What's up with all the hate on" neurotypicals"

Post Reply New Topic

You know, I love a wide variety of autistic and NT people.And I understand how it can seem to someone that a lot of NT's are bullies.

But to my shock, I discovered someone with suspected aspergers who was just a straight up mysoginist. I mean he was talking all kinds of bad hateful things against women, even calling them cuss words.

It made me spiritually sick. Like my soul was suffering from all those toxic words. I was trying to reason with him, but it just was not possible. And the time came to just leave him to himself.

He must be a miserable person inside, unable to find a shred of happiness.

It hurt me worse because I have some female friends who I love. Both autistic and NT. I felt like I had to stand up for them, but I probably should have left that whack job alone.

One seems shy, and the other seems exhibitionist.

^^I have had to learn to ignore people like that and not give them the power to make me upset. I have had to deal with teachers and other people who do not understand me and want me to do things their way, and I have had to reclaim my personal power and do things my way.

Because they're sub-human scum (joking)

Psychological projection, maybe? Perhaps they are projecting all their anger on all neurotypicals. I imagine the feeling of being misunderstood for so long just kind of builds up until one is left with nothing but anger and hatred towards the rest of humanity. I was at that point once.

Now that the topic of Social-Masturbation has been mentioned... I will quote an EBTX page...

Stupid Airport Security
Here in Texas at Dallas-Fort Worth Airport, new security procedures have been enacted like those of other American and European airports. Taken as a whole, these security measures constitute nothing more than a variant of what I have described elsewhere as "Social Masterbation".

The idea here is to "jerk" everybody off to the tune of terrorism. When one accepts the inane demands of these security experts ... it is equivalent to kneeling before them and sucking their cocks. They know it ... and ... so do you when you unzip your bags for inspection. For ... the inspection of a woman's purse ostensibly to check for the tools of a terrorist (after it has passed through an impersonal x-ray machine), is equivalent, psychologically, to "panty sniffing".

They are not looking to expose a terrorist plot ... they are looking to expose your buttocks (or vagina) to penetration ... thus confirming their dominance and ... therefore ... their importance.

Skipping to towards the end of his page of thoughts on Air-Port Security...

The greatest damage done to the airlines ...

Was ... and IS being done by these security psycho-sexual lunatics.
Possibly to be exceeded by the lawyers who may cite with great exuberance, the failure of the airlines to show omniscience.
Somebody forgets to check a bag and they call all the passengers back off the plane to "rescreen". Etc, etc, etc. You know the drill ... the horror stories of needless delays and insults heaped upon the public in the name of social masterbation.
Now we got a "shoe bomber" ... a literal "Nike missile".

So don't be surprised if you have somebody demand that you take off your shoe for "inspection" ... visually ... and by Old Yeller ... to see if you made a Claymor mine out of your wingtips.

God help us if some terrorista
shoves a stick of dynamite up his ass
The body cavity inspection station, aka B.C.I.S. ... brought to you by Tronolane ... "Bend over, John Q. Public ... it's for homeland security".

Thanks for that Kuraudo777. I appreciate your personality and practical responses.

Yes, knowing when to stop the argument, or avoid it altogether, is a social skill, and plenty of people suck at it. I also respect those who avoid conflict and agree to disagree.

My problem is that even people who would prefer to avoid conflict may still get caught up in it now and then. Wouldn't it make sense for everyone, including conflict avoiders, to still learn to follow logic and calmly and respectfully disagree with others?

I agree that always seeking conflict is harmful. Isn't always avoiding it also harmful in a different way? I mean, even though you say you tend to avoid conflict, you still know how to respectfully discuss things and disagree with others because your ideas are important. Someone who never does this, or someone who frequently lets their emotions rule their disagreements/conflicts: I think both of these are deficits that our society should better address.

Also, sorry to hear about your bad experiences with diagnosis-happy professionals. That's awful.

About all the people who think they have this or that disorder, I think you're right. It's nice to categorize and explain symptoms or problems, so that's why people label themselves.

Seeing people on this site literally say that non-autistics are horrible people and autistics are superior because we "have higher" IQs (which I don't have but whatever) just sounds like another way to be ignorant and prejudice. Just replace NT with black, Hispanic, Jewish or native.

Especially considering the fact that without NOn autistics a lot of us would be dead- I know I would be.

Very good point.

'Try to' is different from 'do'.

PS I'm not saying I'm in disagreement with you - I'm simply looking for examples to back up the claim.



Oh for goodness sake.

My statements to you have been entirely objective. In speaking to those I know I also say things such as 'examples please'. I like to get to the point and deal with facts.

If I wanted to disrespect you I'd very directly insult you. Which I haven't done.

I care not if I sound like 'some professor'. I have not insulted you or disrespected you. Nor have I assumed a position of 'superiority'. I'm asking for concrete examples to back up the claims you are making.

Your manner of speaking to me is not the manner of speaking I would use with you. Yet I don't correct you for it, or describe you as acting 'superior'.



With regards the OP's question of 'What's up with all the hate on neurotypicals' - I'd have to say: I don't know. I personally feel autism garners far more public support/attention etc than many other conditions.

'NT's' also have made considerable effort to understand autism - whether it be those in the medical community, carers, parents - even other children at school.

As well as this, autism receives considerable funding from charitable bodies.

I'm very proud of what 'NT's' have done to help not only in terms of public understanding of autism - but also in terms of supporting (financially & otherwise) those on the spectrum.

Is it perfect? No. But no system is.

But we do have it better than many others.


I say to those who 'hate on neurotypicals' - show a little more respect.

It could be argued NT's do more for us than we do for them.

The term "neurotypical" was originally used by the autistic community to specifically refer to people who aren't autistic.

I don't like the word "allistic". It implies that "allism" is some kind of condition that non-autistic people all have. I don't see what's wrong with just saying "not autistic".

Plus, there are many non autistic people who are still not NT. Don't forget about schizophrenia, and people who have other severe and profound mental disabilities.
I don't consider sociopaths as neurotypical either. I think this whole "99%" thing is a make believe and erroneous statistic. I don't know what the real numbers are, but I highly doubt it is quite so close.

But we're all just mincing words that are relatively new to our vernacular. The definitions are ambiguous at best. And I feel a debate like that is rather pointless. :/

You know, attention isn't necessarily a good thing. In the case of autism, a lot of it has been bad as a lot of it is based around myths of an autism epidemic and that vaccines cause autism and other nonsense.


Not all charitable bodies are charitable. Most money put into autism does not actually go into helping people on the spectrum, but to dead-end research. Many autism researchers are in the field not because they actually care about autism or the people with it, but because they know there is a lot of money in autism research, and because of all the attention is they can push so new "revolutionary" theory about autism, regardless if it's at all based in reality, they can make a name for themselves in the psychology community.


[/quote]
While it certainly could, actually arguing that is exactly how to go about offending disabled people as you're basically implying they have nothing to contribute to society.




It's a tongue-in-cheek criticism of the pathologization of autism. I don't like it just because I don't like the word.

'Tis agreed by Consensus-Opinion that Aspies have done more to Improve/Advance Civilisation/Society than any NT ever has. Talking about things like inventions, break-through discoveries, basically being like a distinction in Ancient Chinese Wisdom : Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; Teach a man to fish and you feed him for life... here, NTs would be more like the invention-distributors, whilst HFAs are more like the inventors.

To me tbh both are terms that were made up by the "autistic community". Which probably really means coined by one person on the internet and went viral. Or some similar scenario.

Pretty similar to me as the term "Muggles" from Harry Potter. And pretty much used the same way.