Aspies For Freedom

Hi all - this is a thread that I started in the general members chat area, and I'm switching it over to the time out thread on request.

Basically, as something of a thought & writing exercise, I'm going to try to write a new rant here every day.

Todays rant to follow!

Rant for 25/10/07 - Thoughts on Neurotypes

Over the years, I've learned a number of different social coping mechanisms, allowing me to blend into various social situations, to an extent.

It often goes through my mind that if I were to travel back in time and teach my younger self these techniques, this "alternate me" would probably not have been diagnosed as Aspie, due to not having "Qualitative impairment in social interaction".

This makes me wonder how many autistically-minded individuals are considered not to be autistic on similar technicalities.

Essentially, I blame this on defining autism and aspergers in terms of deficiencies - The DSM criteria offers no insight into the autistic mind, choosing instead to list the things we're not as good at.

One of the goals of the neurodiversity movement, at least in my opinion, is to move psychiatry and the public from thinking of autism as "just a disability" to thinking of it as a difference in neurological wiring. While doing so, it's probably a good idea to fix the definitions themselves.

The new "Autistic Neurotype" would be defined in terms of autistic thought processes, not in terms of things we're not as good at. As such, it would include people usually excluded due to proficiencies in certain areas.

Here's some more food for thought - How many other mental differences could this be applied to? For example, could a "Bipolar Neurotype" include people that habitually have long periods of activity followed by long periods of inactivity? And could there be other neurotypes as yet undiscovered, because they did not present significant enough disadvantage?

In treatment terms, neurotypes including people without categorizable problems would mean that all treatment would have to be individually tailored, rather than "one size fits all".

The ultimate step would be to introduce the "Social Neurotype" to replace the previous neurotypical category - including a similar write-up of thought processes, etc. This would finally put NT's on an equal level to others, by presenting their information in exactly the same way as everyone elses - a much better alternative to the "problems" vs "no problems" ideology we currently have.

I hereby open the table for discussion...

Rant for 26/10/07 - So, which one's the Blockhead?

A few days ago, while reading a Big Issue magazine, I came across an obscure reference to a song by Ian Dury and the Blockheads called "Spasticus Autisticus". After a little research, an intriguing tale emerged...

The song was written during the International Year of Disabled Persons. After a conversation with an autistic man (who also contributed most of the song lyrics), Ian penned the song as a parody of the pity culture surrounding this event. In his own words (from http://www.abc.net.au/pm/stories/s114185.htm):

I wrote this because partly it's the Year of the Disabled and partly because last year I met some people at a concert who were severely disabled - very, very spastic men - and I had a long talk with him and he's got an Honours Degree in English from Cambridge University and yet nobody could understand what he said. And in fact he told me that he was treated as if he was an idiot all the time by the people that he'd met and that his massive frustration was just communicating with ordinary people and being an ordinary person. He was a very brainy person but that didn't help his normal life at all.

The title of the song is intended to be a reference to Sparticus. The lyrics are a very tongue-in-cheek reference to the image the public has of disabled people. For example:

    So place your hard-earned peanuts in my tin
    And thank the Creator you're not in the state I'm in
    So long have I been languished on the shelf
    I must give all proceedings to myself

Unfortunately, the song was widely seen as offensive to disabled people, and was banned by the BBC, among others - despite having been actually written by an autistic person.

If the people involved had paid a little more attention to what the song was actually about, it could have led to a much greater realisation of autistic creativity. It makes me wonder - how many forms of autistic self-expression have been squashed due to this sort of over-protectiveness? It seems to be almost common practice to ignore or deny what an autistic person says, if the receiving party dislikes the message they're getting.

I'm dedicating today, or what's left of it, to the memory of Ian Dury, who tried and failed to give the public a wake-up call. And there's only one way to do it. Turn the volume up loud, and click below...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4NiFnDhrrA

tenaciouscj Wrote:

Although I couldn't make out all the lyrics of "Spasticus Autisticus", I certainly got the distinct impression it was meant to be a parody rather than an offensive song about disability.

