Is anyone else sick of the anti-NT bias?

Page 9 of 9 [ 144 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

timeisdead
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Oct 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 895
Location: Nowhere

14 Dec 2008, 2:14 am

I loathe how we are expected to avoid using terms with the least bit of exclusivity in order to prevent potential offense. Political correctness leads to a generic language devoid of intensity and specificity, thus verbal communication would result in less mutual understanding.



14 Dec 2008, 2:30 am

I say "people." That way I am not using a category and lumping anyone into one. I also say "Some people." I also use "Bullies." People is everyone because they are humans and bullies, anyone can be one. It's not part of anything; NT, autism, learning disabilities, schizophrenia, etc. People with those conditions can be one.



timeisdead
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Oct 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 895
Location: Nowhere

14 Dec 2008, 2:39 am

Spokane_Girl wrote:
I say "people." That way I am not using a category and lumping anyone into one. I also say "Some people." I also use "Bullies." People is everyone because they are humans and bullies, anyone can be one. It's not part of anything; NT, autism, learning disabilities, schizophrenia, etc. People with those conditions can be one.

So it's wrong for us to question or describe any aspects of neurotypical behavior?



Eggman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,676

14 Dec 2008, 2:43 am

Isnt it like going to a demacratic convention and getting upset at their anti republican values, then retuen to your reblican convention and start harping on democrats?



14 Dec 2008, 2:49 am

It's not NT behavior how people act such as when they bully, be jerks, get drunk, etc. it's human behavior.

It's the false assumption people make about NTs people have a problem with here. Like the time I saw a thread about NTs taking things out of context we say. That isn't NT behavior because I have seen aspies doing it too. I see it on here too. A member did it to me a few days ago so I told her she does a horrible job reading between the lines and I advise her to stop trying.


It would be like an aspie committing a crime and people assume all aspies commit crimes. So for them to say aspies are criminals and why do they commit crimes would be lumping us into one category. It pisses us off so why are we doing it to NTs? Some of us are lumping them into one category.



Unknown_Quantity
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 483
Location: Australia

14 Dec 2008, 3:32 am

I think it would be a terribly foolish position to actually hate NT's. We need them just as much as they need us. NT is not a term that can be exchanged with "bully" or "ingnorant" or "insensitive". And if you identify all NT's with these terms then you wrong, if you identify these terms with only NT's then you are wrong.

But, they are a majority. Making fun of the majority is a long tradition and it has served us well. A little bit of parody, a little bit of satyrical comedy and playful jibes go along way to keep people grounded.

Black comedians make fun of "white folks" all the time. All my gay friends have the occassional pithy observation about straight people or "breeders." And as a straight, white (mostly) guy, I don't take any offence. I think we need that sort of humour and we need to see the value in some of the differences we have. But if you take these opinions too seriously or see this as being some indicator of innate superiority, then you need to have your head checked.

I don't think the NT's will crumple into emotional heaps because we make fun of the stupidity of small talk or whatever.


_________________
IN GIRVM IMVS NOCTE ET CONSVMIMVR IGNI


Eggman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,676

14 Dec 2008, 3:33 am

Unknown_Quantity wrote:
I think it would be a terribly foolish position to actually hate NT's. We need them just as much as they need us. NT is not a term that can be exchanged with "bully" or "ingnorant" or "insensitive". And if you identify all NT's with these terms then you wrong, if you identify these terms with only NT's then you are wrong.

But, they are a majority. Making fun of the majority is a long tradition and it has served us well. A little bit of parody, a little bit of satyrical comedy and playful jibes go along way to keep people grounded.

Black comedians make fun of "white folks" all the time. All my gay friends have the occassional pithy observation about straight people or "breeders." And as a straight, white (mostly) guy, I don't take any offence. I think we need that sort of humour and we need to see the value in some of the differences we have. But if you take these opinions too seriously or see this as being some indicator of innate superiority, then you need to have your head checked.

I don't think the NT's will crumple into emotional heaps because we make fun of the stupidity of small talk or whatever.


not all heteros are breeders



pandd
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jul 2006
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,430

14 Dec 2008, 5:45 am

ephemerella wrote:
It's so hard for you to stop parsing semantics, isn't it. It's like, you know that semantic-pragmatics is at issue, but you just can't stop yourself from parsing... so bizarre. You just don't get the idea at all.

You call it parsing, many might call it being over-literal, which, as anyone who knows anything about SID would certainly know, is symptomatic of the same.

