OK, I think you mean most women are intellectually sufficient. Probably. The most important thing is curiosity. All the intelligence in the world is no use if you don't give a damn to use it.
What on earth is this supposed to mean? "Most women are intellectually sufficient"?
I read this as meaning women have just enough brains to do the washing and ironing and have babies, but we shouldn't bother our empty heads with serious topics like politics or science that only the superior male brain can understand. And if we're 'curious' - aww, isn't that a cute ickle girlie?
GuessWho, I'm female. And I'm damn smart. And I don't like being patronised.
*warning: this post is not well explained. I know what I mean, but it's a slippery philosophical concept and I'm struggling to put it into words. So if I've offended you, please ask for clarification before you flame my bum off*
I think I understand how this supremacist thinkging comes about. If you've had (or perceive that you've had) someone telling you you're less important, defective, whatever, this philosophy can evolve as a defence mechanism. The person learns to discount others' opinions, because those opinions are so damaging. So, they do so on the basis of "why should I care what you think of me, because you're inferior. You're not better than me because I'm better than you."
It's so sad, because then the hated becomes the hater and the cycle continues. And they're trapped into perpetuating the very theory that hurt them in the first place - the idea that some people have more right to exist than others.
Oh, Lucie, have you even READ some of the posts around here lately.
I'm not talking about every single person who's ever had wrong done by them. I'm talking about the extremist nutters who come along waving flags and screaming that Aspies are "superior" to NTs.
You're just disagreeing for the sake of disagreement.
If that is how you see my post - I won't bother responding to you again.
Thank God for that, then, now maybe we can get on with discussing the topic at hand without endless sidetracking and semantic argument caused by going out of your way to find something in my comments you can disagree with.
Re: the term nutters. I am an Aspie. I am blunt, honest and often tactless. I call things as I find them. And I consider writing off all neurotypical people as "stupid", "shallow", or any other sweeping generalisation, to be worthy of the term.
Actually, I was going to let this slide, but it's really getting to me, so I'm not going to bottle it up any more:
I'm really pissed off that I'm the one being accused of judging people, because I described the lunatic fringe Aspie Supremists as "nutters", while said Supremacists are allowed to spew forth all sorts of nonsense and if anyone calls them on it, they're the one that gets attacked.
fwiw... (and apologies for going off topic...)
Nutter = nutcase, nuts, loopy, a gentle and mildly derrogatory term for a person of loony tendencies, for example espousing peculiar ideas.
Nah, you're more barmy.
(Barmy is still loony (aren't we all?) but is more affectionate and doesn't have the derogatory connotation. Well, the way I use it, anyway.)
It's not keeping up with the Joneses, CJ, it's blowing the Joneses and Smiths out of the water.
While our identity remains in the shadows and on the fringes of wider society then we will remain targets to ignorence and unthinking oppression.
We need a buiness franchise with visable premises that are clearly Aspie identifiable, and we need to use our purchasing power as consumers to buy as much as possible in house from one another. We need to be seen. We need to make employment for ourselves, and we need to strengthen our offline networks.
It is not about the Joneses it is about quote MY KID end quote. Actually it is not about beating the Joneses so much as who the heck are the Joneses? I just want the best for my kid.
So in sociology you have parents of each social class using the resources they got to make sure their kid or kids gets THE BEST SHOT. But parents have different resources and pass on better advantages to their progeny.
I yearned for a fair educational system reading all that Coleman Report stuff about inequality in schools and education.
But the parents don't want a fair educational system. They want it all for their kid.
The rich dumb schmuck, you can but Daddy is going to make donations to the school where that kid applies, and graduates, and Daddy O expects some payback.
I hate to spoil a good rant, but if a person with autism also happens to have food intolerances (gut problems seem to come with the co-morbid package sometimes) then it'd be silly NOT to eat a special diet if it makes you feel better.
Yes, and I have a friend with an autistic kid, and she reports that since she and he started a gluten free diet they've both been a lot healthier, and her lad's a more comfortable, happier, 'functional' kid. Whether he'd still have food intolerances if he wasn't autistic really is a moot point, it doesn't change the fact that at least one autistic person is healthier on a GF/CF diet.
The point I'm trying to make is that making grand sweeping statements like "GF/CF diets are stupid!" is not especially helpful.
Thank you, Zoey - I thought I'd read something to that affect, but because I can never remember *where* I read these things, I didn't want to talk about it if I couldn't back it up.
But she's not actually talking to us, it's a speech made for the benefit of all the people who are goingto find this thread through google.