Thread: 'Autism' Is Discrimination

I'm sick and tired of being treated like a retard just because I'm a nerd. Autism label is complete discrimination.

It reminds of the "you're going to hell" comments some religious people make, that essentially means they think you'll burn in eternal damnation. The "you seem autistic" quickly turns into an insinuation that I have a brain defect. I have looked up dictionary meanings only to findout that the definition of nerd is nearly identical to the diagnosis of high functioning autism, which I'm not happy about. I will say it here and now; autism doesn't exist. How dare you say I have a brain disorder?! I will fight for my rights and ask others diagnosed on the spectrum to fight for theirs as well.

What has our society come to, that we declare anyone who's like Einstein or Beethoven are mentally impaired? Gay people had to fight for their rights for homosexuality not to be a disorder and so do us nerds. Nerds slave over science inventing stuff like IPods, Laptops, just about everything, and now these consumers respond by labeling us with a defect? Maybe nerds should stop inventing things for these selfish, ignorant imps.

Sensory Processing Disorder Explained | SPD Foundation Is far better suited to describe those currently diagnosed with severe autism.

Are you suggesting that people with autism DON'T require special attention? That they can function with a group of student who do not have the disorder?

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

Are you suggesting that people with autism DON'T require special attention? That they can function with a group of student who do not have the disorder?

I'm saying not all people diagnosed with autism have any impairments; if people are diagnosed for treatment opportunities plus special/proper attention and really have something effecting them then that's fine, but leave me out of your BS.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

but leave me out of your BS.

Since it wasn't Flick who has diagnosed you with autism (based on your self-introduction thread), perhaps it may be more polite to not use "your BS".

Originally Posted by scoobydoo1

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

but leave me out of your BS.

Since it wasn't Flick who has diagnosed you with autism (based on your self-introduction thread, perhaps it may be more polite to not use "your BS".

When I said "your BS" I referred to society, not Flick.

If you feel comfortable sharing, perhaps you can tell us a little more on who gave and how your diagnosis was arrived at.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

Are you suggesting that people with autism DON'T require special attention? That they can function with a group of student who do not have the disorder?

I'm saying not all people diagnosed with autism have any impairments; if people are diagnosed for treatment opportunities plus special/proper attention and really have something effecting them then that's fine, but leave me out of your BS.

I imagine the ultimate goal would be to treat everyone as they require based upon a case-by-case basis. If you have been treated differently or in a manner you feel is inappropriate, you should certainly speak up. I'm not sure that suggesting that autistic people are always capable of functioning in a standard environment is any more fair than suggesting all autistic people always need special treatment.

It sounds like you want a new label besides autism just because you feel there is a stigma attached to that word. I'm not sure that's the best motivation to fight for change, though.

My diagnosis back when I was 14, was correct in terms of autism criteria standards. I am introverted, prefer staying indoors, and am basically a nerd. I of course didn't get a brain scan(although I did get one on separate occasion and it showed I'm neurotypical) and I was diagnosed with high functioning autism because I had traits that matched what they were looking for in an autism diagnosis. From there my family treated me as if I was mentally defective, though at this point since I've been rejecting the diagnosis for 5 years now, I am treated with far more respect.

Here is my full story about being diagnosed. It's pretty long but whatever, if anyone's curious then they can check it out. My story is in the opening post, posted on an autism forum.
Death Sentenced By A Label - General Autism Discussion

I imagine the ultimate goal would be to treat everyone as they require based upon a case-by-case basis. If you have been treated differently or in a manner you feel is inappropriate, you should certainly speak up. I'm not sure that suggesting that autistic people are always capable of functioning in a standard environment is any more fair than suggesting all autistic people always need special treatment.

It sounds like you want a new label besides autism just because you feel there is a stigma attached to that word. I'm not sure that's the best motivation to fight for change, though.

My motivation is for the autism term to be changed so the diagnosis specifically targets those with impairments.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

I'm sick and tired of being treated like a retard just because I'm a nerd. Autism label is complete discrimination.

It reminds of the "you're going to hell" comments some religious people make, that essentially means they think you'll burn in eternal damnation. The "you seem autistic" quickly turns into an insinuation that I have a brain defect. I have looked up dictionary meanings only to findout that the definition of nerd is nearly identical to the diagnosis of high functioning autism, which I'm not happy about. I will say it here and now; autism doesn't exist. How dare you say I have a brain disorder?! I will fight for my rights and ask others diagnosed on the spectrum to fight for theirs as well.

What has our society come to, that we declare anyone who's like Einstein or Beethoven are mentally impaired? Gay people had to fight for their rights for homosexuality not to be a disorder and so do us nerds. Nerds slave over science inventing stuff like IPods, Laptops, just about everything, and now these consumers respond by labeling us with a defect? Maybe nerds should stop inventing things for these selfish, ignorant imps.

Sensory Processing Disorder Explained | SPD Foundation Is far better suited to describe those currently diagnosed with severe autism.

You try to appear as a gallant defender of the autistic, yet, in your first sentence you state "I'm sick and tired of being treated like a retard" using a pejorative to describe a clique. Perhaps you're being too sensitive, I've always taken "are you autistic?" as a compliment, as I know my knowledge/abilities are very compartmentalized and by asking me if I'm autistic you are also complimenting me on my narrow range of skills. What you've done in your post is completely contradictory, you claim to be a defendant of nerds and the autistic, yet simultaneously use slanderous terms such as "retard" and draw careless generalizations about society.

Originally Posted by shlunka

]You try to appear as a gallant defender of the autistic

To be honest, I haven't seen any attempt to defend the autistic. It seems more like an attempt to distance himself from those with serious mental disabilities. What I'm getting is that people with severe autism are "retards", while he's just a high functioning autistic who is basically a "nerd".

I don't know what the goal is here, but I think you need to reconsider your approach if what you're trying to achieve is some kind of fairness to the persons being diagnose with autism. It's coming off as just angry and offensive.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

extended heartfelt emotional - i.e. zero hard (or rational) content - rant

Welcome to my ignore list.
Signed, someone who's both a nerd AND who realises that "high functioning autism" is a spot-on diagnosis (at least of himself).

For the record, people will usually treat those with any disorder as a "retard" at times, and my comment isn't indicative of my opinion of those with serious disorders. Don't put words in my mouth.

So, you don't want to say anything negative about "retards", you just desperately don't want to be labeled as one...

Got it.

Due to my single minded focus on certain subjects for protracted lengths of time and my lack of empathy I get a lot of unusual reactions from the people around me, until they understand how I function. But I have never been treated as if I were "retarded" in any way except perhaps socially.

People have accused me of being standoffish, surly, of rudely ignoring them, of being self centred or selfish, obsessive, strange, of thinking I am better than them, of treating others like I think they are fools or unworthy of my time...

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

Originally Posted by shlunka

]You try to appear as a gallant defender of the autistic

To be honest, I haven't seen any attempt to defend the autistic. It seems more like an attempt to distance himself from those with serious mental disabilities. What I'm getting is that people with severe autism are "retards", while he's just a high functioning autistic who is basically a "nerd".

I don't know what the goal is here, but I think you need to reconsider your approach if what you're trying to achieve is some kind of fairness to the persons being diagnose with autism. It's coming off as just angry and offensive.

The entire post concerned discrimination against nerds. Also, the post stated that the definition of nerd and high-functioning autistic were nearly identical. Therefore, in the defense of nerds, there is also the defense of high-functioning autistics "as the post posits that they are nearly synonymous." I criticized his usage of the derogatory noun "retard". I then critiqued the hypocrisy in trying to ameliorate the public image of nerds "the OP states that the definition of nerd is nearly identical to high-functioning autistics, therefore to the OP nerds and high-functioning autistics are characterized by the same behavior and are therefore synonymous by the OP's definition and conflation of two separate cliques", by conflating nerds and high-functioning autistics, the OP then opens itself up to scrutiny by using the word "retard", which is a pejorative that clearly contradicts this superficial amelioration of the public image of nerds. Is "retard" not often used ubiquitously for all autistics by the OP's concerned audience "I.E, the general populace", and therefore calumnious to all sufferers of any form of autism?

Originally Posted by shlunka

The entire post concerned discrimination against nerds.

By segregating them from "retards".

Originally Posted by shlunka

Also, the post stated that the definition of nerd and high-functioning autistic were nearly identical.

Which they aren't. Not by any definition I've ever heard.

Originally Posted by shlunka

Therefore, in the defense of nerds, there is also the defense of high-functioning autistics "as the post posits that they are nearly synonymous."

Which is based on faulty logic. Since when is "nerd" an acceptable substitute for a medical condition?

Originally Posted by shlunka

I then critiqued the hypocrisy in trying to ameliorate the public image of nerds "the OP states that the definition of nerd is nearly identical to high-functioning autistics, therefore to the OP nerds and high-functioning autistics are characterized by the same behavior and are therefore synonymous by the OP's definition and conflation of two separate cliques", by conflating nerds and high-functioning autistics, the OP then opens itself up to scrutiny by using the word "retard", which is a pejorative that clearly contradicts this superficial amelioration of the public image of nerds.

Quite possibly the longest sentence I've ever read.

Originally Posted by shlunka

Is "retard" not often used ubiquitously for all autistics by the OP's concerned audience "I.E, the general populace", and therefore calumnious to all sufferers of any form of autism?

"Retard" is pretty much a blanket term for anyone with a mental disability. I'm not suggesting that it refers to autistic people of any level. What I'm saying is that defending high-functioning autistic people by calling people with severe autism "retards" does not make a good case. It also seems dishonest to search for a different term for high-functioning autistic people just so you don't have to suffer the stigma of autism. Perhaps advocating for a better understanding of autism would come off as more genuine to me than simply trying to rename your condition.

