A canary in the henhouse?

Post Reply New Topic

A canary in the henhouse?

( This is a text I wrote in the spring of 2017. I believe it is still relevant today. What I denounce in it, in a way, is the arrogance of those who call themselves 'the majority'. On the one hand, they 'allow' themselves not to understand autistics. On the other hand, they 'punish' those who do not understand 'neurotypicals'. And since these people call themselves the majority (which is not true), they allow themselves to play with words to say "no no, it's not a punishment, it's an apprenticeship", or something like that. Leave autistic people who want to be left alone, but give them the tools to do things the way they're meant to do! Our lifestyles are neither sacred nor divine. Every person with autism is different. Isn't that true for every human being? )

Autistic people like to play the harp. It's slow, melodious, and the expressive power is immense. Neurotypicals prefer the guitar. Easier to use, it does not, however, allow the full range of emotions to be expressed. That's why some people play it frantically and sometimes even break their instruments!

Of course, if a musician cannot play, we will help him repair his instrument. If one string breaks, he will have to put another one back on.

The purpose of a metaphor is to try to make his audience hear a melody that cannot be expressed by the usual instruments.

When I see on television people who practice the Applied Behaviour Analysis method, I tell myself that some people have understood nothing of the melody. After all, he's just a little child, if you take one string off his harp, he's got plenty of others left! So what's the problem?

The problem is that a maestro isn't allowed to play an instrument. His role is only to coordinate the ensemble to create a coherent symphony. A maestro who allows himself to play an instrument in his symphony is by definition no longer a maestro.

If it were recognized that autistic people do not have the same moral abilities as the rest of the population, then the country's constitution would have to be reopened. In the meantime, to pretend that it does not is unconstitutionally arrogant.

If, on the contrary, autistics are equal to others in the eyes of the law, then the treatment that currently prevails for autistic children is not legally justifiable.*

Then we must conclude that we are no longer in a society of rights.

So much for the singing canary!

(* this is my personal opinion. I'm not a lawyer, and I don't know the law. But in my opinion, to bully autistic children is wrong, and the law serves to protect the population against evil, doesn't it? )

I am having trouble deconstructing this post of your's. So I will just have to "think aloud" about it.

From the title I thought that you had gotten your metaphors mixed up. Confused the proverbial "Canary in the coal mine" with the proverbial "fox in the henhouse".

But you're doing something else. you're saying that autistics are like songbirds, and NTs are just non musical squawking hens. And to reinforce that image you say that we autistics are like harp players, as opposed to NTs who play ukuleles, or guitars. The point being that we have more....range?...than do NTs? Why stop at harps? Why not go for pianos (they have 88 keys, and thus more range of notes than do either guitars or harps)?

In what sense autistics can be said to have "more range" than do NTs is not obvious. And you don't really explain it. .

Further: if we do have more "range" ( in whatever the sense is that you mean) then how does that make us "morally different" then NTs? And why does that mean we have to change the Constitution?

The proof is still being developed. In the meantime, I encourage you to investigate about the QAnon movement, Donald Trump, Vladimir Poutine, Justin Trudeau, the elite child trafficking, the laws used for criminal purposes, etc (the list is too long for me to write).

For the constitution, I don't know. * would have to be reopened * for me doesn't necessarily mean that it MUST change. But the prevision that if autistics and other members of the neurodiversity spheres cannot be alike in behavior, consciousness and actions than our neurotypical friends, then we cannot tolerate the imposition of the SAME coercitive force for everyone on this planet (in the U.S.A, Canada, and everywhere else, that be).

I originally wrote my article in French. I used DeepL to make a quick traduction to post here. I read again before, to be sure that the meaning was adequate (for example, switched to ABA, because DeepL suggested something else).

The henhouse metaphor came to me from the absurdities of the politicians. I considered them to be some kind of crazy chicken. And the general population was also crazy, just like politicians. I don't remember well now, tough.

Some localised constitutions definitively MUST be reopened.

https://www.ageofautism.com/2019/01/supreme-court-justice-oliver-wendell-holmes-used-forced-vaccination-laws-to-justify-forced-steriliza.html

You seem to be changing topics.

In the first post you seemed to be saying that autistics she be judged differently by the law than NTs.

But now you're linking to the site of some publication that is talking about protecting autistics from a revival of the eugenics movement. A different topic completely.

this thread started out as a rather interesting concept , i thought? .

Well..why don't you take up the baton from Tomatoes and run with it?

Apparently you actually understand what he was talking about in the original post. So could you explain it to us?

I posted the link about eugenics because of the constitution of some state that allowed crimes about people that weren't in the taste of the criminals that decided to make laws in the first place.

I have trouble focusing on just on path. There are so many way to express a lot of things that it's impossible foe me to stay in the *true and tried way* that some would prefer.

I will try to express things differently. But t's not a promise.