Autism Politics - Free For All

Post Reply New Topic

Folks want to control how others understand a disability and anyone thinking outside of the box tends to be pushed to the outside of the social group. They say others just want sympathy and pity. True being born with a disability people will cope all sorts of ways. It has come to a point of being unproductive to ask not to be stereotyped but place the diagnoses label upon oneself as an identity. To personalize it and think everything or more then before mentioned about the label is implied indignity. I have seen even those asking not for sympathy bully the hell out of those that express the disability by saying they want pity. I believe this is the result of coping with the disability and is mal-productive. How can one ask for dignity yet in-dignify those who have the disability to achieve this.

This post is a free for all post. You can talk about anything relevant to autism politics. I'm using it as an exercise in social politics. So I will be responding to your statements.

im not quite sure what your asking

Autism is considered a disability from a legal perspective, but subjectively, a person may experience it as something more enabling than disabling. It depends on how a person perceives it. One person may have issues with social interaction, but have a gift in another area; that gift may outweigh the impairment of social interaction for that individual.

No one is going to change the fact that Autism is a legal disability and take away legal rights of people that experience Autism as a disabling force in their life, so there is no harm in an individual or a group's subjective judgement on whether or not they experience or believe Autism can be a condition that is a more positive enabling force than disabling force.

Maybe if we look at it from the perspective of another disability it could be seen more clearly. Stevie Wonder is a great musician, who obviously has the legal disability of blindness. How do we see him, as a great musician or a disabled person? How do you think he sees himself, as a person with a disability or a great musician with many other positive attributes?

In my opinion, when I think of Stevie Wonder I think of his music and enthusiasim for life, and have great respect for him. I know he his blind, but the thought of disability does not enter my mind. I really have no idea how he perceives himself, but I suspect he has had a fulfilled functional life. Does it change the fact that he has the legal disability of blindness? Of course not, but would you disagree with him, if he said he said he didn't consider his blindness a disability in his life?

Not all people are able to overcome their disabilities with a force greater than their disability; but those that accomplish such an achievement should be entitled to the statement that they don't consider their condition one that is disabling.

So when a person who accomplishes much with Autism, acknowledges the fact that they have it, find ways to cope with it, have a great life, and in someways it makes their life better; why should they not feel and express that they are enabled with the condition, not disabled as an individual?

Stevie Wonder's talent with his blindness and functionality in life does nothing to denigrate the disability of blindness; Neither does the ability of the blind New York governor. These are the kind of examples that inspire people to function with their disabilities.

There are different degrees of vision problems, like there are different degrees of Autism. Some adapt, some don't, some can't, but I see absolutely no reason why a person shouldn't be proud of what they accomplish in life, and not view the legal disability, as a disabling condition, for them as an individual, if that is the way they perceive it.

And objectively, in regard to Autism, in general the public views it as the legally disabling condition that it is, but some see examples of people that live with it and have very productive, enabled lives. It doesn't change the fact that others are more disabled by the condition, but it does provide hope for some.

Some people overcome their disabilities, some try, some can't do it; they all have a right to express their opinion, if they consider themselves enabled or disabled, even though legally they are considered to have a legal disability. Most people like to hear a story of someone that overcomes adversity in their life. It is what many people on this site strive to accomplish.

I have little disagreement with what you spoke of.

However I will mention when the pride of others attempts to destroy the compassion others need to achieve and over come obstacles by forcing autism to be viewed a certain way to not be adverse to prides instinct you got conflict. My focus is on understanding the fallacy of pride and relating conflict. Autism as a label differs from the entire soup of a person.

Stating autism is not a disability differs from someone saying their own autism is mild and not disabling to themselves. Pride tends to want to force it's way in and demand a view point or else they are autism bigots. True this is an extreme example but I just see the whole pride thing as more adverse to those that are truly disabled then very high functioning people that want to be offended at autism being a disability as a label. they tend to want to make it into an identity and the end result is others not taking autism seriously otherwise they will be offended. I think it's just mal-productive.