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

Originally Posted by shlunka

The entire post concerned discrimination against nerds.

By segregating them from "retards".

Originally Posted by shlunka

Also, the post stated that the definition of nerd and high-functioning autistic were nearly identical.

Which they aren't. Not by any definition I've ever heard.

Originally Posted by shlunka

Therefore, in the defense of nerds, there is also the defense of high-functioning autistics "as the post posits that they are nearly synonymous."

Which is based on faulty logic. Since when is "nerd" an acceptable substitute for a medical condition?

Originally Posted by shlunka

I then critiqued the hypocrisy in trying to ameliorate the public image of nerds "the OP states that the definition of nerd is nearly identical to high-functioning autistics, therefore to the OP nerds and high-functioning autistics are characterized by the same behavior and are therefore synonymous by the OP's definition and conflation of two separate cliques", by conflating nerds and high-functioning autistics, the OP then opens itself up to scrutiny by using the word "retard", which is a pejorative that clearly contradicts this superficial amelioration of the public image of nerds.

Quite possibly the longest sentence I've ever read.

Originally Posted by shlunka

Is "retard" not often used ubiquitously for all autistics by the OP's concerned audience "I.E, the general populace", and therefore calumnious to all sufferers of any form of autism?

"Retard" is pretty much a blanket term for anyone with a mental disability. I'm not suggesting that it refers to autistic people of any level. What I'm saying is that defending high-functioning autistic people by calling people with severe autism "retards" does not make a good case. It also seems dishonest to search for a different term for high-functioning autistic people just so you don't have to suffer the stigma of autism. Perhaps advocating for a better understanding of autism would come off as more genuine to me than simply trying to rename your condition.

My conflation of nerd and high-functioning autistic was a mimicry of the OP's statement of their definitions being the same. The OP stated that the definitions were nearly identical, the poster then used "retard", which is often used to describe any variety of mental disorders. By stating that the definitions of nerd and high functioning autistic were nearly identical, as the OP did, and then saying "retard", which applies throughout all forms of autism, the poster was using something that according to the post's own premises, was derogatory to nerds. That results in a contradiction. I only implied that being a nerd was a mental condition because the OP did. I apologize for the lengthy sentences, I struggle with forming terse thoughts.

Well, regardless, I think we all agree that using the term "retard" in any way will not help you make a valid point.

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

Well, regardless, I think we all agree that using the term "retard" in any way will not help you make a valid point.

Strongly agreed, and I apologize for being incoherent.

You're not. I just work best with monosyllabic words.

Maybe this is my own Aspergers (high functioning autism) speaking but I don't understand where the defect is. Our brains function differently, not incorrectly. Many geniuses are thought to have had high functioning autism. People who have this alternate way of perceiving things are often exceptionally talented at organizing details and spatial orientation and math. These are all things that are highly needed in a technological society. It could just be that we are the next wave of evolution. Those who can use computers will be better able to provide and therefore more likely to breed and pass on their genes. Each generation will have more and more high functioning autistic people and it will be a benefit to those who wish to see our species travel into space and find cures for diseases using technology.

No need to be so negative about it. So we talk funny and don't always get NT's jokes. So what? Can they write a computer program in their sleep? I doubt it.

Originally Posted by SpeedFreek

Due to my single minded focus on certain subjects for protracted lengths of time and my lack of empathy I get a lot of unusual reactions from the people around me, until they understand how I function. But I have never been treated as if I were "retarded" in any way except perhaps socially.

People have accused me of being standoffish, surly, of rudely ignoring them, of being self centred or selfish, obsessive, strange, of thinking I am better than them, of treating others like I think they are fools or unworthy of my time...

I get that a lot too. But I don't take offense to it. They can't help the way they perceive things. Poor things.

Originally Posted by SpeedFreek

People have accused me of ... treating others like I think they are fools or unworthy of my time...

You see?
On occasion "normal" people do get it right!

After reading this thread, I almost feel discriminated against simply because I have yet to be diagnosed with any condition relative to cognitive functioning or the lack thereof, lol...

Originally Posted by scheherazade

After reading this thread, I almost feel discriminated against simply because I have yet to be diagnosed with any condition relative to cognitive functioning or the lack thereof, lol...

I'd be glad to offer you a diagnosis...

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

So, you don't want to say anything negative about "retards", you just desperately don't want to be labeled as one...

Got it.

You have failed so incredibly that it's unbelievable. My original comment: "I am tired of being treated like a retard just for being a nerd."

The term "retard" is a derogatory term used to describe the derogatory manner in which I was treated. I have been diagnosed with autism multiple times, so if I really did mean to equate "autism to retard" like you falsely think, then didn't I just call myself a retard?

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Maybe this is my own Aspergers (high functioning autism) speaking but I don't understand where the defect is. Our brains function differently, not incorrectly. Many geniuses are thought to have had high functioning autism. People who have this alternate way of perceiving things are often exceptionally talented at organizing details and spatial orientation and math. These are all things that are highly needed in a technological society. It could just be that we are the next wave of evolution. Those who can use computers will be better able to provide and therefore more likely to breed and pass on their genes. Each generation will have more and more high functioning autistic people and it will be a benefit to those who wish to see our species travel into space and find cures for diseases using technology.

No need to be so negative about it. So we talk funny and don't always get NT's jokes. So what? Can they write a computer program in their sleep? I doubt it.

This highlights my opinion; basically the future evolution of humanity is being called neurologically disabled. Maybe your brain just functions differently because you're smart, has it ever crossed your mind?

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

So, you don't want to say anything negative about "retards", you just desperately don't want to be labeled as one...

Got it.

You have failed so incredibly that it's unbelievable. My original comment: "I am tired of being treated like a retard just for being a nerd."

The term "retard" is a derogatory term used to describe the derogatory manner in which I was treated. I have been diagnosed with autism multiple times, so if I really did mean to equate "autism to retard" like you falsely think, then didn't I just call myself a retard?

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Maybe this is my own Aspergers (high functioning autism) speaking but I don't understand where the defect is. Our brains function differently, not incorrectly. Many geniuses are thought to have had high functioning autism. People who have this alternate way of perceiving things are often exceptionally talented at organizing details and spatial orientation and math. These are all things that are highly needed in a technological society. It could just be that we are the next wave of evolution. Those who can use computers will be better able to provide and therefore more likely to breed and pass on their genes. Each generation will have more and more high functioning autistic people and it will be a benefit to those who wish to see our species travel into space and find cures for diseases using technology.

No need to be so negative about it. So we talk funny and don't always get NT's jokes. So what? Can they write a computer program in their sleep? I doubt it.

This highlights my opinion; basically the future evolution of humanity is being called neurologically disabled. Maybe your brain just functions differently because you're smart, has it ever crossed your mind? There's a reason why we never see smart 'normal' people.

I think you missed the point of my post. I have never been treated as if I am mentally handicapped, challenged, or "retarded" as you claim to be being treated. And honestly, if someone did attempt to project that vibe at me, I probably wouldn't notice. I don't pick up on those types of cues as quickly as someone that is NT. When I was a kid I had to have someone point out to me when I was being made fun of because I didn't notice it. I have learned to recognize it now after more than 25 years of consciously studying the way that NT's interact with one another. And now I have to teach it to my son as well because he also has HFA. I have to point out to him when a girl is flirting with him or when he is being made fun of. I had to teach him how to cuss properly so that he wouldn't be beaten up. Neither of us have the normal emotional reactions to things that NTs have. But you are displaying typical NT behavior. And for you to think that HFA means retarded is pretty common among lesser informed NTs. So it would be my guess that you are NT and getting called "retarded" for some other reason.


Keep in mind Autism is a spectrum thing. There is high functioning which is not impaired and then there is severe which is terribly impaired. If you were diagnosed with severe autism, then there likely is some impairment going on.

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

So, you don't want to say anything negative about "retards", you just desperately don't want to be labeled as one...

Got it.

You have failed so incredibly that it's unbelievable. My original comment: "I am tired of being treated like a retard just for being a nerd."

The term "retard" is a derogatory term used to describe the derogatory manner in which I was treated. I have been diagnosed with autism multiple times, so if I really did mean to equate "autism to retard" like you falsely think, then didn't I just call myself a retard?

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Maybe this is my own Aspergers (high functioning autism) speaking but I don't understand where the defect is. Our brains function differently, not incorrectly. Many geniuses are thought to have had high functioning autism. People who have this alternate way of perceiving things are often exceptionally talented at organizing details and spatial orientation and math. These are all things that are highly needed in a technological society. It could just be that we are the next wave of evolution. Those who can use computers will be better able to provide and therefore more likely to breed and pass on their genes. Each generation will have more and more high functioning autistic people and it will be a benefit to those who wish to see our species travel into space and find cures for diseases using technology.

No need to be so negative about it. So we talk funny and don't always get NT's jokes. So what? Can they write a computer program in their sleep? I doubt it.

This highlights my opinion; basically the future evolution of humanity is being called neurologically disabled. Maybe your brain just functions differently because you're smart, has it ever crossed your mind? There's a reason why we never see smart 'normal' people.

I think you missed the point of my post. I have never been treated as if I am mentally handicapped, challenged, or "retarded" as you claim to be being treated. And honestly, if someone did attempt to project that vibe at me, I probably wouldn't notice. I don't pick up on those types of cues as quickly as someone that is NT. When I was a kid I had to have someone point out to me when I was being made fun of because I didn't notice it. I have learned to recognize it now after more than 25 years of consciously studying the way that NT's interact with one another. And now I have to teach it to my son as well because he also has HFA. I have to point out to him when a girl is flirting with him or when he is being made fun of. I had to teach him how to cuss properly so that he wouldn't be beaten up. Neither of us have the normal emotional reactions to things that NTs have. But you are displaying typical NT behavior. And for you to think that HFA means retarded is pretty common among lesser informed NTs. So it would be my guess that you are NT and getting called "retarded" for some other reason.


