Is Asperger just a learning disability?

Page 3 of 3 [ 43 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

QFT
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Jun 2019
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,456

12 Oct 2022, 3:22 pm

AnomalousAspergian wrote:
Autism and learning disability are by no means the same. Although autistic people can have a learning disability on top of their autism, which I think is why people confuse the two as being the same.


I think everyone keeps misunderstanding what I meant.

Let me, first of all, make it very clear. I don't have learning disabilities. In fact, academically I tend to do quite well.

What I was trying to get at is that the concept is the same. As in, the issue is learning, as opposed to mood or attitude or being unstable or whatever.



himmellaufen
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

Joined: 3 Oct 2022
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Posts: 96

12 Oct 2022, 3:37 pm

QFT wrote:
AnomalousAspergian wrote:
Autism and learning disability are by no means the same. Although autistic people can have a learning disability on top of their autism, which I think is why people confuse the two as being the same.


I think everyone keeps misunderstanding what I meant.

Let me, first of all, make it very clear. I don't have learning disabilities. In fact, academically I tend to do quite well.

What I was trying to get at is that the concept is the same. As in, the issue is learning, as opposed to mood or attitude or being unstable or whatever.


Tbh, it's easy to mask learning disabilities buy not pursuing the subjects we struggle with. A person can be brilliant at languages, but struggle with maths for example.
Some time ago I read an article that autists are divided into three learning groups: verbal, visual and pattern thinkers. And for example, pattern thinkers are good with math equations, but they struggle to visualize or memorize names and new languages.



himmellaufen
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

Joined: 3 Oct 2022
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Posts: 96

12 Oct 2022, 3:41 pm

QFT wrote:
And then in America, when they ostracized aspies for having low social status, it is blame the victim too, isn't it. Just a lot less clear. Thats why Russian prison is a good way to illustrate what is going on in America with a lot less ambiguity.

And finally the rape victim is considered gay but not perpetrator. How is it locially possible? I thought gay is the one who enjoys sex with men and perpetrator is the one who apparently wanted it? Well I guess they attribute to the victim the desire he didn't have.


First, it's not just russians and not just prisons. This mindset dates back to Roman republic times at the very least, where they considered top straight and the bottom gay.
It's less about desire, and more about balance of power. The bottom is getting f****d, so he's weak, feminine, submissive, gay. And the top is dominating, so he's strong, masculine, heterosexual.

It's also connected to misogyny. The bottom is weak, because he's taking a woman's role in sex. Just as women are weak and inferior to men, from this mindset's pov of course.



QFT
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Jun 2019
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,456

12 Oct 2022, 5:56 pm

himmellaufen wrote:
Some time ago I read an article that autists are divided into three learning groups: verbal, visual and pattern thinkers. And for example, pattern thinkers are good with math equations, but they struggle to visualize or memorize names and new languages.


I am the kind that is good with math. But math involves both equations and visualization, so I would assume I am good with both.

I have trouble remembering names, yes.

As far as new languages, I don't "like" learning new languages, which is why I only know Russian and English (I moved from Russia to the US). I guess I assume that learning languages other than those two would be super hard, but I have no idea, I never tried.



QFT
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Jun 2019
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,456

12 Oct 2022, 5:58 pm

himmellaufen wrote:
QFT wrote:
And then in America, when they ostracized aspies for having low social status, it is blame the victim too, isn't it. Just a lot less clear. Thats why Russian prison is a good way to illustrate what is going on in America with a lot less ambiguity.

And finally the rape victim is considered gay but not perpetrator. How is it locially possible? I thought gay is the one who enjoys sex with men and perpetrator is the one who apparently wanted it? Well I guess they attribute to the victim the desire he didn't have.


First, it's not just russians and not just prisons. This mindset dates back to Roman republic times at the very least, where they considered top straight and the bottom gay.
It's less about desire, and more about balance of power. The bottom is getting f****d, so he's weak, feminine, submissive, gay. And the top is dominating, so he's strong, masculine, heterosexual.

