtuse. The theoretical situation you're talking about has little to do with what happens in the real world. People don't just claim that they were raped, they accuse someone of it.

Do you also dislike people who claim to be against child molestation?



evilreligion
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 1 Oct 2014
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 152

22 Jun 2015, 8:16 am

Jono wrote:
HighLlama wrote:
Since "SJW" can be as hurtful a term as the labels so-called SJW's use, it may be more beneficial for all to simply focus on the behaviors you dislike. For example, not to attack someone for being an SJW, but to point out their ignorance on a specific topic. Otherwise these debates about who's at fault for society's problems just go back and forth. It can be too easy to hate labels when they're directed at you or people you care about, but still apply them to an "enemy," just as we often proclaim media we disagree with to be propaganda but never see this quality in what we find truthful.


I agree. The term SJW is often used as a pejorative for people who have legitimate complaints and by people who want to resist social change. There are people on the internet who actually call us SJW's for objecting to the notion that AS people are more likely than the general population to become mass murderers and spree shooters like Adam Lanza. That's why I tend to view people who object to "SJW"'s as dangerous.


Hmmm think about this I actually mostly agree. There is a real danger that we confuse legitimate social justice activism with the behavior I am criticising the essay. There is a further danger that the conversation is hijacked by those with genuinely bigoted views and the term SJW is then used to dismiss anyone who challenges their bigotry.

I do think, however, there is a real phenomona of SJWarrioring going on. It does need a label and people do need to be called out on having this destructive mindset. The problem is that it really comes down to intentions and these are hard to work out. If the intent of the person is to effect real change in society then even an angry rant full of expletives would not, in my opinion, be classed as SJWing. It might be ill advised and not effective but the persons intent was genuine change and so that is the important point. Where behaviour crosses the line is when the intent is clearly to belittle and destroy an opponent. This is narcissistic behavior and is almost always destructive. It is not longer about changing someones mind it is simply about "winning".

It can often be hard to distinguish between someone just being pissed off and flipping out in an angry rant (a momentary loss of control) and a systematic desire to always be right and "win" by destroying and vilifying an opponent.
But overtime I think the true nature of people is revealed. I confess I loose it from time to time when discussing the whole anti-vax thing but I try my best to tell myself that these ant-vaxers are not bad people they are just wrong and have been duped. Similarly even parents who express a desire to cure their kids of autism should, I think, be viewed as victims of a sort. They have been duped by the lie that autism is a disease. That is, afterall, what most of the media are telling people most of the time. And if think your kid is ill then what parent would not want to cure them? Its an entirely natural desire.

So I guess what I am trying to say is that an SJW would simply attack a parent like this and label them a bigot and as evil. Whereas a genuine activist interesting in making a real difference would try to talk them round to having a different view of autism. They would challenge their base assumptions. This process can work, this change in thinking can happen, I know it can because it happened to me! So this is why I find the SJW attitude so annoying because the hate and bile spilled by these people imediatly stops any chance of a meaningful dialogue with parents. It drives them away from the self advocacy movement and into the arms of autism speaks. But the SJW does not really care about that because they get to "win" and "destroy" an opponent, the cost of this victory however is another f****d up autistic kid because their parents were not getting the right information. Everyone else looses, the parents, the autism rights movement as a whole and most of all the kid at the centre of it all.



Moromillas
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 455

22 Jun 2015, 8:53 am

evilreligion wrote:
I confess I loose it from time to time when discussing the whole anti-vax thing but I try my best to tell myself that these ant-vaxers are not bad people they are just wrong and have been duped.

So this is why I find the SJW attitude so annoying because the hate and bile spilled by these people imediatly stops any chance of a meaningful dialogue with parents. It drives them away from the self advocacy movement and into the arms of autism speaks.

I too have quickly slid off the handle, but only once. This was when a parent said to me; that it's the parents that are the victims, because they're burdened with an Autistic child. It was also during a long string of hate being spewed forth, in a forum where AS people are outnumbered ten to one, where the NT's thump up the most hateful comments the most.