Devo had a song in a somewhat similar vein "Mongoloid", but I don't think it was as satirical as "Spasticus".

Ah, I remember that one! About him wearing a hat and holding a paper so no-one knew...

Here's the lyrics:

I'm spasticus, I'm spasticus
I'm spasticus autisticus
I'm spasticus, I'm spasticus
I'm spasticus autisticus
I'm spasticus, I'm spasticus
I'm spasticus autisticus

I wibble when I piddle
Cos my middle is a riddle

I'm spasticus, I'm spasticus
I'm spasticus autisticus
I'm spasticus, I'm spasticus
I'm spasticus autisticus
I'm spasticus, I'm spasticus
I'm spasticus autisticus

I dribble when I nibble
And I quibble when I scribble

Hello to you out there in Normal Land
You may not comprehend my tale or understand
As I crawl past your window give me lucky looks
You can be my body but you'll never read my books

I'm spasticus, I'm spasticus
I'm spasticus autisticus
I'm spasticus, I'm spasticus
I'm spasticus autisticus
I'm spasticus, I'm spasticus
I'm spasticus autisticus

I'm knobbled on the cobbles
Cos I hobble when I wobble
Swim!

So place your hard-earned peanuts in my tin
And thank the Creator you're not in the state I'm in
So long have I been languished on the shelf
I must give all proceedings to myself

I'm spasticus, I'm spasticus
I'm spasticus autisticus
I'm spasticus, I'm spasticus
I'm spasticus autisticus
I'm spasticus, I'm spasticus
I'm spasticus autisticus

54 appliances in leather and elastic
100 000 thank yous from 27 spastics

Spasticus, spasticus
Spasticus autisticus
Spasticus, spasticus
Spasticus autisticus
Spasticus, spasticus
Spasticus autisticus

Widdling, griddling, skittling, diddling,
fiddling, diddling, widdling, diddling spasticus

I'm spasticus, spasticus
Spasticus autisticus
Spasticus, spasticus
Spasticus autisticus
Spasticus, spasticus
Spasticus autisticus

Spasticus, spasticus
Spasticus autisticus

I'm spasticus!
I'm spasticus!
I'm spasticus!
I'm spasticus!
I'm spasticus!
I'm spasticus!
I'm spasticus!
Spasticus!

Batman55 Wrote:

Thanks for the insight. The problem I have here is partly the attitude of the Aspies who DO have Math brilliance, thorough understanding of scientific theories, well-read in philosophy (a lot of the hyperlexic types have this as a forte)... they do not seem to acknowledge those of us who lack the intelligence/knowledge. They do not seem to understand that there could be Aspies who don't have the same gifts they have.

There seems to be an uppity nature about these Aspies; they seem to think you're not "all that Aspie" if you're not on their wavelength.

So what happens is people like me end up feeling like they don't really belong to Aspergia.

I have several times stated that I am useless at maths (counting on my fingers ) Rolleyes & as for time zones & the 24 hour clock I don't have words !!.
I am not well read at philosophy & I don't have a thorough understanding of scientific theories ( I try to understand though...sometimes I do, sometimes I don't ).

I spend ages making a reply to a post, otherwise it would make no sense at all with the typos, excessive commas & words placed in the wrong order, so what you read from me wasn't necessarily easily done.

I truly don't think that anyone is being 'uppity' they just are who they are, the same as I am just me & you are just you.
We are ALL different.

I have just read EvilZakkie's posts & am going to need to read them over & over several times, in order to fully understand what he is saying because I want to.( even then I will likely feel that I've got it wrong ) Rolleyes

If you feel that you don't belong here, then I should feel the same but I don't.

