AS and violence

Post Reply New Topic

[461 dots removed by lau]

Last edited by Zwerfbeertje on 31 May 2008, 9:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

ok what if you it seemed like the whole school was calling you names. kids would follow you and kick the back of your shoes. they would still your bag and laugh at you, you tried meditation but they laugh at you and go so far as o fart in your face. you are unable to tell the teacher for being afraid that you would not be able to repeat there names, remember there faces or make it worse. how would you like to be called Padleigh, everything you said to them would become the topic of another reason to pick on me and if you try to ignore them it gets worse.

[461 dots removed by lau]

Last edited by Zwerfbeertje on 31 May 2008, 9:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

Curiously enough, I don't track many numbers for extended periods of time in my head. I habitually process them into trends and make adjustments as necessary.
It seems vague because all I was expressing were the trends. Not so helpful in proving my point, persay....
I'll try at ballpark figures though.

Ok... I'd have to say, if one accounts for all of my aggressive behaviour... approximately 80% of it is a direct result of interference by other people.... predominantly neurotypicals. The remaining 20% is primarily allocated to technical malfunction... i.e. gaming issues.
I also spend less than 5% of my time in a state of aggression.

Observations of neurotypicals going about their daily business, on average, indicate that although they suffer less dissonance with other people and more with technicalities (closer to a 50 / 50 distribution)... that they demonstrate equivalent aggressive tendencies to myself.


Now naturally, my data set is very limited since I haven't had the oppurtunity to observe other Aspergians for any extended period of time... but as it stands, I have no reason to believe that my being Aspergian makes me any more prone to aggression or violence than anyone else. I simply have different ways of expressing it.... and somewhat different causes for it.


.

So... does that help?

.

Where have I claimed anything like this? Either cut the trolling out or say hello to sanity por favor...

In retrospect, I suppose I wasn't really expressing myself clearly...

If this makes any more sense.... I was suggesting that simply being Aspergian does not appear to result in any more aggression or violence on its own than not being. It is simply that due to our social shortcomings, we are more frequently thrust into awkward situations where ANYONE, Aspergian or otherwise, would typically respond with aggression.

This might in some respects demonstrate itself as an aggressive trend for Aspergians, but that is misleading because it would not demonstrate itself at all in a non-social or non-neurotypical environment... and is simply an artefact of biased data. To become violent or aggressive in situations of certain difficulty and / or potential stress is a human attribute, and not an Aspergian attribute.

.

I am not violent, and there was only one guy I ever hit at school - who was picking on me. Being violent is not in my nature and I am more of an internalizer.

However, there is a violent streak that runs in my mother's family. My mom had a grandmother who threw knives at her children. Mom was not allowed to visit her and there houses were next to each other. Someone has suggested to me that ggrandmother had bipolar depression. I believed that she perceived children as being a threat, and then lashed out at them. She perceived a threat where there really was not one. I'm not implying that she had AS, but depression can lead to violence, particularly if it puts you, as Zwerfbeertje says, in fight-or-flight mode.

Z

when i was in my violent time i think i was depressed. i was quite sad and often thought about harming my self.

[461 dots removed by lau]

Last edited by Zwerfbeertje on 31 May 2008, 9:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

Yes, trolling. When you make unsubstantiated claims, and don't respond to questions about them, that's considered trolling. So.. For the second time, where did I..."complain about aspies being seen as violent" and "proceed to spread similar mud about other groups"? As well as...Claim that anyone on the spectrum had any "innate aggression"?

[461 dots removed by lau]

Last edited by Zwerfbeertje on 31 May 2008, 9:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

GUYS!

Mediation moment.


Your arguing is deviating from the realm of practicality here.
We know what trolling is: the process of posting content primarily or soley to provoke an extreme reaction from others. I've done it enough to know, and I don't believe either of you were doing it intentionally in any sense.

Now, if you two are going to argue could we at least cut out any assumption that the other person is wrong or not getting it? Could we try to tackle this objectively? ^_^;;
We're all rational beings here, yes?

.

I read and responded to your post in a reasonable manner initially, and only resorted to what I though was behavior similar to yours after the second derisive post you made. I initially asked you "Where did I complain about aspies being violent? And how is linking an article by a Ph. D. spreading mud?" and you did not respond and continued making derisive and incorrect statements about what I stated as per the second link in this paragraph. As for making certain parts of your posts bold, it did not change what they literally stated at all, and was only to illustrate the portions I was referring to in my last post. Take that as you will.
No, I called you a troll because you made unsubstantiated statements about what I've posted. In this case, you stated that I complained about aspies being violent, which I did not do, stated I was spreading mud about different groups, which I also didn't do, although this is a bit more open to interpretation since you could conceivably think that any discussion about some other group you don't agree with is spreading mud, although AFAIK an article by a Ph. D. is generally not seen as mud, unless of course a compelling and logical argument is presented to show that the article is flawed, and lastly, you mentioned asking for sources about 'innate aggression of aspergians' that according to you was the OP's (my) claim, which also is not the case.

Misrepresenting the position of another is generally referred to as a straw-man argument, and honestly it's fine by me if you feel you need to take this approach with what I've posted, but regardless, it's still trolling.
No. In my initial posted I stated...Of note, I initially stated that I felt someone on the spectrum isn't any more of a threat to others than anyone else. I also did not say that co-morbid conditions were linked to violence, rather I stated I was thinking about how much of a, which could be a little to no, link there was between those co-morbid conditions and the probability of someone on the spectrum doing something violent.
I did not do so as I have explained, and also I did not make the generalization you speak of. The only thing I did was posit a topic for discussion that I was thinking about, making no definitive statements, at leas with respect to what you claimed I stated, and later linked an article by a Ph.D. as something for those who are interested in this topic to ponder and discuss.

If you wish to continue to create straw-men and troll my thread, feel free. That being said, I've explained my situation thoroughly and if you continue to make false statements regarding what I've said I will report you so that hopefully this discussion can continue in a constructive manner w/o any more off topic antics.

Mr YesPlease.... excuse my need to butt into other peoples' arguments (I'm such a hypocrite like that)...


... But would you please quit it?
It doesn't matter who is right and who is a fool.... if either is really the case. Pointing out each others' logical fallacies isn't making any more of a point in the original context of the argument...
So could we please put the egos aside for now?


.

I think the reason this has devolved into a more "emotional" then logical debate is because of the danger in positing a blanket statement can then be used by unethical persons to do harm to people.

I don't think it is wrong to ask the question but the problem comes when some "unethical people" then take the statement..."autistics/depressed/schizophrenics/non Aryan people are violent." and use it to further some nefarious agenda. Anyone with a knowledge of human history have seen many examples of this process.


The danger is in making the statement.."aspies are violent, lack theory of mind, lack empathy, etc" out of context and with a particular value judgement of the majority gestalt.

As many here who said they did think they are more likely to be violent have shown...there are several reasons for their violent actions and the majority of them are "responding to violence and abuse in a self defensive manor". That would seem to indicate that the more important question to be asked is..."Do aspies experience more abuse and more need to defend themselves?"

Even aspies who may react violently do to sensory overloads or frustration when trying to communicate with people with a different neurology....show that the statement needs to take such neurological experiences into account when deciding if the behavior is "attacking violence" rather then "defending violence". Perhaps the problem is in the word chosen..."Violence" carries a lot of negative emotional connotations.

[461 dots removed by lau]

Last edited by Zwerfbeertje on 31 May 2008, 9:35 am, edited 1 time in total.