I don't see many SJW's within the AS community, quite the opposite in fact, many just don't bother to speak up for themselves, out of fear of sounding offensive or getting into a confrontation. The trend I can see, is that most people are becoming familiarised with SJW's, especially in the toxic feminist movement. They then see the similarities between, the SJW's they know, and the spectrum rights movement. That's what seems to cause them to write off valid arguments and grievances, "oh I recognise that, they're just SJW's."



evilreligion
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 1 Oct 2014
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 152

22 Jun 2015, 10:39 am

Moromillas wrote:
I too have quickly slid off the handle, but only once. This was when a parent said to me; that it's the parents that are the victims, because they're burdened with an Autistic child. It was also during a long string of hate being spewed forth, in a forum where AS people are outnumbered ten to one, where the NT's thump up the most hateful comments the most.

I can understand why that would make you angry. But I also understand why the parent feels victimised. If society makes things tough on our kids then we parents suffer by default. Sometimes though, as is human nature, we may forget that it is our kid that is suffering more. Although have said that when my son was deliberately pissing on the carpet last night and having good laugh about it despite my obvious anger I was clearly suffering more than him.........but that was nothing a good whisky couldn't sort out. Looking back it was actually quite funny, he thought it was hilarious and his autism made him completely oblivious to my shouts of rage in fact it became even funnier because to him I was just making funny loud noises. Yes I definitely suffered more than him last night! Mind you the ipad ban wiped the smile off his face pretty sharpish...... but i digress.

Quote:
I don't see many SJW's within the AS community, quite the opposite in fact, many just don't bother to speak up for themselves, out of fear of sounding offensive or getting into a confrontation.

Here on wrongplanet its fairly SJW free. But places like the thautcast and "the thinking persons guide to autism" facebook page are rife with SJW BS. I think I have been banned from both of them for being a "bigot" and an ableist and probably a concern troll, tone policer, white cis scum privilaged potential rapist.

Quote:
The trend I can see, is that most people are becoming familiarised with SJW's, especially in the toxic feminist movement. They then see the similarities between, the SJW's they know, and the spectrum rights movement. That's what seems to cause them to write off valid arguments and grievances, "oh I recognise that, they're just SJW's."

Yes indeed. The whole SJW nonsense has a negative affect on all genuine social issues. As I said in the essay this is not really a problem for feminism because the feminists have already won and achieved all of their goals so if thirdwave feminism dies off and becomes irrelevant no woman will really suffer. In contrast if autism rights is dismissed by the wider public as just "SJW BS" then the suffering of all autistic people is prolonged. It makes me so angry........ but I will remain calm and polite and rational (well most of the time!)



Moromillas
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 455

23 Jun 2015, 6:17 am

evilreligion wrote:
But I also understand why the parent feels victimised. If society makes things tough on our kids then we parents suffer by default.

In this instance, the parent was saying that it's the parents that are the victims, because of their kids, not because there's no parity when compared to NT's for education, jobs, etc etc. Specifically, he was saying that kids being violent, is a meltdown, and that this violence is an intrinsic part of being an AS person, that it's actually the parents that suffer from their child's violence.



evilreligion
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 1 Oct 2014
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 152

23 Jun 2015, 8:57 am

Moromillas wrote:
evilreligion wrote:
But I also understand why the parent feels victimised. If society makes things tough on our kids then we parents suffer by default.

In this instance, the parent was saying that it's the parents that are the victims, because of their kids, not because there's no parity when compared to NT's for education, jobs, etc etc. Specifically, he was saying that kids being violent, is a meltdown, and that this violence is an intrinsic part of being an AS person, that it's actually the parents that suffer from their child's violence.


What I think is probably happening here is that the parent has been given s**t information from the likes of Autism Speaks and so is trying to modify or lessen their kids autistic behavior. This approach inevitably increases "melt downs" and violence because of the stress this causes the kid. The increase in violence then only "confirms" the lies the parent has been told about autism being a big bad terrible conditions which then only drives the parent to enforce more "treatments" like ABA, thus increasing the childs stress and so increasing the meltdowns / violence and so we have a viscious circle.

Breaking the circle requires that the parent be empowered with good information and that their base assumptions are challenged.

In some respects the parent in question is correct, they are victims just not for the reasons they think. Instead of being victims of their kids they are victims of being fed piss poor information which leads to poor action which leads to poor results for their kids. Of course the kid is still undoubtably suffering more but absolutely no one wins from parents buying into the lie that autism is terrible and needs curing.

