AS as a Crutch?

Post Reply New Topic

Actually, Dr. Asperger thought we were all geniuses.

Wow. So it's like having bionic parts, instead of needing a crutch.
Now I get it.

He said "For great success in science or art, the essential ingredient may be a dash of autism" (or something like that). In other words; anyone excelling at these subjects either must have AS or at least a ghost effect.
Then again, it's highly speculated that he has AS himself.

Reyairia, Dr. Asperger built up the whole "these people aren't useless to society if their strengths can be utilized rather than focusing on their weaknesses" to save such from getting slimed with a nerve agent.

He still spoke of the weaknesses, the impairments and deficits; which are the means to the strengths (social impairment = lack of social grace when looking for the truth; fixated/obsessed = specialization).

If one doesn't think that AS isn't an impairment, I can quote pages that paint a somber view; pages that post a good view compared to "classic" autism (but that's not saying much).

Also, AS isn't a "dash" of autism, it is autism with "adequate" speech.

Fine. If you want that one, go ahead; you failed to answer the one about the coats though. The point is not whether or not it's dangerous to other people; the point is that it's foolish to try to fit the world to each and every one of our specific needs.



I've yet to see such. In fact, I know a lot of NTs who prefer hanging out with only one to two people at a time.



You live in a world of the majority. If you are incapable of socializing with them due to things you cannot control, you are impaired. If it's intolerant, so be it; the world is intolerant.



It is ridiculous because it has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Presumably, said woman can still socialize with others and make friends if she wishes to. If others have a problem with her dress, that's their issue; I'm sure there will be just as many who accept her. On the other hand, someone who has great difficulty making and maintaining relationships because:
-He/she can only talk of his/her favorite interest and/or
-He/she cannot realize the other person is upset because he/she cannot read body language and therefore can come off as insensitive and/or
-Cannot make eye contact because of pain and thus gives off the impression of being rude and ignoring the other person (it does not matter whether they intend to appear such or not) and/or
-Asks rude question/makes rude comments without intending to offend the other person but doing such just the same and/or
-Cannot understand the fine print of social conventions, thus giving off the impression that he/she does not care, does not know, or is being rude towards the other people
Then he/she is socially impaired.



Your subjective opinion; in the end, it doesn't count for much in the world of billions of others, most of whom don't agree with you. Objectively, it's correct.



You've learned then, and while that may lessen your impairment, it means that at some earlier point, you were worse off than you are now. If people do not take the time to learn because they are "only" different, then they're not going to get any farther than where they started. You don't have to regard it as essential - honestly, I don't care whether you do or not - but it makes things easier in the end for those who can manage it. Not being able to due to pain is an impairment socially.



Thus, aspies are impaired. Each and every person may consider themselves to be completely fine, and that's good for them; it's good that they can accept themselves. However, when that cannot be accepted by the majority and that hinders something in their lives - whether it is education, a career, friendships, romantic partners, ect. - it becomes a problem.



Yes, at one time no one even knew about AS, and presumably people with the condition survived and possibly even thrived; they were treated no differently then. People still slip through the cracks now; people get through all of their childhood life and into their adult life before they're picked up, if they are at all. If you insist that you could get through life perfectly fine, then why did you get the dx? And if you were forced to (at a young age, perhaps), then why don't you just ignore it? There's no rule that says you have to tell everyone about it.



Generally speaking, a medical officer is far more objective than the person being evaluated. In your subjective opinion, you're perfectly fine, and ok, whatever. Don't try to push that on to everyone. If you mean that I'm oblivious to your disagreement with the medical officer, of course I am. I don't stalk you.



Let me see if I can explain this better. You said you are not impaired, you are only different. At the same time, you obviously expect some sort of special treatment because of your dx. So the line of reasoning goes something like this.
You are not impaired, only different.
The government/law sometimes ignores your dx.
Your difference is ignored by the government/law, and thus you are treated like every "normal" person.
You should get special treatment because you're different.
You should get special treatment because you're not impaired.
See what the problem with the last line? If you are only different, not impaired, there's no reason for you to be treated any differently than anyone else.