I have learned a lot from all of the members & a lot about myself ...surely this is good?. Big Grin

So don't go, there are a lot of people who you support & who support you. Smile

EvilZakkie Wrote:

I still get the same even though I've been officially DX'd - it comes almost entirely down to looking "normal", rather than having an official status.

It's great that you like the idea, though... *grins*

Thankfully, where I live at present I understand that I am thought to be ' nice weird ' ( happy daft ) Smile as opposed ' nasty weird ' or ' weird weird '. Rolleyes

I look normal & can act normal for reasonable periods of time, but once I feel reasonably comfortable the oddities become more apparent as time goes by, so when this woman who thinks nothing of talking to herself , singing, thinks nothing of lying under a hospital bed in a to fix it , can't get jokes etc.is diagnosed, I suspect that there will be an element of relief amongst the others'. Big Grin

My apologies to Zakkie, but having just read Sarah's theory, I feel the need to add ours as I think they belong together.

sarahjoke Wrote:

{Sarah's mini-rant, at long lost}
Sarah's personal theory on autism:
I personally believe that autism has always existed. Someone mentioned ying and yang, I think autism is a perfect example. There has to be someone that sees things in one way, someone else in another.  In the history of the world people that see things in one way tend to group together and form a society. As time and events morph society, different ways of thinking raise to the needs of said society.

I'm not in any way suggesting that we owe auties the renaissance, the age of enlightenment and the space age... well, actually, I think that's exactly what I'm saying.

How important would have it been for an Egyptian architect to have a "way with numbers and spatial concepts"?  Pretty important, I'd say...

What about the other special skills and interests that auties tend to have?  Music? Art? Writing? Math? Science?  Those all have higher times of emphasis throughout the history of the world.

And likeways (the ying to this yang, so to speak) is that other times have come up as well... times when others' strengths are idealized by their society. Long speeches that warm hearts and bring tears to a crowds eyes is a strength rather than a drone on emotional supplies. When having a long list of friends means that you will live a better life because of the connections that you are able to keep and maintain.  So perhaps these times were not huge growth times for the furthering of civilization, but they have their merits.

The problem with any of these "ways of thinking ebb and flows" is that at some point each rise will crumble.  The cold war ended and the great need for science and math nerds has slowed down and now the "most important" thing a kid can learn at school is to socialize properly.  However, in this time that is lacking in the science and math types (I know I'm being grossly stereotypical, apologies) there will soon come rise to the art and music types (hopefully for me) and probably the literary creatives as well.  But the math/science nerds will eventually rise again, when our society calls them up once more.

For every rise to one there is a fall. Smile

There you have it, my own lofty ideals on autism and the spectrum of humanity.

Right, wrong or regurgitated. At least it�s out there.

My son & I have similar but slightly different thoughts.

WFM & son's theory:-
It would seem to me, that (non fatal, or deleterious) genetic variations causing such things as AS, are part of the grand Genetic design to ensure the survival of the species.

For example many people with AS are known to have social problems (for example will avoid social gatherings) and also have problems with members of the opposite sex.
Although this is somewhat debilitating for a person with AS, and may appear to in fact be a flaw to NT`s consider this:

If a highly communicable disease was to break out with a high mortality rate, then AS`s would be more likely to survive than NT`s due to behavioral differences (lack of socialisation, and physical contact). This would undoubtedly ensure the survival of the species, in extreme circumstances.

This behavioral diversity has in fact been observed in other species, for example rabbits:

There was an man-made outbreak of Myxomatosis, among rabbits, designed to control the species. Now rabbits, as we all know live in burrows in the ground. However, a very small proportion are born with a genetic `abnormality` which causes them to behave differently. In the case of the rabbits, this small proportion, did not live in burrows, but instead lived above the ground, and did not socialise with the other rabbits.
This would at first appear to be a genetic disadvantage, since small mammals living on exposed terrain, would be more likely to be picked off by predators.