Keep in mind Autism is a spectrum thing. There is high functioning which is not impaired and then there is severe which is terribly impaired. If you were diagnosed with severe autism, then there likely is some impairment going on.

Now because I say autism doesn't exist, you say I'm neurotypical? How expected.

I already claimed my diagnosis was accurate but that the disorder itself is not valid. So you're spinning things to make it look like all REAL autistic's think autism is real and that anybody who doesn't think it exists must be neurotypical. Reminds me of theism.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

So, you don't want to say anything negative about "retards", you just desperately don't want to be labeled as one...

Got it.

You have failed so incredibly that it's unbelievable. My original comment: "I am tired of being treated like a retard just for being a nerd."

The term "retard" is a derogatory term used to describe the derogatory manner in which I was treated. I have been diagnosed with autism multiple times, so if I really did mean to equate "autism to retard" like you falsely think, then didn't I just call myself a retard?

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Maybe this is my own Aspergers (high functioning autism) speaking but I don't understand where the defect is. Our brains function differently, not incorrectly. Many geniuses are thought to have had high functioning autism. People who have this alternate way of perceiving things are often exceptionally talented at organizing details and spatial orientation and math. These are all things that are highly needed in a technological society. It could just be that we are the next wave of evolution. Those who can use computers will be better able to provide and therefore more likely to breed and pass on their genes. Each generation will have more and more high functioning autistic people and it will be a benefit to those who wish to see our species travel into space and find cures for diseases using technology.

No need to be so negative about it. So we talk funny and don't always get NT's jokes. So what? Can they write a computer program in their sleep? I doubt it.

This highlights my opinion; basically the future evolution of humanity is being called neurologically disabled. Maybe your brain just functions differently because you're smart, has it ever crossed your mind? There's a reason why we never see smart 'normal' people.

I think you missed the point of my post. I have never been treated as if I am mentally handicapped, challenged, or "retarded" as you claim to be being treated. And honestly, if someone did attempt to project that vibe at me, I probably wouldn't notice. I don't pick up on those types of cues as quickly as someone that is NT. When I was a kid I had to have someone point out to me when I was being made fun of because I didn't notice it. I have learned to recognize it now after more than 25 years of consciously studying the way that NT's interact with one another. And now I have to teach it to my son as well because he also has HFA. I have to point out to him when a girl is flirting with him or when he is being made fun of. I had to teach him how to cuss properly so that he wouldn't be beaten up. Neither of us have the normal emotional reactions to things that NTs have. But you are displaying typical NT behavior. And for you to think that HFA means retarded is pretty common among lesser informed NTs. So it would be my guess that you are NT and getting called "retarded" for some other reason.


Keep in mind Autism is a spectrum thing. There is high functioning which is not impaired and then there is severe which is terribly impaired. If you were diagnosed with severe autism, then there likely is some impairment going on.

Now because I say autism doesn't exist, you say I'm neurotypical? How expected.

That makes no sense. NT's are very aware and vocal about the existence of autism. I said you seem NT to me because of your emotional attachment to the opinions of others. People with HFA don't tend to care what NT's think of them. We usually look down and feel sorry for NTs for not being as good at engineering, math, and coding as we are. And we pity them for their crippling emotional awkwardness. Feelings really are speed bumps on the road to success.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

I already claimed my diagnosis was accurate but that the disorder itself is not valid. So you're spinning things to make it look like all REAL autistic's think autism is real and that anybody who doesn't think it exists must be neurotypical. Reminds me of theism.

Of course you would claim it was accurate. Who wouldn't? Having HFA is seen as a desired trait in many scientific fields. Again you are ignoring that Autism is a spectrum disorder. Did they say you are high functioning or are you like Rainman? Because if you are like Rainman, that would explain why you don't believe in autism.

And how is it that you can believe your diagnosis is correct but also not believe that autism is real? How can you have an accurate diagnosis if you are diagnosed with a disorder that isn't valid? That's like saying you have been accurately diagnosed with smurfism.

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

So, you don't want to say anything negative about "retards", you just desperately don't want to be labeled as one...

Got it.

You have failed so incredibly that it's unbelievable. My original comment: "I am tired of being treated like a retard just for being a nerd."

The term "retard" is a derogatory term used to describe the derogatory manner in which I was treated. I have been diagnosed with autism multiple times, so if I really did mean to equate "autism to retard" like you falsely think, then didn't I just call myself a retard?

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Maybe this is my own Aspergers (high functioning autism) speaking but I don't understand where the defect is. Our brains function differently, not incorrectly. Many geniuses are thought to have had high functioning autism. People who have this alternate way of perceiving things are often exceptionally talented at organizing details and spatial orientation and math. These are all things that are highly needed in a technological society. It could just be that we are the next wave of evolution. Those who can use computers will be better able to provide and therefore more likely to breed and pass on their genes. Each generation will have more and more high functioning autistic people and it will be a benefit to those who wish to see our species travel into space and find cures for diseases using technology.

No need to be so negative about it. So we talk funny and don't always get NT's jokes. So what? Can they write a computer program in their sleep? I doubt it.

This highlights my opinion; basically the future evolution of humanity is being called neurologically disabled. Maybe your brain just functions differently because you're smart, has it ever crossed your mind? There's a reason why we never see smart 'normal' people.

I think you missed the point of my post. I have never been treated as if I am mentally handicapped, challenged, or "retarded" as you claim to be being treated. And honestly, if someone did attempt to project that vibe at me, I probably wouldn't notice. I don't pick up on those types of cues as quickly as someone that is NT. When I was a kid I had to have someone point out to me when I was being made fun of because I didn't notice it. I have learned to recognize it now after more than 25 years of consciously studying the way that NT's interact with one another. And now I have to teach it to my son as well because he also has HFA. I have to point out to him when a girl is flirting with him or when he is being made fun of. I had to teach him how to cuss properly so that he wouldn't be beaten up. Neither of us have the normal emotional reactions to things that NTs have. But you are displaying typical NT behavior. And for you to think that HFA means retarded is pretty common among lesser informed NTs. So it would be my guess that you are NT and getting called "retarded" for some other reason.


Keep in mind Autism is a spectrum thing. There is high functioning which is not impaired and then there is severe which is terribly impaired. If you were diagnosed with severe autism, then there likely is some impairment going on.

Now because I say autism doesn't exist, you say I'm neurotypical? How expected.

That makes no sense. NT's are very aware and vocal about the existence of autism. I said you seem NT to me because of your emotional attachment to the opinions of others. People with HFA don't tend to care what NT's think of them. We usually look down and feel sorry for NTs for not being as good at engineering, math, and coding as we are. And we pity them for their crippling emotional awkwardness. Feelings really are speed bumps on the road to success.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

I already claimed my diagnosis was accurate but that the disorder itself is not valid. So you're spinning things to make it look like all REAL autistic's think autism is real and that anybody who doesn't think it exists must be neurotypical. Reminds me of theism.

Of course you would claim it was accurate. Who wouldn't? Having HFA is seen as a desired trait in many scientific fields. Again you are ignoring that Autism is a spectrum disorder. Did they say you are high functioning or are you like Rainman? Because if you are like Rainman, that would explain why you don't believe in autism.

And how is it that you can believe your diagnosis is correct but also not believe that autism is real? How can you have an accurate diagnosis if you are diagnosed with a disorder that isn't valid? That's like saying you have been accurately diagnosed with smurfism.

Well to be honest I think autism is equally as valid as smurfism, the only difference being there is a case of smurfism as one time a guy's skin became blue after drinking something with metal. In terms of medical health, I fit the criteria for HFA. I also find it not valid in the least bit, and its existence as possible as the resurrection of the vampire mole man that traveled back in time to feast on Jelly Belly's.

I do have emotional attachment, as I'm better than most people at noticing other's emotions. Autism doesn't specifically state that you must be bad at that in order to be diagnosed, hence my further criticism. I think it fails to define a neurological disorder.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

So, you don't want to say anything negative about "retards", you just desperately don't want to be labeled as one...

Got it.

You have failed so incredibly that it's unbelievable. My original comment: "I am tired of being treated like a retard just for being a nerd."

The term "retard" is a derogatory term used to describe the derogatory manner in which I was treated. I have been diagnosed with autism multiple times, so if I really did mean to equate "autism to retard" like you falsely think, then didn't I just call myself a retard?

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Maybe this is my own Aspergers (high functioning autism) speaking but I don't understand where the defect is. Our brains function differently, not incorrectly. Many geniuses are thought to have had high functioning autism. People who have this alternate way of perceiving things are often exceptionally talented at organizing details and spatial orientation and math. These are all things that are highly needed in a technological society. It could just be that we are the next wave of evolution. Those who can use computers will be better able to provide and therefore more likely to breed and pass on their genes. Each generation will have more and more high functioning autistic people and it will be a benefit to those who wish to see our species travel into space and find cures for diseases using technology.

No need to be so negative about it. So we talk funny and don't always get NT's jokes. So what? Can they write a computer program in their sleep? I doubt it.

This highlights my opinion; basically the future evolution of humanity is being called neurologically disabled. Maybe your brain just functions differently because you're smart, has it ever crossed your mind? There's a reason why we never see smart 'normal' people.

