Social Justice Warriors and Autism

Post Reply New Topic

Forgive me for not giving a trigger warning (wait, no, you don't have to forgive me as that means I'm asking too much of you. You can if you want to, though; I'm not trying to control your choices.... Snap! I'm sorry for saying "control" without a warning. Ah damn! I didn't mean to put an exclamation mark after "snap", as that implies more noise than what many sensitive people are comfortable with. O god, I put one after "damn" too. Ah, sorry for using "god" as a mark of shock, as that's very offensive to many oppressed people worldwide. But, if you're Muslim, then praise be to god and peace be upon him).

There is some serious noun-verb confusion going on in this thread. If I advocate for the human rights of women, I may call myself a womens rights advocate (not synonymous with feminism), and the term would apply. So, if I in turn also advocate for the human rights of men, I might call myself a hateful misogynistic bigot, wait, what?

There are indeed some very questionable sub-groups who label themselves MRA and the term probably does apply to them. But if the pro-SJW side wants to judge the MRM by its worst elements, it will have to submit to the same scrutiny in kind, and that is not going to be a favourable comparison for them.

I would never suggest that discrimination against either sex and/or gender on that basis is acceptable. I think both sides has issues that do need to be adressed. That being said, it would be helpful if one side didn't have to deal with a mob of political ideologues rushing in and shouting about how adressing one sides problems is minimizing the problems of the other side, and stifling any and all progress. Case in point: Earl Silverman. In a nation the size of Canada, there is ONE shelter for battered men (women are the perpetrators in 40% of intimate relations violence cases) Guess the ideology of those that would see there be none?

Genital mutilation is a problem for babies of both sexes only in the least developed parts of the world. In the first world, it is only a problem for male babies. I'm going to reveal my deeply rooted misogyny and suggest that this is a problem in need of adressing.

When was the last time you heard anything about male-only scholarships for university, seeing as women make up 61% of university students? Or any real effort whatsoever to get more men into academia? My guess is never. And compare that to the prevalence of female-only scholarships. But oh, there's my misogyny again.

And finally a question to trans-inclusionary feminists: I'm glad that you advocate for LGBTQ rights, but how do you even reconcile the idea of having a different gender to your sex, if gender is "just a social construct"? I'll be nice and not even ask about those feminists who claim that biological sex is also a social construct.

and now I will take my raging misogyny and go out for a bit.

I agree that it doesn't make sense, but maybe it makes these people feel special. As far as these online tests are concerned, you have to take them multiple times in different moods and answer them honestly.

yeah i've been aware of tumblr self diagnosers. while i dn't oppse self diagnosis 100% of the time, i think most people on tumblr do it wrong.

i'm also a mod of an anti-sjw blog, but i've been taking a little break from modding since some people who follw can be just as bad as sjw's at times. heck i've received hate from anti-sj's as well as sjw's on tumblr

I don't think we should associate with SJW's in all honesty.

I've been harassed on twitter before (while fully stating on my profile I am autistic) for not agreeing with their logic 100%. This is coming from someone who used to relate to them until the wool was lifted from my eyes.

From my experience, the people doing the most damage to autistics are undiagnosed parents of autistic kiddos. I have yet to talk to someone who is either diagnosed or self-diagnosed as autistic, who puts down autistics as much or even at all, in comparison to the parents of kiddos on the spectrum looking for pity for themselves.

Seriously! Where to begin in this hatefest of words.
Lets start with the obvious.
First "god" is a name it should have a capital letter not doing so is deeply offensive to Christians
Secondly "god" is used singularly assuming there is only one god, this is deeply offensive to polytheists and as most poly theists are in fact from other cultures that makes you a complete racist
Thirdly "god" is clearly refers to the male form of a deity only making you a woman hating rape applogist and probably an actual rapist.
Fourth using the word "god" in reference to Islam seriously? WTF! you know its Allah so by deliberatly being so insensitive makes you racist and islamophobic. I mean you are essentially condoning the crusades and the slaughter ans rape of millions of innocent Muslims at the hands of white, straight, cis male scumfucks you might as well be drawing a cartoon of Mohamed f*****g a pig. Seriously.
I can't take this abuse I am now suffering from PTSD and am going to my safe space.

Don't assume that parents who do this are looking for pity. Most are not. Most parents who "hate on autism" are laboring under the false presumption that autism is a terrible disease. This is a lie propogated by the media and by many large autism charities. Its not about pity, most parents are fighting for their kids who they see as afflicted by an illness. They see themselves as similar to the parents of kids with any other life long illness. They are, their mind, fighting for their kids and fighting against this terrible autism thing and want to prevent this from happening to other kids. Its ain't, for the most part, about pity.

This is very important to understand if we want to change the way that these parents think. If we start to berate them for seeking pity they will imediatly dismiss what we say and get angry because we are accusing them of something they are not doing. So imagine a parent of a kid with cancer being told they were just seeking pity because they were campaigning for a cure for cancer. That parent would immediately get furious because they are not campaigning for a cancer cure to seek pity they are doing it because they want to help kids and other parents. It is coming from a place of compassion and wanting to help others. If we accuse them of seeing pity we are accusing them of doing something they are not and moreover we a sh*****g on what they think is a very good thing that they are doing. This is the mindset of those parents who campaign for a cure for autism.

