aren't ret*d people the opposite of autistic people?

Post Reply New Topic

I think League_girl is correct in that the r-word is used as a convenient slur. I recall now there was two students whom I went to school with who were both book smart. One has mild cerebral palsy and the other had a stutter. They were both labelled with the r-word despite being in the top bracket of their class.

Back then Mental Retardation was a convenient umbrella diagnosis similar to autism today. If you watch the educational videos from the 1960s I posted there were medically understood subcategories of mental retardation.


It doesn’t matter, they used any word they believed would get under your skin, any word that they believed would make you feel inferior to them and visa versa. I wish I understood that at the time. It was not until I was diagnosed at age 55 that I fully understood.

Before I was diagnosed with Asperger's, the psychiatrist believed I was mildly mentally the r word. But then she decided I wasn't because I was "too smart". I'm not sure what it was about me that made her think I was smart, though. My vocabulary, maybe? My ability to use an adult toilet without assistance?

I've always had an attraction to mildly ret*d men as far as romance. I don't know if this was a subconscious coping mechanism for the fact that NO "normal" man could ever be compatible with me, and at least an MR man would be more accepting of my oddities. OR, was it some innate attraction to them, part of my autistic wiring?

I've always been fascinated by MR people. I even remember the very first time I learned what "ret*d" meant. I vividly recall the circumstance.

If I saw one in public I'd always "stare."

As an adult, always bombing in the romance department, maybe I gravitated towards the idea of dating an MR man because I thought that MR men were the ONLY men I could possibly have a relationship with because I was "so unusual." At the time, I had no idea I was autistic. I just thought I was "different."

I have high intelligence but never thought of intelligence to be important in a relationship, only honesty, loyalty, good hygeine, common interests, similar introversive traits, high morals, similar values.

Now that I know I'm autistic (diagnosed this year), I'm STILL very interested in a romance with an MR man. If he's autistic that's fine too.

So many years ago I had concluded that "no normal man could ever want me." It was inconceivable.

I've had jobs working with MR adults just to find romance. I've heard of NT women of normal intelligence marrying or dating MR men, but I don't think they were deliberately seeking romance in this population. It's much more likely that by coincidence it turned out that way.

I heard of a case where a woman took a job at a group home for MR adults and began dating one of the residents. They married and he became a board member.

As for what kind of MR man I'd be interested in? Certainly not one with Down syndrome or some other genetic disorder, but one with mild MR but normal genetics, physically fit, good work ethic, nondrinker, nonsmoker.

I'm older now and have given up pretty much entirely, as finding a soulmate was just not meant to be.

Isn't being a caregiver & having intimate relationships with residents somewhat.. unethical? It seems at the very least to be something that would be against the rules of such a caregiver/resident set up.

Was wondering that too.

The woman wasn't a "caregiver." The term caregiving implies high support needs. This was a group home where they were almost independent, not quite enough to live independently without assistance. I've worked in these types of homes. Some of the residents go into the community by themselves via public transport to their jobs. They have household chores. Some cook without any problems. They can read, write, etc., They just can't live by themselves.

They are encouraged to live independently, and many have no restrictions of leaving the house. They are consenting adults. One woman in the house I worked at was on birth control because it was known that she'd go off into the community and have sex.

It's not illegal or unethical for a worker to have a relationship (geez, as long as they're not "doing it" on the premises), any more than a workplace romance. I also don't know if they waited till marriage to have sex. I don't know if they were "intimate" prior to the marriage. For all I know they were both old-fashioned and only hugged and kissed.

There is a potential for an unequal relationship, particularly if it's a male worker and female client. I would check the contractual terms of agreement for these staff with regards to risks of fraternising.

The original word "ret*d" means "to delay or impede the development or progress of :

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ret*d

So it was quickly used to describe those with Intellectual Disability implying their intellectual development has been hindered somehow.

It quickly caught on to be also used as an insult that someone did something dumb- "you went at a red light & crashed into my car you ret*d"

Which is why the term is not used anymore to describe those with ID.