I think you missed the point of my post. I have never been treated as if I am mentally handicapped, challenged, or "retarded" as you claim to be being treated. And honestly, if someone did attempt to project that vibe at me, I probably wouldn't notice. I don't pick up on those types of cues as quickly as someone that is NT. When I was a kid I had to have someone point out to me when I was being made fun of because I didn't notice it. I have learned to recognize it now after more than 25 years of consciously studying the way that NT's interact with one another. And now I have to teach it to my son as well because he also has HFA. I have to point out to him when a girl is flirting with him or when he is being made fun of. I had to teach him how to cuss properly so that he wouldn't be beaten up. Neither of us have the normal emotional reactions to things that NTs have. But you are displaying typical NT behavior. And for you to think that HFA means retarded is pretty common among lesser informed NTs. So it would be my guess that you are NT and getting called "retarded" for some other reason.


Keep in mind Autism is a spectrum thing. There is high functioning which is not impaired and then there is severe which is terribly impaired. If you were diagnosed with severe autism, then there likely is some impairment going on.

Now because I say autism doesn't exist, you say I'm neurotypical? How expected.

That makes no sense. NT's are very aware and vocal about the existence of autism. I said you seem NT to me because of your emotional attachment to the opinions of others. People with HFA don't tend to care what NT's think of them. We usually look down and feel sorry for NTs for not being as good at engineering, math, and coding as we are. And we pity them for their crippling emotional awkwardness. Feelings really are speed bumps on the road to success.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

I already claimed my diagnosis was accurate but that the disorder itself is not valid. So you're spinning things to make it look like all REAL autistic's think autism is real and that anybody who doesn't think it exists must be neurotypical. Reminds me of theism.

Of course you would claim it was accurate. Who wouldn't? Having HFA is seen as a desired trait in many scientific fields. Again you are ignoring that Autism is a spectrum disorder. Did they say you are high functioning or are you like Rainman? Because if you are like Rainman, that would explain why you don't believe in autism.

And how is it that you can believe your diagnosis is correct but also not believe that autism is real? How can you have an accurate diagnosis if you are diagnosed with a disorder that isn't valid? That's like saying you have been accurately diagnosed with smurfism.

Well to be honest I think autism is equally as valid as smurfism, the only difference being there is a case of smurfism as one time a guy's skin became blue after drinking something with metal. In terms of medical health, I fit the criteria for HFA. I also find it not valid in the least bit, and its existence as possible as the resurrection of the vampire mole man that traveled back in time to feast on Jelly Belly's.

Ok so you do believe in autism because you also believe in smurfism? Did this guy also shrink to only 3 inches tall and start smurfing around a lot? My personal opinion is that you have gone off the deep end and that your claims that NTs treat people with HFA as retards is unsupported. You may be treated that way but that doesn't mean that ALL people with HFA are treated that way. And in order for something to be discrimination you have to show that people in general treat people with HFA badly. That means you need to produce studies or some kind of verifiable data that shows that people with HFA are more likely to be abused or marginalized in some way by NTs. If you cannot do that, then you are simply a person with the misfortune of behaving in a way that gets you negative attention and you also happen to be diagnosed with HFA.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

I do have emotional attachment, as I'm better than most people at noticing other's emotions. Autism doesn't specifically state that you must be bad at that in order to be diagnosed, hence my further criticism. I think it fails to define a neurological disorder.

My apologies for your emotional attachment. I can see where that would be terribly debilitating especially if you are being rejected by those who you are attached to.

So at this point, since I have a tendency to really upset people with sensitive emotions, I will leave you to the thread without any further input from me. I wouldn't want to make you have a melt down. And I sincerely do apologize for any offense I may have already caused you.

So at this point, since I have a tendency to really upset people with sensitive emotions, I will leave you to the thread without any further input from me. I wouldn't want to make you have a melt down. And I sincerely do apologize for any offense I may have already caused you.

No, in case you haven't noticed I don't believe in smurfism. I was being sarcastic cause I found it funny.

What you said... It's like telling someone who doesn't believe in god that they're going to hell.

Since you spoke of evidence, please present the evidence that shows autism has a common mechanism, and demonstrate the effects that autism has on the brain(like an MRI brain scan chart showing progression of autism and what it does to the brain). Show me both and I'll believe it exists.

Maybe you people don't understand what I'm trying to say.

The Theory Of Mind is the ability to see things from other's perspectives. However, the diagnosis criteria says nothing about whether you must have a ToM or not, which is why I was diagnosed despite having a ToM.

Until the autism diagnosis requires for you to not have a ToM in order to be diagnosed, then autism as a concept is invalid and hence doesn't exist.

autism as a concept is invalid and hence doesn't exist.

Not even for the seriously disabled ones?

Originally Posted by adelady

autism as a concept is invalid and hence doesn't exist.

Not even for the seriously disabled ones?

I wonder if you paid attention to what I said before that.

Why does it seem like you think I imply people with serious disabilities don't have serious disabilities? I probably already know the answer but explain.

No. That's not what I meant - sorry if I confused you. People who have serious ASD conditions that have large impacts on themselves, their families and the education system are the ones I have in mind. Those who exhibit obvious and comprehensive signs of autism really don't need a more elegant definition or a more sophisticated diagnosis - they need more and better access to early intervention and good educational support.

I thought you were referring to people who are "high-functioning" needing a more refined diagnosis process. My suspicion is that a lot of people in this high-functioning group will no longer be diagnosed as having any kind of autistic disorder at all once DSM 5 works its way through the system.

Originally Posted by adelady

No. That's not what I meant - sorry if I confused you. People who have serious ASD conditions that have large impacts on themselves, their families and the education system are the ones I have in mind. Those who exhibit obvious and comprehensive signs of autism really don't need a more elegant definition or a more sophisticated diagnosis - they need more and better access to early intervention and good educational support.

I thought you were referring to people who are "high-functioning" needing a more refined diagnosis process. My suspicion is that a lot of people in this high-functioning group will no longer be diagnosed as having any kind of autistic disorder at all once DSM 5 works its way through the system.

Turns out Asperger's(I was diagnosed with it multiple times) was removed as a disorder, so it seems autism will hopefully come to identify low-functioning cases and not me.
Ed Driscoll » The End of Asperger

I don't have much else reason to be here at this point. All I gotta say is hurray for medical researchers making the right decision.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Originally Posted by adelady

No. That's not what I meant - sorry if I confused you. People who have serious ASD conditions that have large impacts on themselves, their families and the education system are the ones I have in mind. Those who exhibit obvious and comprehensive signs of autism really don't need a more elegant definition or a more sophisticated diagnosis - they need more and better access to early intervention and good educational support.

I thought you were referring to people who are "high-functioning" needing a more refined diagnosis process. My suspicion is that a lot of people in this high-functioning group will no longer be diagnosed as having any kind of autistic disorder at all once DSM 5 works its way through the system.

Turns out Asperger's(I was diagnosed with it multiple times) was removed as a disorder, so it seems autism will hopefully come to identify low-functioning cases and not me.
Ed Driscoll » The End of Asperger

I don't have much else reason to be here at this point. All I gotta say is hurray for medical researchers making the right decision.

Huh?

I think it's still a valid diagnosis used by mental health professionals. The article you posted was about its media depiction.

I've google searched it, and it says it's no longer used in the DSM.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Originally Posted by adelady

No. That's not what I meant - sorry if I confused you. People who have serious ASD conditions that have large impacts on themselves, their families and the education system are the ones I have in mind. Those who exhibit obvious and comprehensive signs of autism really don't need a more elegant definition or a more sophisticated diagnosis - they need more and better access to early intervention and good educational support.

I thought you were referring to people who are "high-functioning" needing a more refined diagnosis process. My suspicion is that a lot of people in this high-functioning group will no longer be diagnosed as having any kind of autistic disorder at all once DSM 5 works its way through the system.

Turns out Asperger's(I was diagnosed with it multiple times) was removed as a disorder, so it seems autism will hopefully come to identify low-functioning cases and not me.
Ed Driscoll » The End of Asperger

I don't have much else reason to be here at this point. All I gotta say is hurray for medical researchers making the right decision.

I tried several times to get you to clarify if you were referring to high functioning autism or autism in general. But you never clarified your position there. And it does make a difference. HFA (formerly known as Aspergers) is not treated as a disorder, defect, or retarded in anyway. It may make some NTs feel awkward around you but that's their problem. Most people just see it as a personality quirk. Its the low functioning autism that is seen as mentally disabling. But your claim was that Autism didn't exist at all. I also pointed out to you several times that Austism is a spectum thing and that at one end of the spectrum a person is severely disabled the other end they are not. You ignored these things and in doing so you seem to have been able to justify taking offense to my comments.

You got snotty with us when we were trying to explain to you that HFA is not treated as you say it is. Now that you finally took the time to look it up you admit your purpose is gone. And I took the trouble to apologize to you? I retract that apology.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Turns out Asperger's(I was diagnosed with it multiple times) was removed as a disorder, so it seems autism will hopefully come to identify low-functioning cases and not me.

I don't have much else reason to be here at this point. All I gotta say is hurray for medical researchers making the right decision.

This appears to be the gist of why you have started this thread.

I can understand why you or anyone would dislike being associated with the mentally challenged because of how the common people perceive them, and based on what you have written in this thread, it isn't so much that you detest autistic people being discriminated against or are advocating against what you perceive as discrimination against autistic people, but more of you personally wishing to disassociate yourself alone from the other end of the spectrum.

Well, if that is the case, I guess the story ends here. Goodluck out here.

I still don't think autism exists but I give less of a damn now that Asperger's was removed. I'm as selfish as King Piccolo.

