A small text concerning Autism (and Mark Zuckerberg)

Post Reply New Topic

I am a 25 year old man diagnosed with a autism spectrum disorder on the lighter scale. At the time, the DSM IV manual held a recognition in regards to cases where not all of the symptoms needed where present to give that person a diagnosis, this was a ”sub” category or ”unspecified”. Thats what I have.

This is not really the most important fact to know, what is important is that I still feel as if I am on the wrong planet and this is why I decided to join in with your ranks to discuss some rather disturbing developments in the field of autism disorders. The point being that one should fight where one is placed and since I was placed in the box marked ”odd” or ”doesnt fit here” from the beginning, I decided that it has to amount to something in the end. There is a purpose here.
How do I begin? Well I am not really interested in any shenanigans regarding how many, what types and so on there are of said autistic trait and so on, its not important. What is important is that we steer clear of the massive rift which we might end up in if this discussion (on the large scale) isnt directed to where it should be, the box marked ”decency and old fashion common sense”.

I read the ”10 myths debunked..and so on” thread and I thought of the word ”snake oil” and remember why that angered me so much. A while ago, a little girl was ”strickened” (this doesnt happen, its just pure BS) with autism after a vaccination (supposedly) and her two parents who conveniently happened to be American promptly decided that the evil pharmaceutical companies were to blame. This is just one of the many cases where snake oil distillers and confused and angry parents meet and shake hands because not long after, they went public with it and blamed vaccines.

Another story which came to my mind was the story of a small kid with a regular yeast infection. TO begin with small kids arent 10 year olds, they cant communicate via language so instead they stroll around, sit still and use most of their body as a giant sign post. This led a doctor to the conclusion that the kid was autistic and so he prescribed the parents some antibiotics because apparently autism is caused by ...(insert random answer). To begin with, one cannot contract autism, its not a fever or brought on by a mosquito bite so the assumption that antibiotics cures autism is just another big lie and it sells. Doctors even came up with ”kits” that could run your medical bill for thousands of dollars, because you know in America they dont practice free healthcare and they have Dr Nick Rivera on staff almost everywhere. Lets just say that it kind of took off for a while, until someone must have noticed that their kid didnt get better from the antibiotics and simply resorted to blame the vaccination.
The rather fun and moronic way these sad and frustrated parents display their sorrow is something we must take seriously. Both the vaccine movement (big one) and the antibiotics movement (small one) are very dangerous because they treat autism as a disease which a) stems from the immune system and b) can be cured with antibiotics. Most of us can make the simple math and see that the erroneous thinking causes ”science” to unfold where there isnt any. Parents immediately jump to the false conclusion that autism can be stopped and so they ”inform” others of the methods and at the same time tell them never to have their kids vaccinated.

The idea that autism has something to do with biology really defies all logic. Lets take a look at the world. Why arent there movie stars with autism? Sports legends? Ever heard of that Nascar guy who suffered from autism all his life, took antibiotics and was cured? No. Wierd huh? Seems only nerds and losers contract it and really smart people like Albert Einstein. Autism sure is picky when it chooses its host organism. Darn autism flu. Even so, seeing what Albert Einstein did accomplish in his life does warrant us to ask: Whats wrong with having that, that dudes really smart! But hey, in todays shallow Paris Hilton infected social climate, all that counts is how normal and popular you are.
So lets jump to another topic, why do we opt to buy this BS? Why do we follow their rules? Because we have to. Get in line people, Popular Jimmy is in the house, better not stir a shitstorm acting out and showing personality. Its communism all over again. Its funny, the western world is always raving about how enlightened it is, yet it fails to see that it created a schooling system which was designed to train robots (social robots). Take high school for example, why is it that those rich private schools seem to be so darn effective? Why does Harvard pump out Nobel Prize winners?