Thus when Myxomatosis was introduced, it rapidly spread through the rabbits living in the burrows, and killing them.
The rabbits living above the ground however, having not been in contact with the ones in the burrows survived. The rabbit population for many years after, consisted mainly of those living above the ground, with a small percentage making burrows. After a long period of time, the population distribution swung the other way, and again, most live under the ground, with a small percentage of `abnormal` rabbits living above the ground.

I think Darwin was almost right, but it is not survival of the fittest, but survival of the diverse.

Many people believe that the great inventors, throughout history exhibited AS traits, and this added diversity has lead to the advancement of the species as a whole, albeit artistically/technologically.
**************************
If we hypothosise that AS's have been on the earth since the beginning and it is known that 'odd' people did exist
was it 'the outcast' who invented the wheel?
It is now commonly believed, that many of the 'great inventors' and 'builders', etc, were AS or had AS traits, so why not him / her?
Assuming this is the case, man would not have evolved technologically as quickly as we have without the AS's. I believe that it is the 'thinkers'/ 'odd ones' who have moved us forward. (some may well say backward !!).
The 'herd instinct' does not necessarily ensure survival.

pikajedi4 Wrote:

well,i am not only discussing the exlusively autistic models (ie:Infinity Island) but also just converting a single street or area ( a la erkolos),the Aut run town,and any other theories anyone else wants to lob at me :p

I think that a ' safe area' be it large or small where people on the spectrum can live their lives, receive support, be employed & not be exposed to unpleasant stimulation or bullying would be a great idea.

This could be expanded to include supplies of clothes or other articles made of fabric which don't cause the teeth to grit etc. .

I agree with all that you say, but I can't identify with this by Ian sinclair:-

Quote:

[i]"Take a look at your autistic child sometime, and take a moment to tell yourself who that child is not. Think to yourself: "This is not my child that I expected and planned for. This is not the child I waited for through all those months of pregnancy and all those hours of labor. This is not the child I made all those plans to share all those experiences with. That child never came. This is not that child." Then go do whatever grieving you have to do--away from the autistic child--and start learning to let go.

After you've started that letting go, come back and look at your autistic child again, and say to yourself: "This is not my child that I expected and planned for. This is an alien child who landed in my life by accident. I don't know who this child is or what it will become. But I know it's a child, stranded in an alien world, without parents of its own kind to care for it. It needs someone to care for it, to teach it, to interpret and to advocate for it. And because this alien child happened to drop into my life, that job is mine if I want it."

I don't believe that anyone is perfect & I certainly didn't expect a perfect child since there is no such thing...
I expected to have whatever kind of child I would give birth to. In other words I had no particular expectations.
I also believe ' once a parent- always a parent'. I care for / look out for / look after / support my children & always will, whatever their age.

quickduck Wrote:

Fascinating subject� Smile

I really love the Autism-Neanderthal theory and desperately want to believe it. As you say Neanderthal weren�t unintelligent or brutish--and of course the genes for As/Autism do have to come from somewhere.

But regretfully most genetic and archaeological research in this area seems to suggest �modern humans� are significantly different from Neanderthals; and its unlikely that they interbred.

�The genes for red hair, freckled skin and short stature� most likely developed independently of Neanderthal influence; and are adaptations to living in a cooler climate.

I really wish this theory were true�but there is no convincing evidence that it is�at least not yet.

So do I..... Smile

This is fun & interesting:-
http://www.geneticorigins.org/mito/media2.swf

EvilZakkie Wrote:

Rant for 01/12/07 - Groups and boxes

I'm sure anyone here that's read up on Aspergers thought patterns know the about the "theory of mind", and also knows that it has been debunked many times over. So far though, I haven't seen any new theories to explain what thought processes explain the appearance of "lack of theory of mind", except the occasional mention that misunderstanding goes both ways.

So I thought I'd throw my hat into the ring.

As I see it, NT's and Autistics have two separate methods of working out how to deal with a new person. The NT's work with a method I call "generalising and categorising", whereas Autistics work with a method I call the "black box" method. Both methods have different strengths and weaknesses.