I think a lot of your perception of how others view mental illness is explained by simple ignorance. Autism, for example, gets lots of attention in the media but it's often not very informative. Even as a general education teacher, the coverage is relatively sparse--more of a familiarity and focused primarily on the high functioning aspects which we'll likely see in a general education classroom--most of the public doesn't even have that much knowledge. Changing the name of something does not cure the problem of ignorance. My best advice, is when you think someone is treating you poorly, or condensing, than take a minute and explain it to them; playing a denial game will be taking as confirmation of their ignorance.

Not only that, they only did away with the name of aspergers. it was absorbed into the autism spectrum rather than treated as something seperate. That's why its called high functioning autism instead of Aspergers. Its just that this change has happened so recently that laypeople still call high functioning autism, aspergers.

Autism is grossly overdiagnosed.
Having some "autistic" tendencies does not make one autistic.

It seems that a diagnosis of autism is a current fad
20 years ago attention deficit disorder (add) was grossly overdiagnosed ( which I surmised had more to do with funding than psychiatry----If a school could give the child ritalin, the school could get another $1500 of funding for educating that child.)

Virtually all "mental illnesses" are a continuum from extreemly effected, to symptom free.
Just because someone prefers their own thoughts to the babble of idiots and does not respond to outside stimulii is no valid reason for the diagnosis of autism.
In a psychology class (long ago) I had a professor who went a bit of the deep end denegrading those who overdiagnosed. He claimed that the "truely autistic" could be found in the back wards of mental institutions playing with their own feces, completely oblivious to the presence of other people.
So, according to his declaritive statements, If you are in here you ain't autistic, which doesn't mean that you have no autistic tendencies.

Originally Posted by sculptor

In a psychology class (long ago)

That might be the issue. I think the profession in general now recognizes that one doesn't need to be completely on the crippled end of the scale, such as in your example, to get a diagnosis and help. As an educator I can tell you that I welcome knowing if a student has high functioning "what ever" since now I'm armed with a better idea how to help the child--whether that be a reminder to check in with the nurse, or teach someone with ADD some tools to keep organized or a suggestion to parents about how to isolate them from distractions etc.

Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox

Originally Posted by sculptor

In a psychology class (long ago)

That might be the issue. I think the profession in general now recognizes that one doesn't need to be completely on the crippled end of the scale, such as in your example, to get a diagnosis and help. As an educator I can tell you that I welcome knowing if a student has high functioning "what ever" since now I'm armed with a better idea how to help the child--whether that be a reminder to check in with the nurse, or teach someone with ADD some tools to keep organized or a suggestion to parents about how to isolate them from distractions etc.

In my case, I always tell people to avoid using baseless and pointless pleasantries. Be direct and honest and if I don't understand I will let you know. Beating around the bush or dropping hints will never work in communicating with me as I don't tend to jump to conclusions or make assumptions. I take people for what they say exactly, sadly, too often people dont say exactly what they mean and I can never tell when someone is being facetious, sarcastic, or serious.

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

You're not. I just work best with monosyllabic words.

Oh!

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

You have failed so incredibly that it's unbelievable. My original comment: "I am tired of being treated like a retard just for being a nerd."

The term "retard" is a derogatory term used to describe the derogatory manner in which I was treated. I have been diagnosed with autism multiple times, so if I really did mean to equate "autism to retard" like you falsely think, then didn't I just call myself a retard?

My impression was that you were suggesting people with high-functioning autism are just nerds. They shouldn't be categorized with people who have serious autism because those people are retards.

In the broader scope of things, I think maybe you just shouldn't use the word 'retard' to make a point about people with mental disabilities. It's hard to take you seriously when you do that.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

You have failed so incredibly that it's unbelievable. My original comment: "I am tired of being treated like a retard just for being a nerd."

Then you've come to the right place.
We have a lot of nerds here.
We'll treat you like a retard because you behave like one.

In the broader scope of things, I think maybe you just shouldn't use the word 'retard' to make a point about people with mental disabilities. It's hard to take you seriously when you do that.

Thank you, thank you, thank you for this.

"Retarded" is now no longer used in medical circles for any of the various conditions that can affect people. It's really important when you get to something like autism. Because the real issue for many autistics is that it is an intellectual developmental delay, not a once and for all limitation. This is true for many intellectual disabilities.

It's now merely a schoolyard bully insult and should be avoided by anyone who wants to present themselves as a thoughtful, competent adult.

Definition1 of Retard; a holding back or slowing down
Definition2 of Retard; often offensive: a retarded person; also: a person held to resemble a retarded person in behavior


And as I was certainly held to resemble a retarded person in behavior, my use of the word was justified. It doesn't surprise me that you guys give magic powers to swear words. You're doing the same thing as the woman in 6:40 of the video, which is quite sad really.
Tipsy Christian woman tries to convince atheists they are sending themselves to hell - YouTube


Still waiting on the evidence to demonstrate autism has a common mechanism and an effect on the brain, I'd prefer a brain scan chart showing its progression.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Definition1 of Retard; a holding back or slowing down
Definition2 of Retard; often offensive: a retarded person; also: a person held to resemble a retarded person in behavior


And as I was certainly held to resemble a retarded person in behavior, my use of the word was justified. It doesn't surprise me that you guys give magic powers to swear words. You're doing the same thing as the woman in 6:40 of the video, which is quite sad really.
Tipsy Christian woman tries to convince atheists they are sending themselves to hell - YouTube


Still waiting on the evidence to demonstrate autism has a common mechanism and an effect on the brain, I'd prefer a brain scan chart showing its progression.

Ok so is this thread about your misunderstanding of autism and why people treat you as if you are not mentally up to par or is this about you not liking religious people?

Can you stick to one rant at a time? It gets really confusing.

Still waiting on the evidence to demonstrate autism has a common mechanism and an effect on the brain, I'd prefer a brain scan chart showing its progression.

This little piece about gait analysis is really interesting to me. Catalyst: Neurological Gait Keepers - ABC TV Science

The most important thing is that it indicates a malfunction in very basic brain activity. And for people who feel that they've been bullied at school because of their apparent difference from others, the commentary from 5.00 onwards is important.

Originally Posted by adelady

Still waiting on the evidence to demonstrate autism has a common mechanism and an effect on the brain, I'd prefer a brain scan chart showing its progression.

This little piece about gait analysis is really interesting to me. Catalyst: Neurological Gait Keepers - ABC TV Science

The most important thing is that it indicates a malfunction in very basic brain activity. And for people who feel that they've been bullied at school because of their apparent difference from others, the commentary from 5.00 onwards is important.

I watched the entire video, and there's facts I've found interesting:

1) Autism was compared to Parkinson's

2) Over two-thirds of those diagnosed with autism have an intellectual disability(ID) with an IQ below 70

3) There's empirical evidence to suggest gait in those diagnosed with autism

Firstly, I had no idea so many diagnosed with autism have ID, and I don't think too many people here were expecting it either. Maybe autism caused their gait, but I'd expect gait from people with an IQ below 70. If autism is redefined to only include a combination of movement functioning problems and IQ's below 70 then I''m more likely to say it exists, but I would still find autism as a disease unlikely because the combination of IQ<70 + gait are very probable random occurrences.

I know there will be questions after I post this, and "what have you been smoking" is not one of them I will answer.

If they can diagnose autism and mark significant similarities to Parkinson's disease could they not also use dopamine replacement drugs to treat autism & Asperger symptoms?

Originally Posted by Ascended

If they can diagnose autism and mark significant similarities to Parkinson's disease could they not also use dopamine replacement drugs to treat autism & Asperger symptoms?

If dopamine replacement drugs can work for people who they diagnose with autism, then yes. It's not that I doubt it but I just haven't researched this treatment. For the sake of being politically correct, I don't think it matters what people with serious disabilities' disorders are called(well it does but you know what I mean). And besides that, the link between high functioning autism(Asperger's isn't in the DSM) and Parkinsons has not been established well enough for me. For autism yes, but at that point why call it autism when it can be called Parkinson's?

but at that point why call it autism when it can be called Parkinson's?

Because it has a different cause. The fact that two (dozen) different conditions and illnesses can have similar effects on a neurotransmitter and might both be ameliorated by similar drugs says nothing about the etiology of those conditions in the first place.

Especially since the two conditions mentioned, autism and Parkinson's, have entirely different prognoses. A Parkinson's sufferer has a pretty grim prognosis with dementia a common degenerative state before inevitable death. Autism has varied prognoses - and those vary tremendously anyway depending on how soon an early intervention begins and how good the therapy is for how long a period. And neither of them has any similar cause or prognosis to Dopamine-responsive dystonia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia even though that genetic condition is treated with dopamine therapy.

I had to look up these terms, I might as well leave them here for anyone else:
ameliorated- to make or become better; improve
etiology- the study of causes or origins
prognosis- medical term for predicting the likely outcome of one's standing

Originally Posted by adelady

Because it has a different cause.

There's no way you know autism has a different cause if autism's cause hasn't been revealed yet, so your first sentence is either a mistake or a lie.

Originally Posted by adelady

The fact that two (dozen) different conditions and illnesses can have similar effects on a neurotransmitter and might both be ameliorated by similar drugs says nothing about the etiology of those conditions in the first place.

That's a bit of a stretch. While it may(in a sense) say nothing about the etiology, it says something about the possible etiology.

Originally Posted by adelady

Especially since the two conditions mentioned, autism and Parkinson's, have entirely different prognoses. A Parkinson's sufferer has a pretty grim prognosis with dementia a common degenerative state before inevitable death.

I'm in agreement with that, as I don't think autism and Parkinson's are related. Mainly because I don't think autism exists.