The answer is obvious, there arent any jocks around to destroy your self esteem and steal our lunch money. And it gets worse, even worse. In 20 years, those Jocks WONT go to school. In fact as technology increases, social technology (Facebook, Twitter etc) erupts and grows there is no need for dumb people. High school is a remnant from an age where there were jobs for anyone and where there was space to fill us all in. In 20 years the world will ask impossible things of us, because almost everything is computerized. Factories? Automated. Commercials. Probably automated too.

That Minority Report future isnt far away in theory but its held back because of one thing: If we can build a world where we no longer need to work for the things we wish for the most (think about that famous scene in Minority Report, the ”whore house” where a businessman is having virtual sex) then there is no need to be good at sports or be a social engineer at the frat party. I mean there is always going to be the real thing yes, but the biggest eyesoar for an NT person is when a ”dumb lowlife loser” gets the girl before him and that goes for almost anything. Our world is constructed to hold us back. So we fight harder.
The problem is that we fight for the wrong things. Lets look at the classic scene in a movie when the nerd wins because he, the Jock and two others + the sexy girl is trapped inside something and the only way out is a computer. The nerd whacks a few keys and they go free. All of a sudden the nerd gains status, from now on the audience must know: He was useless the past hour or so but now he kind of saved the day. The girl suddenly finds it in her heart to confess that the nerd has a ”beautiful soul” and the Jock kind of high fives the nerd and becomes his best buddy. Whats wrong with this scene? This is every damn high school movie all over again but lets compare it with life.

In real life, everybody is that valuable so why the f**k doesnt that shine through? Why is it that just because you can kick ball you are a good person or popular? Why are you a nerd because you are good at computers? Because we were taught that way by our parents and even they root for the Jock in the movies.

Okay so lets assume that we are angels inside and that the world is evil, by looking at Mark Zuckerberg. Henceforth known as MZ because it takes to f*****g long to write. Ever saw the movie ”The social network”. The movie blatantly surrounds MZ with sexy co-workers, businessmen who can paddle a rowing boat damn fast and look like mini Arnolds at the same time, ingenious roomates etc. All the best people, after all this is Harvard (I think it was) MZ is there on some scholarship or just happen to be there because he is lucky, decides to hack into their computer network, slanders his sexy girlfriend because she had the nerve to dump him when we all ask: how did she have the nerve to be with him? I dont think the movie really portrayed people as they looked in real life because lets face it MZ is really ugly but there has to be some draw for the audiences. Whatever.

Anyways, MZ steals business plans, f***s over his best friends, enters lawsuit discussions looking like he is about to draw a Hanzo sword and generally acts like the worlds biggest Turd. MZ really got off by a technical doodle, he didnt intentionally rip his Rowing Team friends off, he simply eluded their attention long enough to trademark himself and then acted as if it rained douchebag. What he did do was f**k over his ”best friend” (who in all irony comes off as the only trustable person in the entire movie) while allowing the creator of Napster, annoyingly portrayed by Justin Timberlake to become his new partner and all while sitting there with a astonished look on his face.

MZ is an aspie (or just evil, for creating Facebook) in description. Temple Grandin said that and I trust Temple Grandin because she builds humane cattle ranches and anyone who has that patience and humanity is more than probably right about a lying evil b****zomfg** like MZ.

The point being; all NT people use Facebook. Hell the entire world uses facebook. People who dont use facebook sometimes are forgotten and sometimes are thought to have vanished. This is a stupid waste of time service created by an aspie that we all use. We dont get to make the argument that MZ has aspergers and thats why the nerd is still the Nerd in the movies. The Social network DOESNT depict MZ properly, it shows us a variety of lewd lasa-vis-cious scenes where MZ is depicted as any regular guy, he even nails asian twins. On the other side of the fence, you have Jonah Hill being his regular screaming fat self in all of his movies but still manages to argue himself to titties at some point (or respect, *shudder*) Who is the real nerd? Jonah Hill or MZ? Jonah Hill spent his entire movie career depicting nerdy looking, disgusting characters who ANYONE would find irritating. MZ comes off as a rather normal douchebag in The Social Network but we all know thats not true.
Hell he doesnt care about being an aspie, he doesnt give s**t. In fact the entire movie shows us why its bad to call him an aspie (or maybe aspies are just like that..) and why Temple Grandin should revoke her statement ASAP. MZ carries every trait of being NT, he is the JOCK if anything. He becomes the JOCK during his flagship race toward utter despicable land.