So instead of accusing such parents of seeking pity what we need to do is to address their base assumptions about autism, We need to show them that it is not like cancer and that it is not a disease or illness. We also need to be very careful about whether we are discussing the same condition. Autism is so wide, so varied that it is not in my opinion a single condition. An autism diagnosis is arrived at by observing behavioural traits. It is entirely possible that these behaviours are caused by multiple underlying "conditions". In kids with extreamly severe autistic behaviours we often see very severe cognitive impairment, other co-morbid conditions (epilepsy, down's, fragile X etc) and actual physical health problems. This is a completely different thing to someone on the aspergers part of the spectrum. To insist that the parents of such severely disabled kids view autism in the same way that I view my sons autism or many people here view their own "higher functioning" autism seem a bit callous. The problem is that the "autism" label is applied to a far to broad a range of conditions. Most people with an autism diagnosis are healthy and just need acceptance and some reasonable accommodations for their differences. But lets not forget that the autism label can and is applied to some kids with very severe disabilities. I for one am not going to judge those parents badly for wanting to change their kids, I do not understand their experiences, I do not know what it is like to parent such a child and so I am simply not in a position to judge them because they do not share my view of autism. Like I said I don't think we are even talking about the same condition when comparing a perfectly healthy autistic child like my son to these kids.

Where to even begin with this thread... I just... uuuuuugh.

Islamophobia, racism, rape, murder, and PTSD are all very serious issues, and anyone who has not personally experienced them has no right to joke about them. You should be ashamed of this post.

And anyone who associates the word "SJW" with bullying and censorship should rethink their position. There is no SJW problem. If your beef with SJW's is that they yell at you when you make rape jokes or racist comments, then frankly they're not the problem. You are.

And if your beef with SJW's is that some of them use their diagnosis as a shield from criticism, then your problem is with individuals, not the broader SJW culture. There shouldn't be any enmity between autistics, SJW's, and autistic SJW's. I know plenty of legit autistic SJW's who don't hide behind their diagnosis. I have watched them improve in so many ways, I've helped them improve, and I'm so proud to be a part of it.

Indeed they are.


Well they have the right (free speech and all that) but I agree they we should not really joke about these things as there is nothing funny about any of these things.


I do not understand your conclusion.
No one was joking about any of the things you mention.
The joke was in fact about SJW types who belittle the very things you list with their faux moral outrage.


SJW's bully and censor. This is very different from real activists for social justice issues.


Well quite clearly there is.


My beef is that SJW's will find a way to make anything into a racist or sexist comment regardless of the intent of the person making the comment. The SJW bends over backwards to try and find insult where none is intended. This mental gymnastics just belittles the real plight of people facing genuine persecution. Case in point your very post I am replying to. It was, or at least should be, obviouse that the butt of the joke here was the SJW faux victim mentality. But right on cue you have come along and found offense by implying that the joke was about Islamophobia, rape and PTSD when clearly none of those things were actually being joked about. It is precisely this faux moral outrage that I have a problem with.


No my beef is with the broader SJW culture as this issue goes beyond autism. Also you need to distinguish between SJW's and social justice activists there is a huge difference. One group are tirelessly championing the rights of minority groups in an effort to improve lives the other are a bunch of whinny middle class slackivists using social justice issues to berate others and feel morally superior.


Again I think you are describing activists not SJW's.

The views that autism SJWs have of severely disabled, cognitively impaired, low-functioning autistic children are ridiculous. They attribute their personal beliefs and preferences to those children and others, but what they think is going on in the minds of these autistic children doesn't even come close to what is going on in the mind of high-functioning children. Then they berate parents of these children for failing to understand their children as if they the SJWs have a great superior understanding of all autistic children.

Joking about people who may have experienced those issues does count as joking about those issues, whether you want it to or not.

"Belittle" by whose standards? Yours? Society's? There's nothing wrong with my rhetoric. The people who tell us to calm down and rethink our words, they're the ones doing the belittling. Calling it "faux moral outrage" is belittling. I promise you, the outrage is real. If you don't like our angry tone, then too bad, the anger is justified. We're not here to play nice. We're not going to ask for permission to change society. You need to understand that equality isn't given, it's taken, and by God we are going to take it.

Anyone who would suggest limits on the subjects of jokes should be ignored.

But Jon Stewart has already shown that jokes can and should be about every subject of importance.

Only hopeless ideologues, humorless revolutionaries, religious zealots and dictators don't understand that.

Frighteningly large group of people, come to think of it.

But in all seriousness, the sketches on the Daily Show do far more to advance social justice than thought policing by politically correct nincompoops.

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/oyuwm8/left-behind

Interesting theory. And which of these things are you accusing me of being?

No idea. Don't know you. Don't even know if you are sincere in trying to silence comedians for thought crimes.

