Getting Public about neurodiversity.

Page 1 of 2 [ 27 posts ] Go to page 1, 2 Next

Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

22 Dec 2007, 7:01 pm

Its time we started getting public about AS in adults!

We also need to present a loud voice to the public at large regarding our opposition to checmical castration of our minds. By that I mean a "cure" as defined by organizations such as CAN.

I submit that we write heavily to sources such as ann landers (annies mail box). The email address is [email protected]

Drop them a short note explaining the dangers and pointlessness of biomedical "cures", and the good traits of AS and high functioning autism. The column is syndicated across north america and is a huge point of contact for us and parents that havent swallowed the curbie message.

Do it. You know you want to!

Unknown_Quantity
Velociraptor

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

22 Dec 2007, 10:37 pm

That's a main reason I want to get into Big Brother.

Of course, if I don't get in, I'll probably start posting more videos on YouTube or something to raise awareness.

_________________
IN GIRVM IMVS NOCTE ET CONSVMIMVR IGNI

Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

23 Dec 2007, 12:38 am

Unknown_Quantity wrote:

That's a main reason I want to get into Big Brother.

Big Brother is a public freak show. If you want to be seen as a freak by all means apply to go on there. If you want to be seen as a proper human being there are other means of raising awareness.

Unknown_Quantity
Velociraptor

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

23 Dec 2007, 4:14 am

Not UKBB. I'm Australian.

_________________
IN GIRVM IMVS NOCTE ET CONSVMIMVR IGNI

Zwerfbeertje
Deinonychus

Joined: 6 Sep 2007
Age: 124
Gender: Male
Posts: 362

23 Dec 2007, 4:34 am

I thought that as an adult you could choose not to take medication?

Danielismyname
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Apr 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,565

23 Dec 2007, 4:49 am

Fuzzy wrote:

...good traits of AS and high functioning autism.

I'm still trying to find these supposed "good traits" people are talking of: I must ask, what exactly are they?

I mean, everything that's "good" in me, I've seen it displayed in "normal" people. It confuses me.

Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

23 Dec 2007, 5:59 am

Ok. I will tell you one that is both a bad trait and a good trait.

Take me for example. I have a weak symbology..table.. for lack of a better word. In my mind, I dont connect a sensory event with a meaning very well. This is pretty common for AS. In fact, its somewhat critical to several points of the definition. Its a bad trait, right? Not always and not in every way.

Say someone said "I didnt like that talk we had last night". The implications to an NT style mind would be "I didnt like the values you expressed, the opinions you held." which further insinuates "I like you less now than I did before". I know you better, but like you less.Feelings are a little(at least) hurt.

Now to me, as a man with AS, I think back, remember that the conversation was about politics, and who we felt would win the next election. The other persons opinion wasnt the same as mine, but the fact that we felt differently was intellectually stimulating, and I can like that person more for showing a modicum of intelligence.

Upon hearing "I didnt like that conversation we had...", the speaker reaffirms themselves as being an independent thinker, and also not afraid to speak their mind. Even though I may be aware of the subtle meaning of their statement, I can choose to disregard it.

In that sense, an NT is more a slave to their instincts, whereas an Aspie is not.

Now If you were inquiring about aspie/savantry skills, I have some very minor ones too. For example, I ALWAYS know what time it is. Just this morning I was laying in bed, thought to myself, "Its 11am, I should get up". I cannot see the time until I sit up... yup, it was 11. Meals are like that too, I eat instinctively at 4pm. Many times I have stood up, went and started preparing something like chicken. I sit down to eat and flip the TV on.. its 4pm.

I can measure things pretty well too. My dad asked an innocent question about the size of his wrist; I said "8.5 inches" and we measured it. it was 8.25.

Dads the same way with measuring things. Once, as a teen, I challenged him to an artillery style game.. it was the first time he played, and about the 1000th for me. He knew the angles instantly and only had to do minor adjustments on shot power. Of 10 rounds, I beat him the first time, and he got me every time after that.