I left a comment on the other topic, in an attempt to clarify that the poster you were in disagreement with expressed compassion toward the difficulties that other people experience with Autism as he gave his opinion on how he viewed the condition. Did it seem like he considered those that were more adversely affected by Autism in his opinion?

It is evident that this individual has done much to help people with Autism and has concern for those that are not as successful as he; isn't that the middle ground, in the issue, we are looking for?

Some people strongly oppose your views and you oppose them in a similiar fashion; can you see that he was taking middle ground and acknowledging that other people that have Autism experience it in a different way than he does?

Maybe you didn't notice the evidence of it in his postings. It is my intent, in consideration to you, to provide understanding from my point of view.

I already replied. The likely problem with people disagreeing is sourced from autism as an identity instead of a disorder label. If people perceive the whole self as autism then they will be more sensitive to it. Autism is indeed a disability but that does not denote the whole person is a disability. Folks seem tangled up a bit and words will then be misinterpreted.

Nathan Young

It's not a question of perception per se. Autism is a spectrum where some people really are capable and some really are quite incapable. Often the problem i see with Autism politics is that the views of the capable supercede the views of the incapable (as they are bound to do). I also get the faint whiff from the most capable that if one isn't a mathmatician or statistician or some other academic then one might aswell crawl under a rock and be quiet so as not to let the side down. I have witnessed similar bullying to the OP by fortunate aspies of the less fortunate.

It's time for a social revolution

I've seen this also; it is unfortunate. But the opposite can also happen; sometimes without intention.

You're damn straight.

So the new autism social revolution will reflect both because I think the bullied are tired of being bullied for stating their truths. Truth is removed for reasons of cure politics, abortion politics and the manipulation of the image of autism as a diagnoses originally for the politics of autism as an identity. It is very true politically autism can be manipulated by individuals using autism as an identity to change the perception of autism as a disorder label for other political reasons.

It is my belief engrossing and centering ones own self on a disorder label can be emotionally and in general psychologically unhealthy whether for pride politics or not.

Identity politics will lead to the normalization of autism and to autistics becoming a political minority with equal rights. Then they will be attacked by the right like gays and blacks are. People will say "you have equal rights now you can do everything that an NT does" and more capable autistics will agree with that.

Autism is not like other minority group and it comprises individuals that happen to be gay, black, white, brown, all kinds of religions, socioeconomic groups and otherwise. The preservation politics of autism as an identity may be misguided and wrong.

I agree. Better to keep the relationship between autistics and society a totally paternalistic one. Once we "stand on our own two feet"as a community we will not be looked on with pity or sentimentality by Nt's and will not get as many concessions from them.

It is compassion that creates social services to get us more equal.

People that don't want a diagnoses don't have to get one. But, as soon as they get one they have a legal disability. I don't think anyone is going to convince a psychiatrist that a condition that limits a persons ability to function in everyday life is normal. The overwhelming majority of people see Autism as a disability. The people that don't have a problem functioning with Autism that see it as a difference instead of a disability are in the overwhelming minority of the American Public; probably below one percent. Half of one percent of our population is into the Hundreds of Thousands but it is nothing compared to 300 million people.

Eighty-five percent of people with Autism are unemployed; most of them understand that they have a disability if it interferes with their ability to function in life. The voices you hear on this website are largely those that are higher functioning; it is possible to get the feeling that they are the majority and that there is real danger for those that function on a lower level, but the numbers in the general public and among other Autistic people don't add up to this.

For those that function well, I'm glad for them, we understand the difficulties that those that function on a lower level have; but some of the ones that function well understand this as well.

There is no realistic harm they present to the autistic population as a whole, except when people are bullied. There is real harm there, and the best way to avoid it is understanding and awareness.

Just my opinion, from what I have observed.