I really do wish people would stop comparing mental disorders of today to the treatment of the minority years ago. Yeah, the attitude absolutely sucked; you'll get no argument from me about that. And that attitude caused problems amongst those groups because of the way they were treated. However, had that attitude not been in place, the majority of those people would be absolutely "normal" like everyone else. I'm part Native American; it runs in my father's side. There are "normal" people there, just like everyone else; the minority blood doesn't affect our mental standing at all.
If you erased the entire history of bad attitudes towards minority groups like that and started all over again, you'd find that there's quite a difference between those with mental impairments and those with a different appearance. Behavior is not going to be that different from group to group, but it's obviously going to be different in the AS group, who will, as per usual, go about offending others without meaning to or knowing that they're doing it.



If you are not impaired, that label shouldn't matter worth a flip. A lot of employers aren't going to think to ask you that, and so long as you don't tell them, it's not going to make any difference to their view of you. As you said before, there was a time when aspies could roam freely without a label (because it didn't exist yet, not because it was inappropriate); obviously, some of them made it. If you so truly believe that you're not impaired, then go out and be like them. Don't tell people what your label is; don't even mention it, and see how you're viewed. If the majority of people view you as "normal", congratulations, you're a minority amongst a minority. If not, then chances are you're more than just different.

Honestly, it seems a bit of a cop-out to me to blame everyone else for your problems, which is essentially what you're doing in the paragraph quoted above. Not that it's an uncommon thing to do; humans rarely seem to like accepting the fact that they're not perfect. But sometimes you've got to take responsibility for yourself, for your actions. Unless I'm sorely mistaken, there isn't a restriction that comes with the dx that says "If you have AS, you can never hold a job in _____, _______, and ______ fields." If you really want something, and you're really willing to work hard at it, you can achieve it. It seems to me that you're not doing that though; you're sitting back and blaming the entire rest of the world for your apparent inability to hold your own.

I don't use it as an excuse. I know that when I've done something wrong, it's my fault, not my Asperger's.

RainSong, your experience in Aspieness is clearly inadequate, adn you are one of those people who are happy to let the NT world dictate to us how we should be, because in THEIR eyes we are impaired.

That's the same attitude as was taken towards blacks (savages), and Muslims (non believers). This is a culture we are talking about, not an impairment. Attitudes like yours fly in the face of human rights - and you just sit back and let it happen.

There is no impairment - and yes, by and large the world is intolerant. Why do you think the WTC was bombed hmm?

We fit in with what we need within reason. We have that right. You are trying to deny that right because you accept the NT label of impairment. You are letting them win, and hold us back from what we can really do (as observed by others on this thread per Hans Asperger's observations about "genius's").

Within her own religion, yes - along with a minority of tolerant Christians. Indeed, if others have a problem with their dress - that's their problem. But they don't see it that way, and that's my point and it's also why it's relevant. As long as she doesn't take off the berka - she gets avoided. Now who's fault is that? By your argument, she's impaired. She's not and we both know it. It's the same with Aspies - the issue is on the NT's side, not ours.

Finally, it is not a subjective opinion. It's a fact of life. I live it, and I've seen others in a similar position. As I said earlier, your experience of Aspieness must be way behind mine to hold such narrow and defeatist views. Instead of letting the NT world tell you what you are - stand up, and fight for your rights. You are NOT impaired, you are different. The weaknesses are placed on you by NT subjectivity and fear. Show some respect as well for Aspieness.

And "restricted" is not the same as MEDICALLY "impaired". This is a key communication issue between us because the rest of that particular section you were quite right - except the use of "impairment" in the context that WE are the problem when we aren't. The NT's are the problem.

And even though no one knew about AS - it was there nevertheless. It's why it is possible to go back and retrieve the attitude of the time. Also - it is the LAW to tell people who need to know if you have a diagnosis. You can get into serious trouble if you don't - and that's one NT rule that I agree with because it makes sense. I got the DX because I WAS having problems. I didn't know I was different and I tried to be NT, but I couldn't do it because I wasn't taking into account the difference, as I didn't know what it was. That wasn't my fault either - because no one was helping me make the discovery. It was like being in a foreign country and not being able to cope with the culture because you knew nothing about it, and no one was willing or able to tell you.