According to Bishop & Norbury (2002), children with semantic-pragmatic disorder have fluent, complex and clearly articulated expressive language but exhibit problems with the way their language is used. [...]

A further problem caused by SPD is the assumption of literal communication. This would mean that obvious, concrete instructions are clearly understood and carried out, whereas simple but non-literal expressions such as jokes, sarcasm and general social chatting are difficult and can lead to misinterpretation. Lies are also a confusing concept to children with SPD as it involves knowing what the speaker is thinking, intending and truly meaning beyond a literal interpretation.



14 Dec 2008, 6:13 am

After reading about SPD, it sounds a lot like AS. I wonder if I could have it?



ephemerella
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2007
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,335

14 Dec 2008, 6:17 am

pandd wrote:
ephemerella wrote:
It's so hard for you to stop parsing semantics, isn't it. It's like, you know that semantic-pragmatics is at issue, but you just can't stop yourself from parsing... so bizarre. You just don't get the idea at all.

You call it parsing, many might call it being over-literal, which, as anyone who knows anything about SID would certainly know, is symptomatic of the same.

According to Bishop & Norbury (2002), children with semantic-pragmatic disorder have fluent, complex and clearly articulated expressive language but exhibit problems with the way their language is used. [...]

A further problem caused by SPD is the assumption of literal communication. This would mean that obvious, concrete instructions are clearly understood and carried out, whereas simple but non-literal expressions such as jokes, sarcasm and general social chatting are difficult and can lead to misinterpretation. Lies are also a confusing concept to children with SPD as it involves knowing what the speaker is thinking, intending and truly meaning beyond a literal interpretation.


Yes, she did make sense when she pointed out that she was acting more or less consistent with the whole behavior and the way I was behaving and that I was making assumptions about what she was trying to say!

Yes, the assumption of literal communication and I also think there is a tendency, perhaps, that when you interpret someone's words, to assign one of several possible meanings to the word or phrase, and not consider the other possible meanings... ?



ephemerella
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2007
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,335

14 Dec 2008, 6:26 am

Spokane_Girl wrote:
After reading about SPD, it sounds a lot like AS. I wonder if I could have it?


I think a lot of AS have it (I think that it is one of the diagnostic criteria for AS, to have SPD).

My second husband was AS and he became an engineer because he couldn't write well enough to pass a non-technical major. But he was brilliant. Just couldn't write. He had it bad...



Unknown_Quantity
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 483
Location: Australia

14 Dec 2008, 8:37 am

Eggman wrote:
Unknown_Quantity wrote:
...All my gay friends have the occassional pithy observation about straight people or "breeders." ...


not all heteros are breeders


I think everyone is aware of that.

"Breeder" is used as a term of derision (or affection, depending on the intention of the joke) and not meant to be taken literally as the people who breed. Note that gay people have kids too.

It's a joke. One that I don't take offence at, but obviously there are some that do.


_________________
IN GIRVM IMVS NOCTE ET CONSVMIMVR IGNI


pakled
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Nov 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,015

14 Dec 2008, 8:15 pm

NTs are people
AS are people

We may not see things eye to eye, but they're here, so we have to deal with them.



Eggman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,676

15 Dec 2008, 1:20 am

no we dont



greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

15 Dec 2008, 1:36 am

timeisdead wrote:
Spokane_Girl wrote:
I say "people." That way I am not using a category and lumping anyone into one. I also say "Some people." I also use "Bullies." People is everyone because they are humans and bullies, anyone can be one. It's not part of anything; NT, autism, learning disabilities, schizophrenia, etc. People with those conditions can be one.

So it's wrong for us to question or describe any aspects of neurotypical behavior?

Is it wrong for some to describe any aspects to autistic behaviour and to question some aspects of it as well to question the cause of it?

Quote:
neurotypical behavior

What is exactly neurotypical behaviour? if you mean things like bullying and bigotry as NT behaviour, that would be incorrect, it would actually be, human behaviour, as Spokane_Girl stated.

I actually wonder if the term Neurotypical is actually a valid clinical term by the way, it might, but I'm not sure, or is it just a social trend?


_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?


Warsie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,542
Location: Chicago, IL, USA

15 Dec 2008, 1:44 am

Eggman wrote:
no we dont


Aspergia :P


_________________
I am a Star Wars Fan, Warsie here.
Masterdebating on chi-city's south side.......!