But you don't have to pick just one, people can be all of these things when they try to shut down jokes. But this isn't about you, it's about the terrible idea that only some people have the right to joke about particular subjects.

By this logic then anyone who might have experienced some kind of bigotry can never be joked about no matter how absurd they are being. Do you not see how dangerous this is? Do you not see how this line of thinking will shut down criticism. If you don't see this allow me to give an example. For decades the actions of the Israeli government against the people in Palestine were shielded by precisely this line of thinking. Any criticism leveled against Israeli oppression of Palestinians was very quickly labeled antisemitic. The guilt and long dark shadow of the holocaust allowed this tactic to work and for many years it allowed the Israeli government to get away with war crimes. Today most people have wised up to this tactic and when Netanyahu starts bleating on about people being antisemitic when they berrate the latest atrocity against the Palestinians no one really listens anymore but for decades the faux charge of antisemitism shielded the Israeli regime from legitimate criticism.


There is plenty wrong with your rhetoric. In whining about trivialities and by attempting to shut down jokes and any other speak that you have managed to work out a way to be offended by you are belittling the very words you use. To user an example that is perhaps important to you personally lets look at the use of the term Islamophobia. This word should be used when examining an irrational fear or prejudice against Muslims. Unfortunately for the last decade or so the word has been consistently used by Muslim groups in the same way as antisemitism was used by Israel, namely to try and s**t down any criticism of Islam. So when someone points out some of the decidedly dodgy stuff going on in Islamic countries as a direct result of the teachings in the Koran on is labeled an Islamophobe. The word is being used to shut down debate and criticism of Islam and various Islamic regime, and believe me there is much to criticise here! But perhaps worse than that the word Islamophobia is now somewhat of a joke to most people. Because it has been consistently abused as a tool of censoring legitimate criticism people have wised up. Now whenever some SJW type starts harping on about Islamophobia people just roll their eyes and think "oh no here we go again more bellyaching from the overly sensitive Muslims". Which is a shame because genuine Islamophobia, just like genuine antisemitism, does exist. But both terms have been so abused and misused by SJW types that they have lost all their potency.


I simply do not believe that anyone can be genuinely outraged by many things SJW's crap on about. Most of the stuff SJW's moan about is utterly trivial. If you are outraged about genuine oppression and inequality then I am 100% on yourside and with you all the way. If someone is moaning about white people having dreadlocks being cultural appropriation or some other triviality then I call BS.


It depends what you are getting angry about. If you are angry about genuine in equalities then yes its justified. If you are getting cross about the use of the term "I believe the most qualified person should get the job" being a microagression then the anger is not justified and to be honest I call BS on the anger being there at all.


On this we agree. SJW types are amongst the most unpleasant people I have ever interacted with.


Actually equality is almost always given. In almost all cases of societal reform the majority get on side with the message and the rights are given. In order to effect real change one needs a critical mass of the majority to be on board with the change otherwise it never happens. Real change is about winning hearts and minds about winning people over with the power of ones arguments. And this is precisely why the SJW mentality is so utterly destructive to all civil rights movements. Because the SJW rhetoric is so absurd, so focused on trivial nonsense, so full of fake outrage, so judgemental, so divisive, so condescending and so Orwellian in its attempt to stifle discussion the public will never ever accept it on a large scale. Indeed it simply drive people away from the causes in droves.

As an example of this lets look at modern feminism. Modern feminism is a joke, only 20% of females in the US identify as a feminist today. This should be close to 100% but it isn't precisely because the rhetoric of third wave feminism is so vile. All the while feminism is in thrall to the SJW mind set, all the while it is fussing over nonsense like computer games causing sexism then it will never achieve anything because the public look at this and just say "WTF? Really? That's what feminism is about? Computer games? Oh well I really don't care about that" and all the while that is happening in many countries around the world women are being oppressed systematically.

So instead of moaning about computer games why is not feminism focused on say a trade embargo against Saudi Arabia? We had sanctions against South Africa during appartite and the way the Saudi's treat their women is just as bad so lets hear a campaign about that. We should all be outraged by the treatment of women in Saudi Arabia, people would get behind that cause but no instead is moaning about sexism in computer games. I merely use Saudi Arabia as an example there are many other feminist issues that need addressing world wide.

So in conclusion. I am about as left wing as one can sensibly get. I believe strongly that all people of all races, sexes and sexualities should be free and have equal opportunities under the law and in practice. I want there to be social justice and it is precisely because I passionately believe in those things that I find the SJW mindset so irksome. SJW's damage the very causes they claim to support. On a very personal level I do not want autism rights to become a laughing stock like feminism is. My son needs an effective autism rights movement that will effect real change so he grows up into a more tolerant caring society. So every time I see SJW types hijacking the autism rights movement with their trivial nonsense I see people harming my sons future. This pisses me off. You think you have justified anger? Well let me tell you the love of parent for their kids is one of the strongest forces in the world. The faux moral outrage of the SJW types can not even begin to compete with this.