The DX in 1997 (when I was 32) was a relief, because now I was able to make the adjustment with the knowledge that was previously missing - and catch up. That catch up process isn't complete yet because I have to correct this "impaired" label so I can go back to work, after I clean up the mess that has developed in the meantime as I try to keep myself occupied in order to avoid becoming a vegetable (an ailment not exclusive to Aspies BTW and has nothing to do with the Spectrum).

Hence the need for the special treatment. I can't catch up alone, because there isn't enough time (I am 42) and I do need money to survive in the meantime as well. Besides, included in that special treatment is respect, which means being treated differently. It applies across the cultural world. There is no one set of rules for a "normal" person - because there is no such thing.

I suppose you're the sort of person who thinks blacks don't deserve special treatment after the way the world has treated them? (And in some ways is still doing in some parts of the world even today!) How about protection for Muslims who are being treated like potential terrorists for no good reason - they don't deserve special treatment? What about those who suffered in Vietnam - remember they were ignored for a long time!

Your point of view fails the test of common sense in a lot of ways I'm afraid - because the bottom line is, I don't think you really understand the ASD culture. There is no mental disorder - that's a creation of the NT world to isolate us as a penalty for being different. If there are any mental problems they were also brought on by the NT world, and are external to the root difference as such. It's the externals that demand the special treatment. Get rid of the externals - and everything will be fine.

But the NT world WANTS those externals, because they are afraid of us. They are the ones actually using AS as a crutch.

Does being black impair them? Does being jewish impair them? Is being a muslim impair them? Is having any different skin color, religion, nationality, impair them? No

Disabilities and skin colors, religion, nationaltiy, are different things than having a disability or health condition?



AS effects how we think and function, being black, being a muslin, doesn't effect their thinking and interaction.


Can you please start telling the rest of us people having mental retardation doesn't make them impaired either, same as bipolar disorder, anxiety, etc. (Sarcasm)

Yeah it's all the NTs fault we are this way (also sarcasm)


No one gets special treatments. They should all be treated equally. No discrimination, rights to freedom of speech and rights to their own beliefs, etc. No special privilidge.


Should I get special treatment like; not having to go to work when I am supposed to go in, not having to stay and finish my shift, not having to do the work there, being allowed to come in anytime I want, etc.

http://www.communicationsforum.org.uk/dict.html





http://lib.nmsu.edu/instruction/healthsci/vocab.html



Truly? Please, inform me how my experience in inadequate. I'm relatively sure you know next to nothing about my experience.

Frankly, I don't care who thinks we should be what. In my opinion, should is a rather pointless word; it affects nothing. I am not here to argue whether or not we "should" be something or something else. That is not my point. My point is that yes, we do have abnormal functioning in terms of social procedures, and thus, we are impaired in a social context. I don't get why people are oh so touchy about that word; it's nothing to be ashamed or proud of, it's simply a fact.



Exactly how am I denying anyone human rights? It is not a culture either; a culture shares a large variety of aspects in common. Aspies, beyond their symptoms, can be as different as night and day. In no way did I ever imply that aspies should have any less rights than anyone/everyone else; I believe that they should have just as many. In fact, by recognizing that they are impaired (see the definition above), it's providing them extra help by allowing them access to understand, therapy, and aid, if it's needed/wanted.



There is impairment. The fact of the matter is, we socially function differently from the majority of the population, and that can hinder certain things in life. I'm glad we agree that the world is intolerant; we live in a world where the majority defines how life is; you're going to have to either get used to it or lived in a shelter, non-realistic "world".

The bombers of the WTC were not a majority, by the by.



I never said we didn't have that right; you're misunderstanding. Since when does the definition of impairment ruin your life? You'll notice that you'll be more likely to get help because of your difficulties than if you went around proclaiming that you were perfectly fine. If you feel that you are able to interact with the majority, like the majority, you don't need extra help; if there was no impairment, then there would be no need to a dx.

In fact, by accepting that people have an impairment, they can strive to overcome it. There are always blessings and curses within life, and nothing's going to change that. However, with an improvement of what's troubling people, they are more likely to succeed in things they are good at. Getting help with social impairment is not going to lessen the person's intelligence or interested. In fact, intelligence and interests (beyond the obsessive talk of the latter) have nothing to do with social impairment.



I still fail to see how that has any relevance. Physical dress and mental conditions are two completely different things. She is not socially impaired; she is still able to function in a normal social manner when the chance arises. There is a place where everyone will not be accepted as they should be; it's a sad thing, but it's also true.



