Conflicting Advocacy Agenda's

Post Reply New Topic

Well if it wasn't then neither was any of this.

I don't think when people like ASAN use the word pity they are ever referring to any sort of compromise made by anyone else. In my experience people call what these groups do pity because that is what they believe these groups are trying to make others do, that is pity the poor autistic rather than actually help them. Pity is exactly the sort of idea that was put across by the I am autism video and ever since then it has always been parents wanting to 'conquer autism' that has taken the centre-stage and their belief that they want to 'pity' us.

The fact is that these people doesn't believe this is right as they don't want to be looked down upon. They feel that they are being victimized and it is well within their rights to explain their problem and well within their rights to explain why. As far as I know no group has ever actually gone up to ASAN, for example, and tried to compromise with them, at least as far as I know because I don't actually keep track of ASAN any more than any other group.

Also how do any of these groups rail against people's rights? As far as I know none of these groups have actually ever impinged upon anyone's rights. Also if they feel they are a victim of other's beliefs then that's also their right.

I just don't buy into the idea they are not trying to help myself and others.

The bad word pity has been overused along with the idea of discrimination.

Instead merely what they are doing is trying to alter advocacy at all costs. While doing so utilizing some of the worse approaches imaginable. The word pity has been abused in this context to the point it is at times simply anti-compassionate and emotional intolerance.

Look at this video. He obviously cares but simply uses some words some don't like. Obviously this is the intending alike projection of other individuals who are accused of pity. It's the same kinds of issues and emotional projection. They care and want to help where needed. For this they have been horribly treated but won't be silenced of course.

I had no interest in posting to this thread at all, I had no reason to as I could not really understand the op beyond a sense that it seemed to have a considerable potential to provoke further unpleasantness, but when AlanTuring mirrored my own sentiments at a slight tangent to that so very much better than I could have said it, I felt compelled to commend him...

I suppose you are right...

I had no interest in posting to this thread at all, I had no reason to as I could not really understand the op beyond a sense that it seemed to have a considerable potential to provoke further unpleasantness, but when AlanTuring mirrored my own sentiments at a slight tangent to that so very much better than I could have said it, I felt compelled to commend him...

Who are they?

There are people who discriminate against us ci. That doesn't have to mean all people, but it can mean alot of them.

The only person who keeps on bringing up the word pity as far as I know is you. They don't use it all the time. Saying that people are trying to make us look pitiful though isn't just inherently wrong ci. You can't use that as a reason to criticize someone. You have to say why it's an unfit description. Also what does anti-compassionate and emotionally intolerant mean? And how does it have anything to do with ASAN or other people?


Of course they can help, but if you try to help someone by not listening to the patient then you aren't going to be very good at treating any one and to be honest if you make a disease out of something that need not require diagnosis and treatment then most of your treatment is going to be useless. Also, since most of what autism has been described as is due to symptoms then you aren't dealing with the core problem. Given the centrality of social conduct to the person, couldn't a change in style cause all sorts of problems that could dissapear in the presence of like-minded people? I don't know if ASAN professes that last point, but I sure do at least in many more cases than society is willing to admit. With these points at hand why shouldn't you feel annoyed that people wouldn't listen to you.

Thank you very much.

I mean what did I say which wasn't correct?

I have been trying to follow that advice, but I lack the thing to describe the thing I lack, and when I ask, I am told it is natural.

As close as I got was the psychobabble in the DSM, which did narrow it down a bit, but does not go on to explain what this is that everyone has that I lack.

At best it is a formalized version of the same I have been getting for sixty years.

You are right, I do not understand you, because you cannot say what you mean!

Empathy, is that feeling like the person being a fool and yelling at someone they do not know? So the social grace involved is kick them?

I know Marquis du Queensbury, but I am tired of hearing, You do not respect my greettiy, and fibble my srette with your gleedly. You should know how to wiffle my sheeplt!

As Psychobabble started this, I think it time to waterboard them till they confess the whole plot in simple English.

I find it a case of, "Alice in Wonderland Syndrome."

"When the white knight is talking backward, and the red queens off her head, remember, what the door mouse said, feed your head!"

"Words do not mean anything, words mean what I mean when I use them."

This did come from the same majority that caved in the economy, exported the jobs, so I have my doubts about their long term mental health.

I would like to point out that before this oh so educated modern psychology, just as many autistic were born, grew up, worked, lived, died, with less problems than are being produced by psychobabble.

Sure, we have a mental health crisus, it started when children no longer played outside, rode their bikes, ran, climbed, and acted like children. Once they were locked in, given to a life of sitting on a sofa watching TV, the behavior problems mounted.

We do have a problem, it is called Culture.

All of it, as you will find to be the case whenever you speak for someone other than yourself without their consent and co-operation.

I am sorry but speaking about what other people believe isn't wrong. Lying about what someone's beliefs are is wrong. I already told you this.

Who died and appointed you my sensei?


*Stating* what other people believe (unless you regard them as an expert source and can cite their own statements) is not only wrong, it is controlling and invasive. It is also ridiculous when you haven't got a clue what they believe and are totally incapable of improving your understanding of that because of the extent to which your pet theories blind you to reality.

No it isn't for a start. Saying what you believe other people are saying isn't wrong. In fact if you were a layman talking about what you believed a political candidate was saying that isn't wrong. If you were talking about what a particular religious group believed in and were a layman you still wouldn't be wrong. Stop trying think your ideas are somehow above being talked about. Also you keep saying that I don't have a clue but all you can manage to say is that all of it was wrong, not what was wrong and not why it was wrong. Also I don't need snide interludes like that one at the top. Also whilst accusing me of all these things you then try and assume what I think at the same time. Calling something a pet theory is only a way to disparage someone without actually giving reason for doubt.