"Make me normal"

Post Reply New Topic

Ehhhh.. from what I've read it sounds like they're just picking out the sad, more hopeless poeple. That's what TV does, but it gives us a bad name IMO. I haven't watched this show, but it sounds like a bad way to portray any kind of Autism by only showing the darker side. Showing a variety of stories would be real "Reality", unlike "Reality" TV.

As for being defective, if you want to think that way, be my guest.

Grrr... isn't it always?



I couldn't agree more with that sentiment Asparval. Working on what you find difficult is desirable. But so is PLAYING TO YOUR STRENGTHS. As most of us know, there are a lot of positive traits associated with being on the spectrum - focusing only on the negative is not only bad for self-esteem, it sounds like a belting way to become depressed, angry and cynical to me.
I have noticed too much focus on the 'undesirable' stuff to be corrected with my child at school, but far less noticeable is efforts to encourage him and bolster his self esteem ready for the battering it will receive between 11 and 14. These kids need to know that they do have things going for them, and that being autistic doesn't make you less of a person.

I had to comment on this. Since no one is sure what causes autism, we cannot say whether autism is "natural" or not. Unless autism is completely the result of some sort of human activity, then autism is "natural." And that autistic people tend not to reproduce isn't an indication that it isn't "natural" either. If autism is the result of recessive genes, or a kind of genetic "error," ect. then you could wipe out every autistic person currently alive, and within a few generations, autistic people would start popping up again.

There is enough strong evidence of a genetic element to autism for me to be absolutely sure that it is a fallacy to say that people with autism don't reproduce. Whether or not the outward signs of autism are evident in everyone with the autistic pattern of genes is another matter. As we begin to understand the genetic mechanisms more fully it could well be found that we are far more typical in the human race than is currently imagined.

You are talking to an aspie who has 5 kids. I should also mention that my dad (who seems quite aspie) also has five kids, and one of mine is very likely aspie also. We most definitely do reproduce and I can't begin to imagine why you would think otherwise! Even Einstein had a child.



Now, this is very condescending. I worked two jobs, 7 days a week, for almost a year , so I don't see how you could conclude that I'm low functioning or have a lack of perspective. The job that I'm currently at requires constant interaction with the public, and I've adapted to it. If wanting to believe in myself and having healthy self esteem is a defense mechanism, then <shrug>...

The bottom line is that even the most severely, profoundly affected person with MR or any disability, will do FAR better with someone who believes in them and seeks out their strengths than someone who is constantly reminded of their "limitations" (which are often constructed by the guardian or therapist!

Although the ability to put MR instead of MY isnt a common one

All things considered, I will write in, to sugest they now go and look for the sucesses, the Aspies and Autistics who are doing well in life......

Er, MR = mental redardation mate...

I was angered/disgusted by the programme title when i saw the advert for it, but after checking out the Channel 4 website and seeing it was a quote from one of the children i thought that mitigated it slightly, but still was a pretty bad thing to call a programme about disability...

However on watching the programme i still thought it could have been worse, but could have been very much better. Like Asparval, the thing that came across strongest was that the school seemed to be teaching the children that autism had *only* bad characteristics (nothing about the positive skills such as memory, ability to "think outside the box", etc that make people with AS highly over-represented among scientists, philosophers etc) and that non-autistic people understood the condition better than them/ourselves (something that was implied rather than stated, but came across when the head teacher was shown talking to/about the children).

The Guardian's TV guide called it "life-affirming viewing"... i found it hard to see what was so "life-affirming" about a programme which, although it featured a lot of statements and situations which i identified with, would have given the uninformed viewer a wholly negative picture of autism and people with autism... it also didn't show the full range of the spectrum, featuring people who were all fairly close in terms of functioning level, or clearly show what level of intellectual impairment those individuals had...

It did make me rethink slightly whether early diagnosis is a good thing - i did think my childhood might have been a lot better if i was diagnosed with AS from an early age, but these kids all seemed to resent and hate having AS, seeing themselves a "defective" and wanting to be "normal", without seeing any positive value in being themselves and not "normal"... it seemed perhaps that the teachers constantly telling the children that their problems were due to their autism probably made them attribute everything negative to autism, and see themselves as inferior to non-autistic people... the difference perhaps being that i found the label for myself and found it explained my life, whereas they would probably feel that a (negatively judgemental) label had been imposed on them...

I think Channel 4 could have done a lot better if what they were aiming to do was produce a documentary to increase understanding of autism...

erm... i know of MR, ME, MI and MS, but wtf's MY?

I'm gonna write a letter, not to complain, just to show the other side of the coin. The show was full of overwhelming negativity and violence.

Da. I am writing in to sugest they get permission to film my youth club..... then again, there is a little violence there... usually me attacking my mate danny w drumsticks to make him listen (Hes about as deaf as a post if you put rock music on)

I wasn't offended by the program but I was annoyed that it didn't portray what I consider to be aspergers at all. It portrayed a very extreme set of people with very extreme personalities that do not portray me in the slightest and make it harder to explain to people that aspergers doesn't mean that you have to behave in an extreme way and it doesn't mean you are totally dependant on others (like ALL of the people in that program).

They did the same with narcolepsy. They had a really fat woman who was very odd and she kept falling asleep and letting her face fall into her dinner. She also did some other things that made people with narcolepsy look like complete twunts. Everyone now remembers these extreme people when you mention narcolepsy. Then you have to explain that the program was more FICTION than FACT.

The media always picks the most extreme example to make it entertaining for NT's. They don't do it to promote the people it is about, they do it to make it entertainment for everyone else.

You appear to be a b3tard.... woo! welcome to teh site matey!

Bonjour Monsieur,

Yep... more a lurker on there though... Have posted a few times.

I hate the steryotype of AS that comes from things like this. I didnt see the TV show in question but the review was very steryotypical.
People make up stupid ideas of us by watching things like this and stupid films.

I have a copy of this on my computer, would it be acceptable to make a .torrent of it and post the link here? I'm sure plently of people would like to see it or review it, but I understand there are legal issues and so on.