It's subjective. Your personal feelings are obvious, but that does not mean they are correct. In fact, because you are so obviously personally involved, you cannot be objective whatsoever in this matter. You do not understand both sides of the issue, nor do you seem to wish to; instead, you're holding onto your view without taking into account the difficulties that those on the spectrum face.

I am socially impaired, I'll be the first to admit it. I offend people, I make them think I'm not paying attention or that I don't care, and invariably I bore some with my talks. And I don't care. I happen to be much farther along than what is expected of someone in my age group, and the profession I'm interested in doesn't require all that much social work. Does that mean that sometimes I don't wish to communicate well with others? Not at all. Until the last year, I was completely isolated, and loneliness kind of really sucks; but I didn't understand how to function normally, so I couldn't do anything about it; if I tried, it went no where. Social impairment. I have made changes to accommodate the outside world of others - not that that changes my social functioning, - and as a matter of fact, I do respect aspies, the same as I respect everyone else. I respect aspies enough to recognize that they face difficulties in social communication that the majority does not. I respect that they are usually able to overcome that enough to do what they want to a certain extent. I respect them enough that I embrace both their good and their bad; by ignoring the difficulties that they face, I would be ignoring a large part of them; that is not respect, it is ignorance.



I am not talking about medically impaired, I'm talking about socially impaired. We have a problem with social functioning, and there's no way around that. The abnormalities that we display in social contexts are obvious and thus important enough for us. No one is a problem, whether they're aspies or NTs.



See, that's what I'm saying. You had problems significant enough to seek help; you were unable to be "normal", and there's nothing wrong with that. It's not your fault, and it's not anyone else's fault; it's just how it is. The word "impaired" has far too much emotional connotation attached to it, and that's why there seems to be an issue. Words are just that, words; they're only going to affect you so much if you choose not to let them.



What I'm trying to get across is more or less this: if you were not impaired (see the definition above), you wouldn't have problems adjusting to society the way you do. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that; there's no reason you shouldn't get help because of things that you aren't able to control. No one should look down on you because of it, and you shouldn't be any more limited than what you naturally are.

There are no completely "normal" people, I agree; however, there is the majority, and as much as it may suck, most of us will have to interact with them frequently. To try and adapt to some of their conventions, and thus make some things easier, is not a wrong thing to do. To try and deny them in every way you can isn't wrong either, but it's not going to make life any easier for you.



I believe that each and every person should have the same treatment and respect. That means protection for when they are being hassled, especially if they're being hassled unduly, equal opportunities, and other basic human rights. I believe they should be cared for, nurtured, and understood. I don't think it was right at all for those who suffered in Vietnam to have been ignored; I think that was a very wrong thing to do. No one is any less than another, despite what differences and/or impairments they may have; everyone is equally human.



Common sense dictates that there is a very, very small chance that you will be able to change the world; common sense says that you cannot speak for everyone, because there will always be people who disagree. I understand the ASD culture well enough; I've been here for a long time, and I've done a lot of research on it. It's a neurological condition that affects social development in multiple ways. By denying the troubles of people on the spectrum, you are denying that they have ever had to work to get to the point that they are now, and you're denying them the basic respect of acknowledging them for who you are. If you want to say that the majority of employers or some such are going to reject you for your condition, fine; I disagree, but it hasn't been tested enough to conclusively say one way or another. However, by no means do you have to tell other people such as those you want to befriend about it; if they notice that there's a difference (which they probably will) and react to it, you cannot say it's because of the label; they don't know about it. They're reacting to how you act, and those actions are impaired.

It is human nature to want stability, and for many, stability is what is normal. I'm not saying they're right - they're not, in my opinion - but that's how it is. That doesn't mean they're knowingly trying to eradicate us from society; some of the extremists are, but not everyone.

Like many people on these forums do, it's a fallacy to compare a genuine difference--physical due to environmental differences; ideologies due to social differences compared to genuine disabilities that have no environmental and/or social benefit (comparatively speaking); it's a fallacy to draw a logical argument from such in support of autism being from the same pool of differences as melanin distribution due to solar activity.

And you mine.