This may sound like I am defending parents too much. Maybe I am. But I know that the vast majority of parents just want whats best for their kids. The love I feel for both my boys is like nothing else I have ever felt in my life, even when they are being little s**ts (like the deliberate carpet urinationfest last night) I still love them. The need to protect and help them is always there and its so strong. I find it hard to imagine how any parent would not be looking out for their kids so when I see poor decisions and destructive actions by parents most of the time I attribute it to them having poor information rather than poor characters. Now in some cases we have genuinlely selfish and bad parents but for the most part I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and just assume they are misinformed rather than bad.

So again the best course of action when confronted by these midinformed parents would be to try an inform them. I would say something like.

"Yes we used to get lots of meltdowns early on. I remember some real hum dingers but what we found was that they were triggered by us trying to force our son to do things that his autism made really hard. There are certain things that he found very stressfull, far more than out NT child and so we needed to make certain allowances. What we struggled with in this was the fact that it seems like you are giving in to the child and letting them get away with stuff you would not normally allow. But once one understands that the child is not actually being naughty and that they are probably stressed and in pain you realise that you are not letting them "get away" with anything you are just working with them. etc ....."

That kind of approach might get them to think again their base assumptions and at least try a different way. I know this can work because that is what I learned. I have a natural inclination to be quite a strict parent, I was raised in a loving and fun way but my parents didn't let me get away with being a brat and there was strong discipline if me or any of my sibs stepped out of line. So this was how I wanted to raise my boys. I have had to let so much of that go with my eldest because its simply not fair to punish him for certain "naughty" behaviors because he is not actually being naughty! But it took many conversations with autistic people and much reading for me to modify my approach. It just didn't feel right, it felt like we were giving into a little tyrant. But guess what? It works. We get the odd epic meltdown but they are not very often and its normally when he's over tired or stressed out by school. Generally he's a happy little boy which was not he case a couple of years ago.



Moromillas
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 455

23 Jun 2015, 11:36 pm

evilreligion wrote:
Moromillas wrote:
evilreligion wrote:
But I also understand why the parent feels victimised. If society makes things tough on our kids then we parents suffer by default.

In this instance, the parent was saying that it's the parents that are the victims, because of their kids, not because there's no parity when compared to NT's for education, jobs, etc etc. Specifically, he was saying that kids being violent, is a meltdown, and that this violence is an intrinsic part of being an AS person, that it's actually the parents that suffer from their child's violence.


What I think is probably happening here is that the parent has been given s**t information from the likes of Autism Speaks and so is trying to modify or lessen their kids autistic behavior. This approach inevitably increases "melt downs" and violence because of the stress this causes the kid. The increase in violence then only "confirms" the lies the parent has been told about autism being a big bad terrible conditions which then only drives the parent to enforce more "treatments" like ABA, thus increasing the childs stress and so increasing the meltdowns / violence and so we have a viscious circle.

Breaking the circle requires that the parent be empowered with good information and that their base assumptions are challenged.

In some respects the parent in question is correct, they are victims just not for the reasons they think. Instead of being victims of their kids they are victims of being fed piss poor information which leads to poor action which leads to poor results for their kids. Of course the kid is still undoubtably suffering more but absolutely no one wins from parents buying into the lie that autism is terrible and needs curing.

This may sound like I am defending parents too much. Maybe I am. But I know that the vast majority of parents just want whats best for their kids. The love I feel for both my boys is like nothing else I have ever felt in my life, even when they are being little s**ts (like the deliberate carpet urinationfest last night) I still love them. The need to protect and help them is always there and its so strong. I find it hard to imagine how any parent would not be looking out for their kids so when I see poor decisions and destructive actions by parents most of the time I attribute it to them having poor information rather than poor characters. Now in some cases we have genuinlely selfish and bad parents but for the most part I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and just assume they are misinformed rather than bad.

So again the best course of action when confronted by these midinformed parents would be to try an inform them. I would say something like.

"Yes we used to get lots of meltdowns early on. I remember some real hum dingers but what we found was that they were triggered by us trying to force our son to do things that his autism made really hard. There are certain things that he found very stressfull, far more than out NT child and so we needed to make certain allowances. What we struggled with in this was the fact that it seems like you are giving in to the child and letting them get away with stuff you would not normally allow. But once one understands that the child is not actually being naughty and that they are probably stressed and in pain you realise that you are not letting them "get away" with anything you are just working with them. etc ....."

