Temple Grandin

Post Reply New Topic

Doesn't matter she's still a hypocrite.

Speaking of Einstein, here are 2 interesting articles about his brain. Of course no one is certain whether or not he was on the spectrum, but he did think in images and then translated to numbers. Among other things in the articles it is mentioned that his brain was smaller then the norm, but his parietal lobes were 15% bigger, and other parts of his brain were different too.




http://www.cerebromente.org.br/n11/ment ... stein.html

http://www.dana.org/news/cerebrum/detail.aspx?id=3032

People are always going to eat meat. I don't see why you are against someone making it better for the animals... not doing that seems completely illogical if you actually cared about them.

Do not advocate veganism and then go off to make life for cows to go to slaughter. Its a hypocritical move.

I absolutely agree people can eat meat. But people should eat HEALTHY Meat. That's why I'm vegan. Because I want to advocate healthy meat standards and not just the after product, but the living animal too.

Health standards.

I don't think she would be able to be hypocrit even if she wanted to, she doesn't have that in her. What she does is she tries to solve concrete problems, as mentioned people eat meat, personally I would like to become a vegetarian because I like animals and it makes me very sad that we kill them, however since it is a fact at the moment, people do eat meat, at least she tried to make it less painful for the animals, which is a good thing, if we are going to eat them at least we don't have to torture them on top of it.

How is she a hypocrite? Advocating veganism not hypocrisy if a core belief is freedom of choice and that belief takes precedence over those surrounding veganism.. I'd be willing to bet your definition of hypocrisy is too black and white to be of any practical use.

No, advocating veganism is not hypocrisy. Advocating veganism when you're helping the farmers make "comfortable slaughter" possible for cows is hypocritical.

So you'd rather nobody establish better ways of doing things in the meat industry and instead let animals be uncomfortable or even tortured simply because the person doing so also advocates veganism? Yes, that makes a lot of sense.

You're seeing things too black-and-white.

Well, considering the 80-90% unemployment rate among adult autistics, I *am* impressed when I see a Temple Grandin or a John Elder Robison, even if I don't care for a lot of the specific things either individual says. I am still struggling to find my own career niche, now complicated by the fact that my bad-but-livable sleep disorder I've had since I was six years old has mutated into a can't-live-in-the-world sleep disorder.

I hate the pity attitude society can have toward us. Pity makes me feel nauseated. But I do understand the excitement people feel when they see one of us with good employment because there *are* huge challenges for us and the majority of us go through life unemployed or seriously underemployed.

humans are going to kill and eat cows. lots of them. no way to stop that. it's going to happen. before temple grandin every slaughterhouse was a nightmare for the cattle. many still are. just really terrible things happen to the cows. that's because the only humans that will work in them are fairly despicable characters. people who are opposed to animal cruelty could not possibly work in that type of job.

what grandin has done has made those final minutes for some cows much calmer, without the terror. she has allowed the cows to think it's not the end. the cows she has helped do not get tasered, beaten with hammers, run into with the forks of front end loaders...........the cows are going to die. no one can save them. i think it's better for them to die peacefully than to die filled with great terror. would those of you who trash her rather for the cows to all die in horror or to have calm before the end. you only have two choices.

i think highly of her for what she has done for cows. i find it pretty incredible that anyone who believes animals should be treated with compassion would think badly of her.

No I think what she should be establishing is ways of treating the animals in a more healthy way. Not just through slaughter, but actual practices of taking care of the animals.

It would be great if we could choose the things we are interested in that way, if we just had to think "I would prefer to be interested in this, instead of that other thing I am interested in", but unfortunately it doesn't work that way. Also there is a lot of people who are focused on what you mentioned, which is great of course, and I admire the people who help that way too, very much. But very few have expertise in the same area as her, that makes her pretty unique, and since I can't stop people from eating meat I am grateful that there was someone who at least could help make it less painful for them. I know personally what a slaughterhouse can be like, my grandfather was a butcher (a good person tho, at least he always made sure to kill the cows with one hit on the head and he didn't make them suffer), but once he wanted to stop at a slaughterhouse to say hi to a person he knew, and there was a pig who escaped a truck and they were running after him, I can tell you that poor pig was terrified (and for good reasons), I cried so much ...

As she mentions she likes to work on concrete problems, to make things better right now, and it is when she spent a summer on a ranch that she witnessed how animals were treated and after that did her best to make it less painful for them. Because of her many animals, who would be killed anyway (unfortunately ) suffer a lot less.

Idon't have a problem with her as a person, but I find myself disagreeing with her a lot of the time. I wish people would stop treating her word as the bible as if she could speak on behalf of and understand the diverse strengths and needs of everyone on the spectrum.

I guess it's not her fault that she is being treated as an authority by the Autistic community and the by society in general.

I don't know, I think a lot of people on WP come off as egocentric and self-indulgent, but I also acknowledge that we(AS peeps) often do that, especially in text. I don't take it personally or anything, I'm sure I do it myself.

And Pandora Box... I'm curious to know what work you've done in regards to animal welfare. I understand from your posts that you are a vegan, what else have you done?

I'm not attempting to invalidate your position or imply that you don't have solid ground to criticize TG for not doing more than she has, I'm actually quite curious to know what you've done as well. You seem quite passionate about the subject.

True. A lot of people like her because eventho you may not agree with everything she says, she still helps a lot of people, and helps parents understand what their child might be going through. She gives conferences because she is asked and I think it is very generous of her to do that. When I see her sometimes I think omg I don't think I could ever be as social as she is, she sure has come a long way, and she was lucky to have a mother who was strong and didn't listen to doctors who were telling her to put her in institution.

I don't think she is seen as an authority, I mean not the same way as a psychologist or psychiatrist would be, but she is seen as someone who knows a lot about autism, and can speak from experience. And she is like all of us, she still learns more every day.

There is a good interview here in case you are interested, it is a little different then conferences, there is many videos one after the other so when the first one is done you have to let the next one load http://conversations.psu.edu/episodes/temple_grandin/