Who says it's abnormal? The NT world - not us, and that's the problem. It is NOT a fact just because the majority says so. Heck, the majority of the world said the Earth was flat when it never was! It is DIFFERENT. The impairment is a restriction brought on the NT intolerance and nothing else. Calling it a fact is the reason why certainly I get touchy - because it's BS!



By allowing the NT world to tell us what to do, instead of doing something about it.



The symptoms and the results of those symptoms - although variable - all come from the same source. THAT is the ASD culture in a nutshell, and it is indeed sharing a larger variety of aspects in common. Look at the number of agreements on this board alone - the number of "I know what that's like" comments. There are disagreements as well, but that happens within every culture. Recognising us as "impaired" does NOT provide what is needed - in fact it results in the opposite effect. Isolation by society. The people who need to understand are the NT's.



And who's fault is that? You're talking like it's ours. It's not - it's the NT's.



Or one does what I am doing - fighting such an unacceptable and intolerant situation. Intolerance won't go away without it. Neither situation that you refer to is acceptable to me.



Which was my point - notwithstanding what they actually did was an over reaction of mammoth proportions. But taking that fact out they had every reason to be angry.



Yet again, you are ignoring the issue of intolerance and more importantly what it causes. The definition of impairment has ruined my life because it cost me a job and rendered me bankrupt when I tried to fight it and lost. I'm still fighting but from a different angle now, and I will continue to fight it - because it's wrong and it's stopping me from getting a job. The label is stopping me from saying "I'm fine" because it's immediately cast off as a lie by the NT world. Anyway, who says it's compulsory to interact with the majority like them? We live in a diverse world and to say that is precisely why I said to you that you were saying we don't have the right.



Getting help for a social "impairment" is admitting to inferiority - which is what NT's exploit at a moment's notice. We are equals to the NT's. And as far as they are concerned - intelligence and interests have PLENTY to do with social differences. They are wrong of course, but that's what they do. The only thing that needs to be overcome is the intolerance of the NT's. That way, we can achieve whatever we want to without them getting in our way with restrictive labels that don't belong.



No she can't function in the normal social manner outside her own people, because she's been cast off. Kicked out. THAT is where the situations are the same, and therefore relevant.



I face the difficulties everyday, but not in the way you think we all do. I do look on both sides - I have to in order to understand. Slapping on blinkers inhibits knowledge and I don't do it. It's how I know how untenable the NT's position is. The problem is that there are Aspies who are resigned to being labelled impaired by the NT world. Why accept something that is so wrong and stops one from fulfilling their full potential just because we're told to "fit in"?



You aren't socially impaired. You are different, and there is some pride there and that's a good thing at least.



No, intolerance on the part of the NT world. You don't have to function "normally". Who said you HAVE to? The NT's? You DON'T! Because there's no such thing as "normal". The isolation is not your fault. It's theirs - just like the Muslim who wouldn't take off the berka. Isolated.



Well that's what you are doing to me. You are ignoring the difficulties I am having because you are in effect saying they don't exist - because you refuse to acknowledge the source (the NT's). If I have trouble socialising - I move on. I find that the best areas for me are within my interests, and even then sometimes there are issues. So I move on from the issue laden areas.



Yes there is. It's called yanking the NT world into line about difference. And you ARE talking medically impaired when you say there's no way around it (ie the fact that ASD's are all genetic in origin).



The first sentence is wrong, because there was a time - as I explained before - that we remained hidden. If the issues were that obvious the work of Hans Asperger would have come out a lot sooner than it did. They are not abnormalities - they are differences.



I wasn't even trying! The point is I had nowhere else to go.



Uh huh. Try telling the medical officer who branded me unfit for employment that! That's not words - that's a legal precedent that cost me a job that I would otherwise have been able to keep if they were prepared to adjust to the difference and exploit my strengths! That IS someone's fault - the medical officer AND the ex-employer who set it up!



Incorrect. I am having the problems I am because the NT world won't allow me to be me - a basic human right. They label it "impaired" just to make sure of it. Society should be accomodating us, not the other way around.



And yet they do, and I am! Hence the reason why there's PLENTY wrong with that!



So I should stop fighting? Do me a favour! Minorities have rights, and the majority should be the ones adapting conventions in order to fit everyone in. And I for one am not trying to deny them in EVERY way - just the ways needed.