Originally Posted by adelady

Autism has varied prognoses - and those vary tremendously anyway depending on how soon an early intervention begins and how good the therapy is for how long a period.

Though I don't actually disagree with your statement here either; you've said it yourself, autism prognoses vary tremendously. I'm skeptical they have a common mechanism.

Originally Posted by adelady

And neither of them has any similar cause or prognosis to Dopamine-responsive dystonia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia even though that genetic condition is treated with dopamine therapy.

I'm in agreement with this too. Not that it matters.

And just more reasons for me to disbelieve autism's existence:
Correlation between intelligence and social deficiency - Psychology Wiki
This is because whether someone is "socially awkward" depends primarily on the people around them, not oneself. Intelligent people's social issues seem to be(by the general population) attributed to a boogey man disease instead of the correct reason. This act is blatantly obvious discrimination against intelligent people. Autism has been debunked by yours truly.

Although it may be impossible for us to be sure, but I have to ask; just how social are you in the presence of other people? Do you face trouble communicating with or understanding your peers?

Originally Posted by scoobydoo1

Although it may be impossible for us to be sure, but I have to ask; just how social are you in the presence of other people? Do you face trouble communicating with or understanding your peers?

Something tells me you don't see the difference between inability to communicate and unwillingness to communicate. I will fancy you this though; I have no such inabilities to communicate, and have been tested for this.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Something tells me you don't see the difference between inability to communicate and unwillingness to communicate.

I had that thought at the back of my head when I was writing that post, but I figured I take things step by step depending on the answer you gave. It* would be a mistake on my part to jump to conclusions before allowing you to clarify.

Example:
Q1: just how social are you in the presence of other people?
A1: I'm pretty sociable when I have or want to.

Q2: Do you face trouble communicating with or understanding your peers?
A2: Not really. But I usually prefer keeping to myself.

Etc.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

I will fancy you this though; I have no such inabilities to communicate, and have been tested for this.

I have to ask that you not imagine my demeanor via an online conversation. There are very few cues for us to pick up on besides the readable textual content. I'm merely trying to understand what factors contributed to your diagnosis.

I'm merely trying to understand what factors contributed to your diagnosis.

As long as I can remember, I refused to conform with the rest of society, willingly not making friends. As it just so happened, not having any friends(willing or unwilling) was a listed symptom of autism. As I got older my refusal to be with other people grew, and so did the autism boogey man. Nobody understood why I was like that, and the only explanation they could come up with was a copout that not only gave them the leap of faith that transcended their lack of knowledge but also gave them the relief that I "wasn't" really smarter than anyone else, including them.

A very biased answer from me? Maybe. True nonetheless.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

As long as I can remember, I refused to conform with the rest of society, willingly not making friends.

Not willing, or did not make many/any friends even after trying? The typical child usually engage in social exercises with other children in the form of group play. When you were a child, did you have an aversion to interacting with your peers as a child?

Originally Posted by scoobydoo1

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

As long as I can remember, I refused to conform with the rest of society, willingly not making friends.

Not willing, or did not make many/any friends even after trying? The typical child usually engage in social exercises with other children in the form of group play. When you were a child, did you have an aversion to interacting with your peers as a child?

It seems you're looking for reasons to think autism exists, but I'll humor you.

I did engage in social exercises but had a general dislike for other people, starting at a very young age(which I'm proud of). An aversion? I'm not sure if I had any specific instance of it but in preschool, seeing other kids playing together just made me annoyed. It was more of a consistently repeated type of aversion if at all.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

I'm merely trying to understand what factors contributed to your diagnosis.

As long as I can remember, I refused to conform with the rest of society, willingly not making friends. As it just so happened, not having any friends(willing or unwilling) was a listed symptom of autism. As I got older my refusal to be with other people grew, and so did the autism boogey man. Nobody understood why I was like that, and the only explanation they could come up with was a copout that not only gave them the leap of faith that transcended their lack of knowledge but also gave them the relief that I "wasn't" really smarter than anyone else, including them.

A very biased answer from me? Maybe. True nonetheless.

So what is your motivation for not wanting friends?

Because not having friends can be the result of many things besides HFA. But it is a common trait among those with HFA.

edit: Nevermind you must have been typing at the same time as me. and you already answered the question.

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

I'm merely trying to understand what factors contributed to your diagnosis.

As long as I can remember, I refused to conform with the rest of society, willingly not making friends. As it just so happened, not having any friends(willing or unwilling) was a listed symptom of autism. As I got older my refusal to be with other people grew, and so did the autism boogey man. Nobody understood why I was like that, and the only explanation they could come up with was a copout that not only gave them the leap of faith that transcended their lack of knowledge but also gave them the relief that I "wasn't" really smarter than anyone else, including them.

A very biased answer from me? Maybe. True nonetheless.

So what is your motivation for not wanting friends?

Because not having friends can be the result of many things besides HFA. But it is a common trait among those with HFA.

edit: Nevermind you must have been typing at the same time as me. and you already answered the question.

There seems to be very few logical people in the world, and if I'm looking for friendship then I primarily want someone logical. That's a very tough search. If I wanted to I could buy a pair of generic blue jeans, a bland tight shirt, get a buzzcut and then make friends with normal people... Whom are not logical and a waste of my time. I think everyone on this forum, especially a science forum, understands the way I feel about this.

Knowing the world has logical people in it is satisfactory enough for me.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

It seems you're looking for reasons to think autism exists, but I'll humor you.

I am not actually. Like I've said earlier, I'm just trying to identify what factors might have tipped the scales for your diagnosis.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

I did engage in social exercises

Because you had to, were told to, or because you wanted to?

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

but had a general dislike for other people, starting at a very young age(which I'm proud of).

Can you tell us a little more about that? Did you dislike strangers (people you aren't familiar with) in general, dislike crowds, dislike their silliness (being a child and all), dislike the intimacy of being social with others, etc.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

An aversion? I'm not sure if I had any specific instance of it but in preschool, seeing other kids playing together just made me annoyed. It was more of a consistently repeated type of aversion if at all.

Together? Did you also had an aversion when they are alone? I guess what I'm trying to ask is; if you can recall, was it the numbers (of people) that put your off?

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

I'm merely trying to understand what factors contributed to your diagnosis.

As long as I can remember, I refused to conform with the rest of society, willingly not making friends. As it just so happened, not having any friends(willing or unwilling) was a listed symptom of autism. As I got older my refusal to be with other people grew, and so did the autism boogey man. Nobody understood why I was like that, and the only explanation they could come up with was a copout that not only gave them the leap of faith that transcended their lack of knowledge but also gave them the relief that I "wasn't" really smarter than anyone else, including them.

A very biased answer from me? Maybe. True nonetheless.

So what is your motivation for not wanting friends?

Because not having friends can be the result of many things besides HFA. But it is a common trait among those with HFA.

edit: Nevermind you must have been typing at the same time as me. and you already answered the question.

There seems to be very few logical people in the world, and if I'm looking for friendship then I primarily want someone logical. That's a very tough search. If I wanted to I could buy a pair of generic blue jeans, a bland tight shirt, get a buzzcut and then make friends with normal people... Whom are not logical and a waste of my time. I think everyone on this forum, especially a science forum, understands the way I feel about this.

Knowing the world has logical people in it is satisfactory enough for me.

I won't debate that with you. I don't like people much myself. I prefer logical people as well. I don't know many. Most people have these things called feelings that annoy the hell out of me. But I have grown to understand my own annoyance with those perceived to be illogical, is also illogical. It borders delusional. It borders grandiose self-image. Extreme arrogance. Anti-social personality disorder. All traits of HFA. The thing you are failing to do in your own lapse of logic is to assume that having HFA is a handicap or that it somehow makes you less than others. So what if some people don't like people with Autism or High Functioning Autism. Many will continue to call us Aspies for a long time because they are not aware of the name change. If they changed our label to being super-geniuses, would you be less offended by the discrimination we would surely experience? People like us are different and it is normal human behavior to dislike what is different from ourselves. We don't like them, they don't like us. It's all even stevens isn't it?

make friends with normal people... Whom are not logical and a waste of my time. I think everyone on this forum, especially a science forum, understands the way I feel about this.

Well I don't. The idea that other people are "a waste of my time" I find quite unpleasant. I'd agree that I'm not interested in a whole heap of things that absorb other people, but that also applies to a lot of scientific and "logical" people. I could be sharing a table at the staff club at the university with a group of philosophers or with a group of mathematicians/engineers - and be just as bored as I would be with enthusiasts for a sport or motorbikes or online gaming or a thousand other things. Even musicians. You might think that sharing a table with members of an orchestra could lead to interesting conversation about your favourite music. It could. But it's equally likely to be the same dreary discussion about the internal workings of any workplace you're not involved in. Fascinating to the participants, beyond tedious for anyone else.

Most people talk about their work, their families, themselves and what they're interested in. It's up to you to be a good conversationalist to get the best out of any interaction.

Adalady makes an excellent point. You seem upset by the idea of being discriminated against and called autistic, but then you refer to the majority of other people to be normal, seems reasonable, but then you go on to describe "normal" to mean something illogical and a waste of your time. You are discriminating against normal people, a group in the OP you were upset to not be considered a member of.

Are you being logical?

Originally Posted by scoobydoo1

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

It seems you're looking for reasons to think autism exists, but I'll humor you.

I am not actually. Like I've said earlier, I'm just trying to identify what factors might have tipped the scales for your diagnosis.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

I did engage in social exercises

Because you had to, were told to, or because you wanted to?

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

but had a general dislike for other people, starting at a very young age(which I'm proud of).