So who do we root for? I remember sitting through that movie and learning to hate Mark Zuckerberg. Id punch him in the gut if I met him, if not for my own anger then for human justice. Of course I wouldnt dare because I am sure that MZ would cut a deal with Obama and have me shipped to Guantanamo or something like that. MZ is simply an awful person, end of story so why is he so successful? Its the rags to riches story all over again, only this time MZ happened to have an army of lawyers to shield him from the twins (Rowing Team, not Asian) and his ”best friend” as they came after him with everything they got. They settled out of court later.

If we translate this unique fate, that of MZ to a High School setting, lets toss Jonah Hill in because he is so funny and pretend that MZ had ripped the Jocks off over a game of cards or something. Who would have won? It wouldnt take ten seconds before Jonah Hill lay face down in the toilet.

Autism can be a burden or a blessing, depending on the situation and of course: Whats at stake. Peoples greed drove a lot of the MZ story from beginning to end but when everything is accounted for id rather be lying in a toilet bowl and recite why I shouldnt cheat at cards, than waking up in a 100 million dollar house without a soul.

(Thread moved from PPR to Autism politics)

Thanks for the reply.

It was the idea that autism is a disease and that there is a cure that I am debating (and ranting about:P) and how we are percieved in the social worlds.

If autism would be a disease that kids could contract (or have a cause, other than genetic) then it would make sense that a lot more people would suffer from it, hence my "nascar driver" comparison. The idea that it is a set of symtoms separate from personality belongs in parents heads. It IS our personality.

Yes, the things you mention are biological, I was leaning on the idea that its a "disease" when I made that statement:P

The social worlds we create and maintain will largely decide how we are percieved as well as our background and social status, which was my point with Mark Zuckerberg. During normal circumstances he would be the victimized youth, a fate he avoided due to his environment and special set of skills.

Mark Zuckerberg created something that millions of people want to use. That's why he's rich and famous. I don't begrudge him that. Even if the movie is true concerning his reltionships with the other people he co-created it with, he personally was the one who had the vision to take it far beyond Harvard. That vision is worth a lot. He was an utter jerk in the movie and may have been just as jerkish as he was portrayed, but I don't understand why you are so upset at him.

There is a lot of ego in the movie, no doubt but here are some facts that mark why I dont like the man. Its just like that.

I wouldn't assume that Zuckerberg is autistic. I for one did not see any evidence in the film that he was disabled (i.e. significantly impaired) in any way. (Actually, you said that. So why assume he is? Temple Grandin is not the best judge.) His portrayed relationship skills seemed pretty normal for a male of his age, and his gifts are often found in people who are not disabled in any way. Most exceptionally gifted people are not autistic, but are still socially isolated until they get into environments where they can meet true peers. And not all of them are nice people. Like any other group, they're people first.

And why would an autistic person invent something like Facebook? Personally if I could, I'd invent a program that would let me assemble 3d diagrams of geometric figures and molecules and other neat high-spatial stuff like that. Or I'd create a website with tons of data on a particular subject. (Actually I did that: www.filmcontentdatabase.com.)

I'm not really sure what the original rant was about. I can't seem to concentrate much these days.

And for the record, I bought into the high tech myth and tried working in high tech myself, 12-13 years ago. Total disaster. Engineering culture is not necessarily even remotely kind to autistics. It would depend entirely on your special interests. And on your figure. (The movie showed how sexist the Facebook workplace was.)

Rereads original post: I'd take the money, myself. Not having any for decades does shift one's perspective somewhat. And I don't like Jonah Hill either. We root for the people we can relate to, and diss the rest. That has nothing to do with anything objective, like whether someone has or might qualify for a particular diagnosis.