But autism is literally explained as a developmental condition where parts of the individual have not developed to the expected standard of peers.

That may be something mild as being socially inept to the more severe ID, non-verbal adult brain of a two-year-old.

An analogy may be a forest fire, only a few trees may be destroyed or the whole forest can be burnt down.

So the OP opinion is not logical

There are many unequal relationships in which both people have the same IQ, same education. Why must IQ be similar in order for the relationship to be equal? A man might batter his girlfriend several times a month while both have Harvard degrees. What makes a relationship "equal"? What about political views? What about lifestyle goals? What about common interests and values?

A person who is living in a group home with mild intellectual capacity s basically independent to sleep/love whom they want. However, if somebody is employed to work in a professional capacity with them then I was suggesting they check the fine print with regards to their ethical obligations to their client and whether there is a conflict of interest.

I would be careful dating someone with an ID because you can get in trouble with the law for it. Unless they are living on their own, have no assisted living, have no caretaker and they make their own financial decisions and take care of themselves, then I guess they are allowed to consent by law because of their age. Plenty of people with low IQs drive cars and have families and their IQs are in the late 60's to early 70s range.

I feel as though there are some double standards here. If a dude said:

He'd probably be labelled a predator.

It's just weird that someone would do that!

I wouldn’t say Elgee is necessarily a “predator”—but a client-worker relationship is probably unethical. It’s no good to call someone a predator unless there is actual evidence for predation.

These sorts of relationships do happen. Some are harmful, some are good—but the POTENTIAL for harm is considerable.

There might not be bad intentions—but there is POTENTIAL for bad intentions, hence the concept of “conflict of interest.”

There is a nurturing quality to some relationships. There are people who feel “whole” when they nurture someone.

I bet that Elgee is “selling herself short” by assuming that “no normal person could ever desire me.” I used to think that way myself….then I learned that this isn’t true.

I don't think it's appropriate to date your patients. This applies to caretakers too.

I should've mentioned from the get-go a very key point: One of the reasons I've been more drawn to MR men than normal men was/is because I never, never, ever had a desire for sex. This alone abolishes the idea that I could be a predator. I'm still a virgin and consider myself asexual in that I completely lack a desire or drive for intimate relations. HOWEVER, I'm all for hugs, cuddles, snuggling, a little kissing!

NOTE: I was never sexually abused or even fondled. My total lack of libido is innate, and I believe it comes with my autism. I also never witnessed any sexual abuse. My parents were always affectionate with each other. There was never anything abnormal in the house growing up. This is just the way I'm wired.

I figured that an MR man would be less likely to insist on sex or require it for a relationship. I was able to have a non-serious, brief romance with three MR men (though I'd say that one of them was more in the borderline range), and sure enough, NONE wanted sex! I met all three via personal ads.

So you see, it's not about predation. It's about innocence. I am not hardwired for sex.

That all said, there's STILL something about mild MR that draws me, as far as a romantic relationship. I really loved the character "Lennie" (though I wouldn't call him mild) in "Of Mice and Men," and would've loved to have met a real "Charly" in "Flowers for Algernon," or the "Tim" character in "Tim."

"Tim" is a book about an MR man in his 20s who falls in love, and vice versa, with a normal woman in her 50s. The movie version starred Mel Gibson and Piper Laurie.

There is a movie, "Light in the Piazza," and this was also made into a Broadway play, about a 23-year-old normal man who visits Italy and, by chance, meets a mildy MR woman who's 26. But he doesn't realize she has ID, even though her mother describes her intellect as a 10-year-old. Her family's bigger issue is that he's three years younger. They eventually marry.

Bottom line: I'm just so weird and messed up, but now I know this is AUTISM. Am I open to dating an autistic man with high intelligence? Yes, now that I know that I meet criteria for ASD.

And one of the things I'll lay out on the table before the first date is that I DO NOT WANT sex. No. Never.