Can you tell us a little more about that? Did you dislike strangers (people you aren't familiar with) in general, dislike crowds, dislike their silliness (being a child and all), dislike the intimacy of being social with others, etc.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

An aversion? I'm not sure if I had any specific instance of it but in preschool, seeing other kids playing together just made me annoyed. It was more of a consistently repeated type of aversion if at all.

Together? Did you also had an aversion when they are alone? I guess what I'm trying to ask is; if you can recall, was it the numbers (of people) that put your off?

A1: At first I engaged in social exercises because I wanted to, but then subsequently didn't want to.

A2: I did not specifically dislike strangers, in fact my lack of bias allows me to dislike anybody, including my own mom. I don't specifically dislike crowds, and whether I do would depend on what people this hypothetical crowd consists of. I have no particular stance on silliness. I don't specifically dislike the intimacy of being social with others but dislike having social intimacy with those I dislike. Off topic: Generally I feel you're looking for me to match a single symptom of autism and then say I have it once I do.

A3: I'm not certain, as recalling things that far back in time is difficult.

Well I don't. The idea that other people are "a waste of my time" I find quite unpleasant. I'd agree that I'm not interested in a whole heap of things that absorb other people, but that also applies to a lot of scientific and "logical" people. I could be sharing a table at the staff club at the university with a group of philosophers or with a group of mathematicians/engineers - and be just as bored as I would be with enthusiasts for a sport or motorbikes or online gaming or a thousand other things. Even musicians. You might think that sharing a table with members of an orchestra could lead to interesting conversation about your favourite music. It could. But it's equally likely to be the same dreary discussion about the internal workings of any workplace you're not involved in. Fascinating to the participants, beyond tedious for anyone else.

Most people talk about their work, their families, themselves and what they're interested in. It's up to you to be a good conversationalist to get the best out of any interaction.

Yes, I discriminate against discriminators. Certainly not the good old fashioned mom and pop bigotry, that's for sure.

It's up to me to be a good conversationalist to get the best out of any interaction if I care about doing so.

Adalady makes an excellent point. You seem upset by the idea of being discriminated against and called autistic, but then you refer to the majority of other people to be normal, seems reasonable, but then you go on to describe "normal" to mean something illogical and a waste of your time. You are discriminating against normal people, a group in the OP you were upset to not be considered a member of.

Are you being logical?

I've clearly been taken out of context. I'm not upset about not being considered normal in general... I'm upset how I'm not considered to have a brain that functions normally.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiology_of_autism

autism is associated with mental retardation

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Off topic: Generally I feel you're looking for me to match a single symptom of autism and then say I have it once I do.

Hmm, tell me: how long have you been paranoid?

Originally Posted by Dywyddyr

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Off topic: Generally I feel you're looking for me to match a single symptom of autism and then say I have it once I do.

Hmm, tell me: how long have you been paranoid?

Forever, why?

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Originally Posted by scoobydoo1

Because you had to, were told to, or because you wanted to?

At first I engaged in social exercises because I wanted to, but then subsequently didn't want to.

Can you tell me a little more about the reasons for not wanting to?

Do you find it tedious? Or perhaps, you are more comfortable entertaining yourself; possibly because you weren't able to find someone else who share similar interest(s) and didn't want to impose on others?

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Originally Posted by scoobydoo1

Can you tell us a little more about that? Did you dislike strangers (people you aren't familiar with) in general, dislike crowds, dislike their silliness (being a child and all), dislike the intimacy of being social with others, etc.

I did not specifically dislike strangers, in fact my lack of bias allows me to dislike anybody, including my own mom. I don't specifically dislike crowds, and whether I do would depend on what people this hypothetical crowd consists of. I have no particular stance on silliness. I don't specifically dislike the intimacy of being social with others but dislike having social intimacy with those I dislike.

I see.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Originally Posted by scoobydoo1

Together? Did you also had an aversion when they are alone? I guess what I'm trying to ask is; if you can recall, was it the numbers (of people) that put your off?

I'm not certain, as recalling things that far back in time is difficult.

Understandable.

Do you perhaps have that same view now; as an adult? Not "children playing together", but your peers engaging in conversation and/or activities.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Generally I feel you're looking for me to match a single symptom of autism and then say I have it once I do.

I'm not sure what else I can say to reassure you that I'm not doing so. All I can hope for is that you are able to pick up on cues I've left behind with the lack (preferably absence) of judgmental overtones in the content of my post.

Yes I have picked up on it, but it seems a bit contradictory that you parlay it with the possibility of me not being able to understand the cues you left. Otherwise, answering your questions is becoming too tiresome for my tastes. If you wish to extract further information from me, then you'll need other ways. If you sent me a PM asking further questions then I'd answer but that's only if you're desperate or curious enough.

Well I'm convinced.

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Otherwise, answering your questions is becoming too tiresome for my tastes. If you wish to extract further information from me, then you'll need other ways. If you sent me a PM asking further questions then I'd answer but that's only if you're desperate or curious enough.

Understood.

My primary interest lies in how people process information, reason, make choices, and behave; either consciously or subconsciously. In short, how people "work", much like understanding how a combustion engine works by studying the parts and how it functions as a whole. Not specifically you, but the general public at large. I hope that offers some insight as to why I asked the questions I did, and I thank you for taking time out for this conversation.

Originally Posted by scoobydoo1

Originally Posted by MoonCanvas

Otherwise, answering your questions is becoming too tiresome for my tastes. If you wish to extract further information from me, then you'll need other ways. If you sent me a PM asking further questions then I'd answer but that's only if you're desperate or curious enough.

Understood.

My primary interest lies in how people process information, reason, make choices, and behave; either consciously or subconsciously. In short, how people "work", much like understanding how a combustion engine works. Not specifically you, but the general public at large. I hope that offers some insight as to why I asked the questions I did, and I thank you for taking time out for this conversation.

Like finding a new type of radio a new mind is hard to resist taking apart and seeing how it works. Too bad they won't let us physically take minds apart.

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Like finding a new type of radio a new mind is hard to resist taking apart and seeing how it works.

Except that, far too often, the new type of radio turns out to be just another bog standard one in a shiny new casing.

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

Are you suggesting that people with autism DON'T require special attention? That they can function with a group of student who do not have the disorder?

Firstly your suggesting their in a group not working singularly. Autistic kids work fine by themselves, even better.

Originally Posted by jakesyl

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

Are you suggesting that people with autism DON'T require special attention? That they can function with a group of student who do not have the disorder?

Firstly your suggesting their in a group not working singularly. Autistic kids work fine by themselves, even better.

I don't think segregating them because they have social developmental issues is the right path. I believe they need a very structured approach to building social skills so that they CAN work within a group successfully. To push them into a room alone and say, "This is a better setting for them" seems very cynical to me. Very little in the real world can be accomplished without social interactions.

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

I don't think segregating them because they have social developmental issues is the right path. I believe they need a very structured approach to building social skills so that they CAN work within a group successfully. To push them into a room alone and say, "This is a better setting for them" seems very cynical to me. Very little in the real world can be accomplished without social interactions.

Not sure.
(And I'm tempted to disagree vehemently).
Some social interaction is required to achieve things - at least if those things are going to be "of benefit" to the world.
But, if you're happy enough to work on your own (or especially if you prefer to work on your own) then social interaction is a hindrance and a distraction ¹.
Leave the social interaction (if it's considered absolutely necessary ²) until there's something to "pass on".
Don't even get me started on "working within a group".

1 Case in point: I got handed a particularly difficult problem at work once and my boss was concerned that it was too much for one person to solve. Despite repeated reassurance from me that I'd have no trouble he persisted. Right up until he said "But surely there's some way I can help?"
"Yes, Con, you bugger off altogether and wait until I come to you with the answer".
He finally got the hint.
2 Why is it that's always other people that tell me I should interact with other people? If I wanted to interact I would.

If we're talking about someone who wants to work on their own because they can focus better, that's fine. If we're talking about someone being left isolated because they are unable to function in a social environment, I think it's unfair to that person not to address their issues.

As to the "group work" point, I was always the first to roll my eyes in school on a group project. What I'm referring to is more mundane, though. I mean ordering food at a restaurant, making a physical deposit at the bank, going to a sports event, etc. Some people with autism can have serious meltdowns in events like these simply because their social development was not properly addressed.

I think it all comes back to the notion that you can WANT to work on your own for a bit and be social if you choose. For some people with autism, they won't get the option to be social when they choose if the issues are not addressed early (~2 years old).

EDIT: It's important to note that most of my comments refer to how we handle infants and young children who suffer from autism. This is well before they are capable of making an informed independent decision.

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

Originally Posted by jakesyl

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

Are you suggesting that people with autism DON'T require special attention? That they can function with a group of student who do not have the disorder?

Firstly your suggesting their in a group not working singularly. Autistic kids work fine by themselves, even better.

I don't think segregating them because they have social developmental issues is the right path. I believe they need a very structured approach to building social skills so that they CAN work within a group successfully. To push them into a room alone and say, "This is a better setting for them" seems very cynical to me. Very little in the real world can be accomplished without social interactions.

I don't think jakesyl was implying that you or anyone suggested segregation being forced on them. It's just that kids with autism, especially high functioning autism often prefer to be alone. I know I always enjoyed jobs where I had no direct coworkers to deal with. I can deal with customers just fine, but if I have to work with a team I end up angry and wanting to hurt people because they are often too chatty, inefficient, not willing to be accountable for their mistakes, and do not take their job seriously. I probably would have done better in the military because at least in those circumstances, people that behave that way get killed and Id have the satisfaction of seeing the people with poor work ethic drop like flies while the rest of us worked like a well oiled machine. But the law won't allow me to let the stupid people fall into industrial meat grinders. I am obligated to tell them to stop texting and get to work and pay attention to what they are doing.