OK, that's more like it. Glad to read that.



I'm not looking to change the world - just the part that affects me. And as far as speaking for everyone goes, when Aspies disagree - we do a good job of it. We have issues with banding together as a result because of little disagreements that blow completely out of proportion. The only way I really try to speak for all Aspies is to generalise enough to get the interest of the decision makers in order to set something up to allow all Aspies in that area to put their own views and not have to worry about upsetting another's apple cart (so to speak).



I am saying that the focus is wrong. The NT world is seeking to blame the difference - labelling it an impairment (medically). We have troubles - yes. But the issue is the way we are treated as a result of our differences. THAT is what we have to battle against. There is hard work involved but let's get the metaphorical "Ball Park" right first shall we? You can't play gridiron on a baseball diamond!



It's been tested enough for me - are you denying me my right to use my personal experience as a guide to my knowledge?



NO THEY ARE NOT!! Will you stop that? They are DIFFERENT! And THAt is why you HAVE to tell them. It's an obligation - on both sides, because I need to know if the environment is safe for someone like me. To deny information to an employer is actually an acceptable reason to terminate the employment - because you sold them (metaphorically speaking) a false bill of goods.



And by saying those last five words, you are allowing something that is wrong to be accepted as right.



Those in charge are. There are more morons around than you think - those who are willing to exploit the law in order to keep us out of influential positions that just may deprive them of their ego driven desires for money and power. And a lot of the others are sheep - blindly following the leader and not even bothering to think for themselves. That suits the NT's in charge. We won't be led around like that and that's why they are scared of us and feel the need to label us so that the sheep do their biding and isolate us as best they can.

Apologies to other readers for the long post!

And yet you'll note that I haven't accused you of being ignorant of aspies, whereas you clearly accused me of such.

You've yet to inform me how my experience is inadequate.



A difference, simply by its very definition, is abnormal. The majority defines what is normal because the majority is the most common; you cannot say it is normal for the grocery stores to solely sell peaches and chicken nuggets when most grocery stores sell far more than that; there may be a few that only sell those, but they are not the majority; they are abnormal (and their lack of supply would most likely impair them from selling as much as other stores, because most people eat more than peaches and chicken nuggets).

The world being flat still has nothing to do with this. It was not a fact, but the difference between socialization is a fact. You can deny all you want, but that won't make it false; when you deny that there is a difference (and thus, one is abnormal) between NTs and those on the spectrum, you are denying that there is a reason for the spectrum. It is not BS.



They are not telling us what to do. No where does it state that if you are impaired, you must immediately change your ways. You can continue living like you always have.



I feel like I'm communicating with a child. We. Are. Impaired. Our differences in communication are abnormal compared to the majority of society, and that impairs us. We are going to be isolated whether or not you give it a name, because of the way we act; people, no matter how well intentioned, are not going to be able to tell that we don't mean to offend others. You cannot continuously blame all of your problems on the NTs; take responsibility for yourself.



It's everyone's fault. You're being just as intolerant of them as they are being of you.



Intolerance will never go away; you are preaching intolerance now. You are denying facts to make yourself feel better, and that's getting no one anywhere.



How does your point have anything to do at all about whether or not aspies are socially impaired?

If you choose to be angry every single time someone holds an intolerant view, you'll be angry your entire life, so angry that it will cripple any and all potential you hold. There are always going to be people in the world, no matter what you do, that are going to be intolerant. They may not be intolerant over social communications, but they're going to be intolerant of something. Wasting your emotions on them is futile.



You are over-exaggerating what you view as intolerance time and time again.

I'm labeled as socially impaired due to a different disorder. I have a job, I have an education, I have a life. It didn't kill me, hasn't killed me, won't kill me. The only one ruining your life is you. You became so overly emotional at the thought of being "impaired" that you were willing to throw away your funds to have it removed. No one said that you have to be perfectly fine to function in society; it may be an abnormal functioning, which is technically impaired, but it's functioning just the same. There's no reason you cannot go in and sell yourself if you really, really, and really want a job that you're capable and suited for. Go in and tell them that yes, you are socially impaired, but that doesn't stop you from getting work done; explain to them that you are capable of doing social things, it justs means that you do them differently (which is abnormal); regale them with your successes, achievements, and skills. Don't conduct yourself like a bitter person who can't stand being different; conduct yourself like a professional who is confident that he can do it. If you really try, and apply for a lot of jobs, even if it's maybe not the one you would love to have, you're bound to be at least considered.