The NT method, "generalising and categorising", involves learning general rules for how to treat a "person". These rules include appropriate behavior, what they think the person is likely to be thinking in various situations, etc.

Obviously one set of rules will not work for every single person, so when these rules fail, they will invent a new category for the type of person that the rules failed for - for instance, if the rules failed for one or more women, then a new set of rules will be created for "women", leaving the original set as rules for "men". This categorisation then splits into smaller and smaller categories. So knowing how to treat someone, or guessing what they are thinking, involves working out which category they belong to and using the set of rules for that category.

Of course, there will be some information specific to individual people, but for the most part, the category holds the most influence.

The advantage of this method is that it's very easy to work out how to treat a new person. The disadvantage is that the information will not usually be entirely accurate, and it can often take a lot of effort to work out that a person does not fit the "usual" rules.

The Autistic method, or the "black box" method, means that when meeting a new person, you have no information about them at all - to an autistic persons mind, their thought processes are just a big black box with a question mark printed on the front. Certain general responses will probably have been learned (small talk standards, etc), but for the most part an Autistic person will not know how to treat someone new.

After talking to or observing the new person, any facts are added to a "file" about that person in particular - likes, dislikes, which behaviours get which responses, etc. This information can is used as specific information about the new person and no-one else, and it can also be used as "general possible" information - as in "it is possible that other new people may also exhibit this trait. I shall have to observe, experiment, and find out".

Of course, some information may be used as vague category generalisations, but for the most part, information holds the most influence.

The advantage of this method is that the it produces more accurate information about a person over a long period of time, and that Autistics are less swayed by stereotypes. The disadvantage is that when meeting a new person, the Autistic person will have a very limited idea of how to act around them.

Ultimately, the best method would be a combination of the two - use generalisations, but make sure that actual information is given higher regard than the generalisations. This would give the advantages of both methods, without the disadvantages of either. But while this is possible to an extent, without careful monitoring the "natural" method will usually kick back in - Autistics will try to overanalyse or second-guess the "rough approximation" categories they've created, and NT's will find it hard to accept information about a person that goes against the information for a group that person belongs to.

So there you have it. Any thoughts?

Generally speaking I like all people until they offend / hurt me or I see them hurt others. which seems to be black box approach.

I seldom have any preconceptions about others, this does seem to be an NT thing.

I agree with erkolos that 'in order to grow ' acceptance that it's OK to be as we are is very important .

EvilZakkie Wrote:

Rant for 03/12/07 - Superior Inferior Deleria.....
......For example, in general, NT's have superior social skills. In general, autistics have superior pattern recognition skills. By giving them a context, superiority and inferiority are meaningful. Without a context, they're just arrogant or insulting.

In short, autistics and neurotypicals are individuals, and neither can be better as a group.

I agree, we are all individuals with different strengths & weaknesses.

I think all that most of us want is to have our particular differences accepted by society as a whole.

Perhaps some AS's in the process of trying to ' fit in ' are picking up other concepts common to NT thinking.

EvilZakkie Wrote:

Rant for 07/12/07 - Still winning, but we can't neglect strategy...

This rant is intended as a counterpoint to my earlier "Dancing with the enemy" rant from 05/12/07.

In that rant, I presented the idea that we were actually winning the cure debate, and that if we keep on doing what we are doing now, we'll actually convince the public that our way of thinking is not "inferior".

I do sincerely believe this. However, I do notice that in many cases we are starting to fall into behaviour traps which could leave us unable to make progress.

The first trap is the overuse of logic and debate. What helped us early on was the use of logical debate to point out flaws in the curbie point of view. At the time, their point of view was so flawed that our point of view was new, shocking, and entertaining.

These days, however, the old debates have gone back and forth long enough that the standard answers are all pretty well established, and a curbie debate can go for days, meaning most people will tune out.