Originally Posted by seagypsy

It's just that kids with autism, especially high functioning autism often prefer to be alone.

This is where I have a problem. Prefer? Or are unable to cope with social interactions?

There are certain therapies, when initiated at a young age, that can allow for semi-normal social lives for children with autism.

But there's the point.
Autistics get stressed (or don't even notice) when "forced" into social situations (and I'm pretty sure that my predilection for solitude is not entirely a "choice" thing).
Simply because society at large deems social interaction to be a "good thing" why should we force everyone to conform to this ideal?

I'm probably explaining this badly.
At my level I can (if pushed) work with others ¹ but I'm at one end of a spectrum. An "extreme autistic" is being pushed into a hole that he/ she's not shaped for.
To my mind the "better" solution is to find someone who enjoys caring for others and put them in charge: leave the kid alone (until/ unless they want interaction).

1 Usually it's not so much a case of "rather not" but "what's the point of..." i.e. why on Earth would I want anyone else around?

Originally Posted by Dywyddyr

But there's the point.
Autistics get stressed (or don't even notice) when "forced" into social situations (and I'm pretty sure that my predilection for solitude is not entirely a "choice" thing).

While your anti-social tendency may not be entirely a choice, in some part, your decision to participate in a social arean is a choice. Someone with severe autism may not be able to make this choice, not because they don't want to, but because they could be potentially harmful in a social environment. I've seen a 6 foot 200 lb teen with autism have a meltdown in a restaurant. It can be scary for both them and those around them.

Originally Posted by Dywyddyr

Simply because society at large deems social interaction to be a "good thing" why should we force everyone to conform to this ideal?

I guess my only argument to this would be that humans are an acknowledged social creature. To deprive an individual of this activity due to a disorder seems unfair to them. We don't know that they choose to be anti-social, we only know that they are unable to be so due to their condition. If we can give them a chance at a normal social experience through therapy, I believe that is the right course of action.

Originally Posted by Dywyddyr

I'm probably explaining this badly.

You're not.

Originally Posted by Dywyddyr

At my level I can (if pushed) work with others ¹ but I'm at one end of a spectrum. An "extreme autistic" is being pushed into a hole that he/ she's not shaped for.
To my mind the "better" solution is to find someone who enjoys caring for others and put them in charge: leave the kid alone (until/ unless they want interaction).

I think this is the most fascinating point (medical research aside) in the debate about autism. There is a vocal group of parents who have children with autism who think that their child doesn't have a condition. They are the way they are and to treat them as abnormal is wrong.

Everything I have said is pretty much how I would respond if I had a child with autism, but it is ultimately the preference of the parent.

Originally Posted by Dywyddyr

1 Usually it's not so much a case of "rather not" but "what's the point of..." i.e. why on Earth would I want anyone else around?

Pretty much how I feel when I have to do public outreach or meet with landowners. Can't I just do my job? Bugger the masses.

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

Originally Posted by seagypsy

It's just that kids with autism, especially high functioning autism often prefer to be alone.

This is where I have a problem. Prefer? Or are unable to cope with social interactions?

There are certain therapies, when initiated at a young age, that can allow for semi-normal social lives for children with autism.

For severe autism I definitely see your point. The kid NF and I look after is a nightmare. He fluctuates between wanting socialization that he can't get because, well, just about every NT kid that attempts to play with him walks away wanting to crush his skull in. But there are also times when kids do want to play with him and he snarls and growls at them, literally, to stay away from him. But then he isn't just autistic. He is also schizophrenic, bipolar, antisocial personality disorder, sociopathic. you name it he has it. He makes me wish we could euthanized the severely mentally ill at times.

But for people with HFA, like myself, I can't remember ever meeting one that could remember a time when they wanted to have intimate personal relationships. I think it is there but it is so deeply buried in our subconscious that we simply don't directly experience the desire to socialize. I tolerate people talking to me. I don't generally enjoy it. I generally cling to one individual for social interaction. But at the first sign of discovering they are not like me, I can cut any and all emotional attachments I have with them. Which is extremely frustrating for poor NF. Because in spite of having 4 kids, he is the person I am most emotionally attached to. I love my kids and I can handle short bursts of conversations with them, but when they start talking about their interests which I have no interests in, I literally have to force myself under great pain to patiently sit and pretend to be interested. I don't know if they can tell I'm faking it or not. I am certain they know I love them. The older ones seem to understand I can't help the frustration I get.

But what you seem to be expressing is the belief that we actually want to be social and are somehow emotionally being scarred for lack of social interaction. I assure you, we are not. I feel more scarred from having socialization forced on me. I have to take extra anxiety medication if I anticipate having to interact with a lot of people. A lot in my mind is defined as 2 or more. I have never had any official treatment for HFA. And only recently had a doctor say that I did seem to have it but that more visits would be necessary.

I have depression and anxiety, which generally lessons when I am able to isolate myself. It's the forced social interactions that cause me distress. Having many classes available online works much better for me. And I don't have as much anxiety dealing with people online as I do in person or over the phone. Words on a screen can only communicate the meanings of said words. I don't have to worry about reading facial expressions, body movements, voice tone, or dealing with people saying um all the time. And it seems most people, when writing, only type what is necessary, they don't interrupt their own statements to say something, holy cow did you see the ass on that monkey!!, anyway so this guy cut me off on the highway....

See how annoying it is when people interrupt themselves. I do it too. That's why I prefer to not even talk to people about things. If I am talking to someone one on one it isn't as big a problem, but a third person who wants to interrupt or distract a conversation makes my blood boil.


It isn't really a matter of preference or coping, its just how we are and under which circumstances we function best. If you don't like being around people who stink, is that your preference or are you simply not able to cope with the smell. in reality cope and prefer technically mean the same thing except that saying someone cannot cope implies that what they don't like is something that they should like, that their preference is wrong somehow. Do homosexuals prefer to date people of their own sex or are they not able to cope with people of the opposite sex? Do you see how strange that question is?

We are attracted to isolation. Others are attracted to socializing. There is nothing wrong with either scenerio. We are simply wired differently and therefore function differently.

Low functioning autism isn't any more disabling than just being an uneducated stupid inbred moron. They have many of the same handicaps. People with High functioning autism just have higher intelligence than those of crippling autism.

You could say that some people have high functioning neurotypicalness (very intelligent people) and others are severely low functioning neurotypicalness(really stupid people like those given to believing in alien abductions and conspiracy theories).

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

We don't know that they choose to be anti-social, we only know that they are unable to be so due to their condition.

OMG!
I actually see exactly where you're coming from now.
You just made my day.

OTOH it now makes me unable to rationally disagree with you. Damn!

Originally Posted by Dywyddyr

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

We don't know that they choose to be anti-social, we only know that they are unable to be so due to their condition.

OMG!
I actually see exactly where you're coming from now.
You just made my day.

OTOH it now makes me unable to rationally disagree with you. Damn!

I'm not sure how much rationale there really is for any position on autism. It's a really fascinating condition. I've worked with a 13 year old genius on my campus and to say that he is somehow inferior or disabled by his condition would only work if you've never met him. He talks loud and rambles and doesn't make eye contact....and he's STILL going to contribute more to the progress of science than I ever could.

How can you call someone handicapped and be jelous of them at the same time?

I want to say one more thing about my stance on children with autism. If using social development therapy somehow hindered the other aspects of development that often accompany autism, I would not feel the same way. People with autism often have amazing gifts that come at the price of social comfort. These gifts should not be sacrificed, but if we can help them develop social skills alongside their other capabilities, I think we owe it to them to do so.

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

Originally Posted by Dywyddyr

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

We don't know that they choose to be anti-social, we only know that they are unable to be so due to their condition.

OMG!
I actually see exactly where you're coming from now.
You just made my day.

OTOH it now makes me unable to rationally disagree with you. Damn!

I'm not sure how much rationale there really is for any position on autism. It's a really fascinating condition. I've worked with a 13 year old genius on my campus and to say that he is somehow inferior or disabled by his condition would only work if you've never met him. He talks loud and rambles and doesn't make eye contact....and he's STILL going to contribute more to the progress of science than I ever could.

How can you call someone handicapped and be jelous of them at the same time?

I consider most NT people to be handicapped, but I can be jealous of their ability to manipulate others into giving them stuff they didn't earn and don't deserve. But I did have the unexpected opportunity to "study" under a sociopath, so I did learn a few things. Someday I may put some of those tricks to use. But haven't felt inclined to do so yet.

Sorry, NT?

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Someday I may put some of those tricks to use.

But, but, but... that means interacting with other people in real life!

Originally Posted by Dywyddyr

Originally Posted by seagypsy

Someday I may put some of those tricks to use.

But, but, but... that means interacting with other people in real life!

yes, but to be sociopathic, you cannot see other people as people. I just have to view them as test subjects or pets put here to serve my whims. Then I just treat them as if they are characters in a video game that I can anticipate the script and actions according to what I can convince them of.

But you do make a good point, and that is probably why I haven't been inclined to do it at any time yet.

Originally Posted by seagypsy

But you do make a good point, and that is probably why I haven't been inclined to do it at any time yet.

I can't honestly think of anything I'd want to manipulate people into doing.

Originally Posted by Dywyddyr

Originally Posted by seagypsy

But you do make a good point, and that is probably why I haven't been inclined to do it at any time yet.

I can't honestly think of anything I'd want to manipulate people into doing.

Leaving you alone?

Originally Posted by Flick Montana

Leaving you alone?

But I can generally manage that without manipulation.