Of course we live in a diverse world, and I didn't say we had to act exactly like them, nor is it required to do such. What I said is that in many ways it's easier to adapt to them; by learning some of the things that turn them off, we can make a better impression if need be. It doesn't change the fact that we are different though, and by being different, impaired.



You believe having an abnormal way of functioning, a way of being different, is to be inferior? Your problem is not the label, your problem is your attitude towards it. Of course we're equal to NTs; everyone is equal. So explain it to them; tell them what it affects and how, don't just sulk and think they should automatically know. You're still different though, still impaired; that's just how it is, whether you like it or not. I can say that I naturally have pink eyes, but that doesn't mean that I do or that I ever will; it's a fact. You can still achieve with the labels, you just have to try harder, which you seem opposed to doing.



The same is true for any culture; in some cultures, our revealing dress would be considered inappropriate. She can still function in the same social manner, however, if she is given the opportunity, much like said people with revealing clothes can function in the same social manner is given the chance in other societies. There are certain things that carry throughout the human race, and the ability to read into social cues is one of them; the cues may be different from culture to culture, but overall, they still exist. Someone who can read cues in one culture can eventually learn them in another. However, someone who is born without the ability to read or understand those cues isn't going to learn them; they cannot function normally in a social setting no matter where it is. The woman can if she has the opportunity; the aspie can't, regardless of the opportunity. Hence, there is a difference between the situations, and it is not relevant at all.



And those difficulties create feelings within you that you obviously cannot lose long enough to be objective. You may look on both sides, but you don't look at them with the same understanding; you are inclined to believe "your" side, and that's what you do; your opinion is subjective. There's no where that says you have to be dxed if you suspect that you're an aspie; at the age you did it, you cannot blame it on your parents, and you need to take responsibility for the fact that you went in there fully aware that you may not like what they told you; they are experts on it, whereas you are not. You are socially impaired because of your abnormal functioning in a social situation, like the rest of the people of the autism spectrum; that is part of the spectrum, and that's how it is. Your potential is only decreased if you allow it to be; if you don't want to work and be strong enough to convince people that you're capable of doing what you want, that's your fault. There are plenty of people with the same label that have achieved in this world.



I am socially impaired. I cannot function in the same manner as the majority does because I cannot understand them, nor can I give off the signals that they understand knowingly or not. That is a difference, which is abnormal, which is an impairment in the social world. Whether I choose to have pride for it or not is my own decision; it's a subjective choice. (For the record, as I'm sure you'll bring this up, no, I don't wish to be normal. I'm perfectly content where I am, and I'm sure I wouldn't be near as happy if I was like the majority. I am, however, socially impaired; I accept that, and that's fine with me.)



It is not intolerance because they're not aware of why I'm different. All they know is what's natural to them; they see the same signals day after day after day amongst people who operate like they do, and I give off all the signals of being unwilling to communicate with them and ignoring them. They are making assumptions based off of what they have learned from other people. If they were well informed on the matter - which I don't choose to go around telling everyone I meet - perhaps they would see it differently. However, I don't expect them to know such, because they don't need to know such in relation to me. There is normal in some contexts; there are certain social aspects that are shared throughout the majority, and that is normal. It is no one's fault.

The berka has nothing to do with this still. People have knowledge of why she wears that, whereas they don't have the knowledge of why we communicate differently. If they choose to isolate her, it's a conscious decision based on her dress with the full realization that she may be perfectly "normal" in social contexts; if they choose to isolate us, it's a decision based on our behavior, which, as far as they are aware, shows that we are not interested; as far as they know, we really aren't interested. Why should they continue to pester someone who, as far as they know, doesn't want to talk to them? Honestly, it's foolish to expect everyone going around asking people who don't seem interested in talking, "Are you of the autism spectrum?"



No, it's not what I'm doing to you. I'm fully aware that you have difficulties, and I've said such before; however, I disagree with the "source" of your problems. It doesn't matter whether we agree over that or not; the differences are still the same. If you move on from them, then good for you.