That kind of approach might get them to think again their base assumptions and at least try a different way. I know this can work because that is what I learned. I have a natural inclination to be quite a strict parent, I was raised in a loving and fun way but my parents didn't let me get away with being a brat and there was strong discipline if me or any of my sibs stepped out of line. So this was how I wanted to raise my boys. I have had to let so much of that go with my eldest because its simply not fair to punish him for certain "naughty" behaviors because he is not actually being naughty! But it took many conversations with autistic people and much reading for me to modify my approach. It just didn't feel right, it felt like we were giving into a little tyrant. But guess what? It works. We get the odd epic meltdown but they are not very often and its normally when he's over tired or stressed out by school. Generally he's a happy little boy which was not he case a couple of years ago.


I don't think "suffer" is the right word for it, nor is "victim." When people hear the word "suffer," they might think of someone in bed with a cold, shivering and throwing up. Dehumanised and disenfranchised fits much better, as you have much less opportunities similar to the black community, and also, that it's though of as something aberrant and wrong, or something to be shameful of similar to the gay community. It would be strange to say that black people suffer, or that gays are victims, it doesn't seem like the right fit -- same with their parents.

That's a prevalent message, here's the problem though: They don't want to hear reason or experience. They would look at that paragraph and write you off straight away. They'd say things like; Oh, you don't know what you're talking about, you haven't done the research, your reading comprehension is off, you're not an expert on these things, you don't have any experience, etc etc. The gold medal in mental gymnastics. Anything they can cook up to ignore all the facts, and believe whatever they want to believe. Sometimes, they won't even give you the opportunity to dispel the nonsense, instead being as vague as possible, or worse still, just up-voting the most hateful comment.

When I hear stories about kids playing up (not Aspies, but kids in general), it sounds awfully similar to the drunken antics of an adult, so much so that it's hard to tell the difference. So my view of parenthood, as an outsider looking in, is that it's hard work, and not unlike taking care of a drunk person for a small portion of your life.



o0iella
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 18 Aug 2013
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 229

01 Jul 2015, 9:15 am

I'd rather this forum be full of "SJW's" than the many self-hating NT-supremacists who are here at the moment.



beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

01 Jul 2015, 11:10 am

o0iella wrote:
I'd rather this forum be full of "SJW's" than the many self-hating NT-supremacists who are here at the moment.


Hear hear!


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


quiet_dove
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 290
Location: Massachusetts

01 Jul 2015, 11:11 am

Oh god. Don't get me started about SJWs. They've honestly made me start to reconsider being a liberal, since it seems like they've got a firm hold on liberalism these days.

I honestly feel like "SJW-ism" is a cult, and they prey on vulnerable, naive young teens, since those teens aren't as capable of logical, rational thought as older adults are, and they just want to be accepted (especially if it's by a popular group of people, and, unfortunately, SJWs tend to be really popular these days). The teens aren't capable of thinking through the lies that they're being fed by the SJWs in charge (and those SJWs in charge tend to be narcissistic people like Anita Sarkeesian, or well-known Tumblr "celebrities" like Misandry-Mermaid), so they just tend to believe everything they're told to believe, since they're so desperate for acceptance. This leads to them having a blind faith in "SJW-ism," much like the blind faith that Christian fundamentalists have. And that blind faith is incredibly dangerous, since it allows the SJWs in charge to spread whatever lies (or hatred) they want to, without having to worry about being called out on it. There's also a spirit of "anyone who dares to question our beliefs is wrong and should be hated on," which is also akin to the way that fundamentalist Christians tend to think it's wrong for people to question their beliefs.

I could honestly go on for pages and pages ranting about this, but I'll cut myself short. Suffice to say, I'm strongly against Social Justice Warriors.


_________________
"Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be normal." - Albert Camus


quiet_dove
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 290
Location: Massachusetts

01 Jul 2015, 11:13 am

o0iella wrote:
I'd rather this forum be full of "SJW's" than the many self-hating NT-supremacists who are here at the moment.

So you'd rather that people hated others, and blamed others for their own problems, than that people focused on their own problems and tried to fix them? Because I don't see Social Justice Warriors paying any attention to their own obvious emotional problems.

I mean, at least by hating myself, I acknowledge that I'm not perfect and that I have issues. When was the last time an SJW did that?


_________________
"Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be normal." - Albert Camus