It's also connected to misogyny. The bottom is weak, because he's taking a woman's role in sex. Just as women are weak and inferior to men, from this mindset's pov of course.


In this case, the bottom would be more trans rather than gay. Because affeminate implies trans. It doesn't imply gay.

The one thats gay would be the top, since the top is the one that wants sex with another man.

And yes I agree that it is mysogyny. I would say mysogyny *instead of* homophobia. Unless you say it "transphobia"

I do see your point though. Which again illustrates an analogy with the real world. So back in 2005 Anne rejected me on the basis that my mom shelters me. In her mind, it means I want to be sheltered, and this is something she can't handle. I told her that just because my mom shelters me, it doesn't mean I want to be sheltered. In fact I don't want it and this is what I resent that my mom does it against my will. Now, in what Anne originally written, she used the word "confident": as if she thought I wanted to be sheltered because I lack confidence. And I told her "yes I am confident: I just don't know how to stand up to my mom". And she said "isn't it a confidence issue that you dont know how to stand up?"

Well, it is analogous to what you are saying. Here is the analogy:

Me: I am confident, I just don't know how to stand up to my mom

Rooster: I am straight, I just don't know how to defend myself against people that rape me

Anne: The fact that you can't stand up means you don't have confidence so you just confirmed my point

"Normal" prisoner: The fact that you can't defend yourself against the rapist implies that you are weak, and weak implies gay, so you just confirmed my point.

And by the way there are more analogies besides this one. Here is another analogy:

Anne: I didn't say you want to be sheltered, I said you are used to it

"Normal" prisoner: I didn't say you were gay before you were raped. I am saying you became gay as a result of rape

And here is yet another analogy:

Anne: I will judge you by your actions. Since you accept being sheltered, you probably want it

"Normal" prisoner: I will judge you by your actions. Since you accept being raped, you probably want it



himmellaufen
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

Joined: 3 Oct 2022
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Posts: 96

12 Oct 2022, 6:21 pm

QFT wrote:
himmellaufen wrote:
QFT wrote:
And then in America, when they ostracized aspies for having low social status, it is blame the victim too, isn't it. Just a lot less clear. Thats why Russian prison is a good way to illustrate what is going on in America with a lot less ambiguity.

And finally the rape victim is considered gay but not perpetrator. How is it locially possible? I thought gay is the one who enjoys sex with men and perpetrator is the one who apparently wanted it? Well I guess they attribute to the victim the desire he didn't have.


First, it's not just russians and not just prisons. This mindset dates back to Roman republic times at the very least, where they considered top straight and the bottom gay.
It's less about desire, and more about balance of power. The bottom is getting f****d, so he's weak, feminine, submissive, gay. And the top is dominating, so he's strong, masculine, heterosexual.

It's also connected to misogyny. The bottom is weak, because he's taking a woman's role in sex. Just as women are weak and inferior to men, from this mindset's pov of course.


In this case, the bottom would be more trans rather than gay. Because affeminate implies trans. It doesn't imply gay.



These people don't think like that. They think that gay=womanlike. They don't have much trans awareness, and if they meet a transgender person, they will assume it's a gay man(if mtf) or lesbian(if ftm), unless they happen to pass.

And it's rooted, among the others, in misogyny.

I once talked with such person about transwomen. He said "I don't understand them; why would anyone want to be weaker(a woman)"?

I will, perhaps, repeat once again....for them, woman is a synonym of weak, submissive, inferior, stupid, emotional, bottom, dishwasher, rag, a second class citizen. So they treat men whom they perceive as feminine as second class citizens too.

Even if these people "respect women", if you ask them why, they will immediately say "because women are weaker, dumber, inferior they need special treatment".