And those are good examples of a weak grasp of symbols. A person would have a preconceived notion based on body image or whatever else. A aspie has their perception influenced less by what they "know" as opposed to what they sense.

And thats problematic in NT society.

In short, you will never find ANY good or bad trait in AS that do not also appear in the general populace. Its faulty to expect that. ..does that offend you to hear that?

Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

23 Dec 2007, 6:08 am

Zwerfbeertje wrote:

I thought that as an adult you could choose not to take medication?

Correct. But there are always ways to circumvent that, or its possible that organizations such as CAN or an individual's family could effectively prevent us from reproduction. The big battle for neurodiversity will be played out in this coming generation of ASDs and the next.

For example, how many down syndrome people ever marry? Yet many are sufficiently independent as adults.. and they certainly are social people. They tend to have friends with the populace at large and also organize themselves into DS social groups.

I mean, I AM an adult, but many here are simply teens still. They have little legal recourse for steering their destinies until they reach adulthood, and in that time, they could be declared unfit to maintain their own affairs indefinately.

Danielismyname
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Apr 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,565

23 Dec 2007, 7:11 am

Fuzzy wrote:

In short, you will never find ANY good or bad trait in AS that do not also appear in the general populace. Its faulty to expect that....

That's the thing: we're perfectly "normal" except the core deficits we exhibit, said deficits are what put us into the autism/Asperger's box. Much like an individual with any other neurological condition, they're normal except for the symptoms they experience due to it (MS for example). The bad traits we have due to our disorder/"difference" you won't find in normal people because they don't have AS/AD, the good traits we [possibly] have, they will [possibly] have too.

The only outward difference in how we interact verbally is our lack of care for social conventions (that's if we can interact with others, many of us cannot), this will allow us to make points no matter how..."rude" we appear; we seek the factual truth rather than social standing by submitting.

ixochiyo_yohuallan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 500
Location: vilnius (lithuania)

23 Dec 2007, 7:36 am

What confuses me, personally, is the normal vs. not normal distinction. I've never run into "normal" so far - perhaps someone could draft a primary species description for me so that I could spot it next time?

Danielismyname wrote:

(that's if we can interact with others, many of us cannot)

This is going to be totally OT but: in all the books I've read, including personal accounts, I've come across very few, if any, cases where an autistic person would be altogether unable to interact with others. Stereotypical, limited, odd or non-traditional (e.g. typing-to-speech communication device) interaction doesn't count, because however incomplete/faulty/strange etc. it could seem to somebody, it is interaction nevertheless. I could start quoting case histories and such but I don't think it is relevant.

Specifically, I've never, ever come across any description of someone with AS (as opposed to "classic autism") who would be incapable of any interaction whatsoever.

No intention to start an argument here - I just don't like strange statistics without any references, and I especially don't like them being applied to everybody on the spectrum, including people one has never seen and met.

Danielismyname
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Apr 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,565

23 Dec 2007, 7:45 am

Interaction-definition in the context of autism (social impairment).

From Gillberg's AS criteria:

Quote:

(a) inability to interact with peers

I cannot interact with people out there in the world, barring professionals in a mechanical setting (most people with classic autism can do this, barring the absolute worst cases); the psychologists I see at Attwood's say that I'm not unique, and they say I have AS. I cannot initiate/sustain a conversation at all in a social setting, and mechanical settings away from professional visits.

O and "normal" equates to what's objectively defined as such, i.e., those without a neurological condition that affects one's ability to interact with others.

AngelUndercover
Velociraptor

Joined: 2 Dec 2006
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 408
Location: somewhere else

23 Dec 2007, 7:51 am

Danielismyname wrote:

Fuzzy wrote:

In short, you will never find ANY good or bad trait in AS that do not also appear in the general populace. Its faulty to expect that....