Have fun with that. Actually, there are quite a lot of people who are ok with differences once they're informed about them; believing that everyone who is NT is automatically against you is intolerant against them. You're not going to make much progress in getting them to accept differences if you go around telling them that they're all being intolerant.



Undoubtedly, however, they were still noticed by others. People were not as dependent on mental health in those days though, and they didn't feel the need to go in for an explanation. I doubt that made it any easier for those back then. Besides, for a time people on the spectrum were diagnosed with other things; they weren't called AS or autistic, but they still had labels, such as schizophrenia.

Differences are abnormal. There's nothing wrong with being different, and there's nothing wrong with being abnormal.



Whether or not you tried isn't important. What's important is that you obviously had difficulties in functioning in a social manner.



Did he actually put in your file that you are unfit for employment, or did he just label you impaired? There's a difference between the two.



You have to actually try for your rights. You can't sit back and expect people to hand them to you; in an ideal world, yeah, you could, but this world isn't ideal. Impaired is a word; I defined it for you last time, but apparently that's just not working for you. You can still be you. You have to explain how you're able to do well in society to get a job, but everyone has to do that to a certain extent.

And no, society cannot accommodate every single person. It would be unrealistic and damaging to society at large. The world does not revolve around you, as it does not revolve around anyone; you have to be able to adjust to how it is. Being stubborn and refusing to try will get you nowhere.



So try. Get out there and prove to people that you are just as capable of everyone else.



So you should start fighting in a way that will get you somewhere. Trying to change the world won't get you very far at all; trying to convince the people that you need to believe in you that you're just as good as everyone else will. Of course the minorities have rights, but no, the majority is under no obligation to try and adapt to fit everyone in. As I said before, that's unrealistic. The majority caters to itself and society as a whole, and you can whine about it all you want, but that's not going to change anything. Because if all you do to try and further yourself is act like you're acting here, you will get absolutely nowhere.



I'm really not always a witch. I'm just a fairly realistic one.



Which is still a very large part; it's not realistic, I'm sorry. People have to compromise to get things done; you have to change a bit too. Yeah, aspies seem to take disagreements a lot more seriously than most. It's not good to try and speak for all aspies at any time though; it's false advertising, and the moment another group of aspies steps up to argue your ideas, the people who you campaigned to are going to suspect everything you said.



And I'm saying that the focus is right. Most people aren't blaming anyone; the problem comes when you have extremists who start trumpeting about saying that they - and everyone like them - blame the other group. It is an impairment, whether you like it or not; if you're not going to accept it, then don't, but that doesn't change it. You are not going to be able to change everyone to accept you, because that's how life is. If that makes me a defeatist, then so be it; I happen to be a content defeatist because I didn't overburden myself with unrealistic expectations.



And while that may be for you, you are not everyone who is labeled impaired. I'm labeled impaired, but I have a job; obviously, our experiences aren't the same, and I'm not going to go around insisting that all employers are going to accept you despite the impairment label. I'm denying you to speak for everyone in order to further your views; you don't have a right to do that anyway. There is no objective study concerning such.



Shouting is really unattractive. I'm not talking about employers right now, I'm talking about people you want to be friends with. You are insisting that you are not impaired socially, which means that you are not abnormal in a social context, which means that you have no differences in interacting with others; hence, you should be perfectly fine with making friendships and relationships without ever informing them of your dx.



I never said it was right; I said that it was how it is.



You're being paranoid in regards to this; I never have patience for conspiracy theories.

Everyone's ought to see TLPG's blog.

what the asdhating blog at blogspot? Yeah it is a nasty bit of opinionated,egotistical, biased and delusional bile and has already got two members being attacked from quotes used here. There will be more give him time. TLPG is too radical for reason and rationale.

I don't really bother explaining to people why I have social issues. I just ignore them, until they get annoyed and go away. *shrug* I try to explain to my mom sometimes that I can't really help some things, but she just has the "Well you're just gonna have to learn to blah blah blah" attitude about it. Totally helpful

Nope. Mood swings and pessimism come and go but if I go around saying I think I might have AS or be on the spectrum or whatever then that'll become a stigma; no one will understand, it'll get distorted, etc. . .
I think I can manage to come off as NT provided I had enough sleep anyway. . .