Sex is seen as conquest. f*****g a woman, they imagine they are owning her. Thus, f*****g another man, they are owning him.



himmellaufen
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

Joined: 3 Oct 2022
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Posts: 96

12 Oct 2022, 6:28 pm

QFT wrote:
Here is the analogy:

Me: I am confident, I just don't know how to stand up to my mom

Rooster: I am straight, I just don't know how to defend myself against people that rape me



Wrong analogy.

Confident is a synonym of assertive, which is a synonym of standing up for yourself. Therefore, confidence is a synonym for standing up for yourself. Therefore not being able to stand up for yourself means deficits in confidence.

Meanwhile, being heterosexual has nothing to do with being able to defend yourself from anyone. Plenty of men are not capable of defence, because for example, they are disabled or very old. Yet they are hetero.

For the prison rapists, gay doesn't nessecierly mean homosexual. For these people, it's a synonym for "inferior, weak, like a woman".
Thus, a person from your analogy would say:
"I am inferior, weak, therefore I can't defend myself."



firemonkey
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,394
Location: Calne,England

12 Oct 2022, 6:36 pm

himmellaufen wrote:

Tbh, it's easy to mask learning disabilities buy not pursuing the subjects we struggle with. A person can be brilliant at languages, but struggle with maths for example.
Some time ago I read an article that autists are divided into three learning groups: verbal, visual and pattern thinkers. And for example, pattern thinkers are good with math equations, but they struggle to visualize or memorize names and new languages.


Not quite the same thing,as I've not heard of a 'science disability', but I dropped science subjects before my O level year because of poor results in the 4th form. That being due to lack of natural ability and not putting much effort into subjects I wasn't that keen on. I struggled with geometry, and have never been good when it comes to mental rotation and 3x3 matrices. I'm quite good at pattern recognition. I was in school long before there was the kind of help available now. No terms ,using USA terminology, such as 'gifted and learning disabled' or '2e'

I can be quite avoidant when it comes to things I'm not very good at. The worst example ,in terms of severity, occurring less than a fortnight after my 1st psych admission . Went into a state of heightened anxiety because they were going to have me help make doll's houses as therapy. If there was an IQ for constructing things mine would be <80. I was pulled from the path of a hospital bus.



QFT
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Jun 2019
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,456

12 Oct 2022, 7:13 pm

himmellaufen wrote:
Wrong analogy.

Confident is a synonym of assertive, which is a synonym of standing up for yourself. Therefore, confidence is a synonym for standing up for yourself. Therefore not being able to stand up for yourself means deficits in confidence.


Back then I interpretted the word "confident" differently. I thought that she meant feeling confident being on my own without outside help. And then I was thinking "sure I am confident: I don't like it when my mom offers unsolicitted help, thus I feel more than confident without such help".

Part of the reason why I interpretted this way is that Anne wrote the following

Anne wrote:
I know you are used to women taking care of you. Your mom sounds like she shelters you and I have a feeling your ex girlfriend did the same. If this is something you expect from someone you are in a relationship with, this is the area I just can't handle. When I am in a relationship with someone, I expect that person to be very independent, confident in himself as an individual ...


So she lumped together lack of confidence with actually *wanting* my mom to do to me what she did. If the issue was inability to stand up, then the first part of the above quote won't make sense. Yet she did use the word "confident" at the end of the above quote.

himmellaufen wrote:
For the prison rapists, gay doesn't nessecierly mean homosexual. For these people, it's a synonym for "inferior, weak, like a woman".


You just reminded me how 20 years ago gay didn't mean homosexual either. When I first encountered the word gay in one of my classes, I didn't know what it means and had to look it up in English Russian dictionary. The dictionary said "happy". But the topic we were studying was the one of homosexuality. So I was wondering "how can that word possibly fit?" And then I thought "maybe if someone is happy (aka gay), they want to celebrate their happiness by purposely doing something inappropriate, so they commit homosexual act, just so that they can laugh at themselves". Or the other theory I had was "when I pass by homosexual, I laugh; but I only get to laugh for a minute or so that it takes me to walk by; on the other hand, homosexual are watching themselves the whole entire time, so they get to laugh at themselves the whole time, and thats what makes them happy (aka gay)".