That's the thing: we're perfectly "normal" except the core deficits we exhibit, said deficits are what put us into the autism/Asperger's box.

I disagree. It's not just my deficits that make me different. I don't look at the world the same way an NT does. There's some overlap, but my mind does work differently. It's not just a matter of being without skills that NTs have.

(And I do know not all NTs are the same... I don't mean to come across like I'm saying they are.)

ixochiyo_yohuallan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 500
Location: vilnius (lithuania)

23 Dec 2007, 8:24 am

Danielismyname wrote:

Interaction-definition in the context of autism (social impairment).

From Gillberg's AS criteria:

Quote:

(a) inability to interact with peers

Technically, what you're doing right now is interacting, quite successfully, with me

(and no, I don't accept that "this is not real interaction", because we understand each other and are exchanging ideas and opinions, which is a huge part of what interaction is; it could have been a typing/writing vs. speech or typing/writing vs. typing/writing exchange while being in the same room, and it would have also been interaction).

Probably, what you meant was "inability to interact in a social setting", "inability to interact verbally while speaking face-to-face with an unfamiliar person" etc., whatever specific issue it could be. This is not utter inability to interact; it is interaction that is selective and limited to certain settings. Utter inability to interact would mean: being illiterate, incapable of comprehending language (whether verbal or sign language), and basically just sitting in one place being absolutely unresponsive. I doubt that I've ever come across a description of such a state that would be completely certifiable, because even in the severe cases of what is termed LFA, is an open question whether the person really doesn't understand language - they may, and may start using it if they are ever given access to alternative means of communication (like it happened with Sue Rubin).

You are talking about a diagnostic manual, which, by definition, is pure theory, and is not even meant for describing every single person out there with 100 percent accuracy. I am talking about real people and their lives which I have read about (and I keep reading about more all the time). Sweeping generalizations like this perhaps help a professional make a diagnosis, but, honestly, next to none of the cases I've come across involved a person who would match that description utterly and completely.

I'm sorry if I come across as pedantic and picking on people's phrasing too much - it's just that in cases like these, a word or a couple words may make all the difference, and entirely change the meaning of a statement.

Oh, and I'd just rather not call "normal" all the disruptive, abusive individuals I've met who have no (diagnosable) mental or neurological condition. They, too, are incapable of relating to other people in any adequate way - only the incapacity is extremely different in nature, and, frankly, I'm not sure which type of incapacity is worse.

Danielismyname
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Apr 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,565

23 Dec 2007, 8:41 am

That's why I'm speaking in the context of autism and its definition of inability to interact [socially] in person, and mechanically too in many aspects. I cannot talk to students in a mechanical setting, peers; the same in a social setting too; again, I'm not unique.

Not all people with Asperger's need to meet that criterion in Gillberg's, but it's still there, and many of us are unable to interact in person with our peers.

I'd still like to know what "good" traits autism has bestowed upon me, especially when the closest individual in person to me has all of the "good" traits I have (she's "normal").

anbuend
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Jul 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,039

23 Dec 2007, 12:44 pm

Danielismyname wrote:

Actually, from what I've heard, while we do some of the same things as others, we do them in a completely different way than others. And that different way of doing things is because of a core perceptual and cognitive similarity that is not in itself a deficit. And then a way that we develop, with that core similarity, that guides us to specialize in some areas and not others.

So it's more like the things we are good and bad at have a surface appearance of being the same as everyone else, but the way we come at them is in a totally different way that yields the same results in some circumstances but extremely original results in others.

It's discussed a bit in a French news article that I translated into English:

Autistes: L'intelligence autrement (that's a link)

Quote:

A number of scientists associate the peaks of ability in autistics with a strictly perceptual intelligence, which they often consider a not-very-advanced cognitive faculty. Yet, certain tasks on the Raven test seem to require a cognitive processing more complex than simple perception, notes Laurent Mottron. However, autistics, use perception in a different way than we use it, and this, to solve tasks known as intellectual. “Perception is superfunctional in autistics who discriminate better than we do on the visual and auditory planes. It probably plays a more important and more effective role in the resolution of tasks that call upon the intellect, than among the typicals,” he emphasizes.