There is still a place for logical debate (especially around people unfamiliar with the concept of autistic rights), but contrary to popular belief, most people will not be swayed by the best logically developed argument. We need to introduce other things to engage the hearts and minds of people - emotionally charged stories, interesting projects to showcase our abilities, unique and entertaining methods of explaining and engaging people in autistic rights issues, showcasing and celebrating personal achievements, public spectacles - you get the idea.

The next trap is in picking targets. It's easy to forget that our purpose is to convince the general public that we are not "flawed NT's". We need to choose which entities we focus on for this purpose.

Unfortunately, it is quickly becoming habit to target obscure yet accessible groups and people that happen to disagree with us - simply because the big groups seem "too big to topple". This includes campaigns against individual posters, anti-autism blogs and nutjob organisations that lack any credibility. This can actually have the opposite effect of making these small players popular.

Generally speaking, the best group to target is always the general public - after all, they're the final goal, so why not direct campaigns towards the source?

Next on from them are the big curbie organisations - Autism speaks, Cure autism now, and any other curbie organisations that have enough funds for an advertising budget. The reason these organisations need to be targeted is that people will actually see their material, so an alternative should be in place.

Next are any other large public groups - autism related or not. This could mean schools, universities, service providers, social groups, interest groups, etc.

We will be able to do something about the small players after we get public opinion on our side. Before then, they're just distractions.

The final trap is complacency. We need to keep in mind that there is a very pressing need behind the push to change public opinion. Prenatal testing research will yield a result - it's only a matter of time. Convincing people of our equality is not just a matter of being accepted - it is a matter of our existence. If we do not convince the public in time, autistic people will literally no longer exist.

So there you have it. I have great hope for the future, and I believe we can do this - but we need to remember to form an actual strategy.

Keep the balance between hope and practicality, and we will triumph.

Quote:

There is still a place for logical debate (especially around people unfamiliar with the concept of autistic rights), but contrary to popular belief, most people will not be swayed by the best logically developed argument. We need to introduce other things to engage the hearts and minds of people - emotionally charged stories, interesting projects to showcase our abilities, unique and entertaining methods of explaining and engaging people in autistic rights issues, showcasing and celebrating personal achievements, public spectacles - you get the idea.>........ <Generally speaking, the best group to target is always the general public - after all, they're the final goal, so why not direct campaigns towards the source?

I know that we as a group haven't been involved in this, but surely Heather.. & the like are good examples of showing the public AS in a good & positive light.
There must be thousands of good examples out there who could perhaps be persuaded to give positive publicity for Autism.

EvilZakkie Wrote:

tenaciouscj Wrote:

What about those of us whose "impressive achievements" are simply doing what others take for granted? We're not all high functioning enough socially to be able to get into the limelight.

Absolutely true, and I don't really have an answer. This was more about what things would influence public opinion, rather than what things should be considered by the public.

All I can suggest is that when people feel that they are unable to do amazing things, they just try to be as good a person as they possibly can, and influence public opinion that way...

I don't do amazing things, like many I struggle & certainly couldn't ever be in the limelight.

I was thinking more on the lines of hoping that those who are amazing & willing to be in the limelight, could perhaps help our aims by being willing to be some of our advocates.

Hi Zak, I've read your ants all along and enjoyed every one of them. This is the first time I felt the need to dialog. April is "Autism Awareness Month" in the US, and I've been wondering if there were a simple means for increasing understanding and acceptance in my community. It must be simple and without ongoing obligations. I have considered hosting an open house, but attendance is uncertain. Perhaps something with our local library .... Thoughts, experiences, ideas, etc, most welcome.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

EvilZakkie

EvilZakkie

EvilZakkie

EvilZakkie

woman from mars

woman from mars

woman from mars

woman from mars

woman from mars

woman from mars

woman from mars

woman from mars

woman from mars

woman from mars

grizeldatee