But, back to your point. Could it be that the word "gay" had *three* different meanings: one is happy, the other is homosexual, and yet another is trans?

But if we are going to get specific like that, then in Russian prisons they aren't using the word gay. They are using the word "pidor" which means "fa***t". Well, the word "fa***t" doesn't have homo as its root. So could it be that "fa***t" changed its meaning. And sometimes it means "homosexual" while other times it means "transgender"?



himmellaufen
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

Joined: 3 Oct 2022
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Posts: 96

12 Oct 2022, 8:12 pm

I don't think we are getting anywhere, here. I already told you how these russians use such words, but you keep going back to your definition.

Also, it seems you are aware that you misunderstood what that Anne person meant with her words. My only advice is that you should assume less, and ask more, when you aren't certain why people say what they say.



QFT
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Jun 2019
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,456

12 Oct 2022, 11:15 pm

himmellaufen wrote:
I don't think we are getting anywhere, here. I already told you how these russians use such words, but you keep going back to your definition.


Maybe I didn't express myself clearly, but I was borrowing things you were saying. In fact I was elaborating on some of what you said. Your point was that they didn't view gay as homosexual but instead as weak. And so I was elaborating on other non-homosexual notions of gayness.

Maybe you thought that I wasn't receptive because I wasn't mentioning the weakness part. But I knew it in my mind though. The only reason I weren't mentioning it is that I was focusing more on "homosexual or not homosexual" issue.

But, speaking of weakness, I agree with you that they view them as weak, and that is what they seem to be focused on. I also agree with you that they view women as weak as well. The example of "respect for women" being defined by a sexist idea that they are weak, pretty much describes Russian attitude, and I agree with you its sexist and hurtful. But Russians -- men and women -- both support it since thats how they raised, so Russian women are sexist against themselves.

I guess the part where they would link it to homosexual is the part that "sex is about power". This means that

Man is heterosexual ==> Man has sex with a woman ==> Man is the top during said sexual act ==> Man is powerful

Now, that logic is already skewed in many levels. First of all, sex is not about power, but about emotional connection. And for emotional connection you have to be an equal. And secondly its not always true that man is always the top. So to say that, one has to make a bunch of sexist assumptions.

But since we are not talking about whether its actually true, but rather about the logic of it. Lets pretend for a second that this is true. But even then I won't follow the logic. In fact, the logic would go like this:

Weak ==> Can't be powerful over anybody ==> Can't be top ==> Can't have sex with a woman ==> Either homosexual or asexual

Strong ==> Always the top ==> Either straight or bisexual (after all, being top with both women and men would be bisexual wouldn't it)

But they kinda crossed out asexual and bisexual possibilities.

The only way out of it is to say that gay doesn't imply homosexual, but instead it implies "insert the blank". You inserted weak, I inserted transgender. But we both inserted something other than homosexual. And also we both agree that -- in the sexist mindset we are discussing -- there is a link between the two since women are seen as weak. I didn't acknowledge it in writing prior to this message, but I saw your point, I just was focusing on other aspects of it.

himmellaufen wrote:
Also, it seems you are aware that you misunderstood what that Anne person meant with her words. My only advice is that you should assume less, and ask more, when you aren't certain why people say what they say.


Yes and no.

On the one hand, from where I am sitting now I can see that the common usage of the word "confident" is different from the one I assumed it to be back then.

On the other hand, by reading the first part of her email, it seems like she was using it in the way that I was thinking of that term back then.

And you are right, I should have asked her. But, unfortunately, thats not what happened. I felt really awkward, so things escalated, and then a month later she no longer talked to me. Now, that was back in 2005, so its too late to ask.

It was my mistake that I didn't mentally prepare for our meeting. I should have thought ahead of time what I will ask. But I didn't. I am used to think on my feet, yet I keep making mistakes when I do. Thats my problem not just with her but with a lot of people and situations.