When they look at an object, autistics categorize and generalize much less than typicals. Still, they meticulously explore the appearance of the object, its brightness, its shape, and make of it a very thorough, deep processing that opens many doors for them, explains the researcher. Autistics seem to learn many more things than us by simple exposure. “We assimilate information without making an intellectual effort, in a fashion less voluntary than the typicals, and without really knowing what we are doing,” specifies the autistic Michelle Dawson. “This knowledge sits in my brain without doing anything until I find myself in front of a task in which this information is integrated and is used to solve the problem.”

By contrast, when Laurent Mottron reads a scientific article, it’s to seek certain information that will confirm or invalidate his starting hypothesis. “I don’t memorize everything, I cut off all unrelated information, to not let it distract me. And if I later need other information that can be found in the same article, I read it again,” specifies in his turn the psychiatrist who does not stop emphasizing the incredible contribution of Michelle Dawson who became his colleague at work nearly three years ago. However, one can question Michelle after she has made a reading of an article, in the same fashion that one can question a database, because Michelle doesn’t have preferences in what she memorizes. She assimilates many pieces of information even if she doesn’t know if they will be useful to her. But then, she connects this information with what she hears or sees and that gives her many new and unforeseen ideas for apprehending a problem. What is more, her thought is never partial whereas ours is constantly because we seek for years to defend the assumptions we have developed.”

For Michelle Dawson and Laurent Mottron, the perceptual intelligence of autistics is without contest a true intelligence. The autistic researcher believes “It is necessary to evaluate intelligence by an individual’s capacity to carry out or not carry out a task, rather than by the fact that he arrives there by typical or atypical means.”

So they're saying that even when we do the same thing as other people, we're getting there in a different way. And that can be very important in some circumstances because we will perceive things other people don't, and put together information in a way other people don't.

And, sorry for the somewhat clunky translation, has to do with the way I learned French, which was not as much from French class (which I did go to, but never got beyond beginner) as a haphazard thing from reading a lot of French and putting together patterns from it.

I think people are too often looking for "good traits" on the surface, as if being able to do a particular task is the "good trait," when it's actually the way we do it, not the fact that we do it, that's the "good trait".

_________________
"In my world it's a place of patterns and feel. In my world it's a haven for what is real. It's my world, nobody can steal it, but people like me, we live in the shadows." -Donna Williams

Last edited by anbuend on 23 Dec 2007, 12:54 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Unknown_Quantity
Velociraptor

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

23 Dec 2007, 12:50 pm

Well, without knowing you, I can't really say. It's up to you to find the good things that you can attribute to being different.

Perhaps you are strong willed. Some would say that is being stubborn, but in certain situations, that's exactly what is needed. Without strong willed or stubborn people, the human race would be walked all over. We'd have dictatorships that would never crumble, never know the fear of revolt, never be questioned.

Perhaps that's another trait you possess, you might always question everything, this is a great advantage to the species as a whole.

There's are perhaps many advantages to whatever you might see as bad traits. For example, a level of inability to interact socially - well, it means you won't be swayed or easily lead by social manipulation. Any attempt to brainwash the masses will always be incomplete as long as there are Aspies and Autistics. Sure it might suck for the most part, but if we didn't have people like you (or more specifically, if we didn't have you) the human race would be worse off!

Even a self critcal attitude towards your Autism is likely to somehow have some benefit either to you or to us as a species.

_________________
IN GIRVM IMVS NOCTE ET CONSVMIMVR IGNI

Page 1 of 2 [ 27 posts ] Go to page 1, 2 Next

Jump to:

Getting Public about neurodiversity. Post Reply New Topic

Getting Public about neurodiversity.