This is a double-page headline from the daily newspaper "The West Australian" this week "Birney wants kids "who can look you in the eye"".
Birney is the new state opposition leader. In an interview in which he criticised the youth of today and educators (such an old cliche, but just the thing that aspiring conservative pollies blabber on about to win popularity with the fogey set). Twice he gave the example of "kids, some of whom are very good at physics and chemistry, but a lot of whom can't look you in the eye when they're speaking to you", and who don't present in a slick and charming manner in job interviews.
If you're autistic and avoid eye contact naturally, you wasted your time studying all of that boring science stuff, because if you front up to a job interview and a dickhead like Mr Birney is calling the shots, you clearly don't stand a chance.
What do you think of Mr Birney's values? Do you believe personal charm is more important than academic achievement?
Sounds like a great opportunity to start writing to the relevant authorities and get some more info on Autism and AS out there!
Not only would it shame this thoughtless git of a politician, it'd be a great chance to educate the general public
I wonder if his attitude is part of younger people not wishing to make eye contact, he sounds full of himself and its probably quite arrogant!
Why doesn't some one humiliate this guy ,deflate his ego?. Ego is a lot of people's defence as a certain person once said. Why not break his defence although wait a minute what party is he standing for?...
Matt Birney is the leader of the Liberal Party in WA. In Australia the liberals are like the Conservatives in the UK and the Republicans in the US.
I saw a snippet of Birney being interviewed on TV today by some female journo, and he is quite attractive for a politician, and I think they were flirting in the interview. Seems like the kinda guy who gets where he wants on the power of personality.
With hindsight the way I phrased the poll questions might have been a bit biased.
I'm wondering if Mr Birney knew that he was criticising a certain kind of person in his reference to kids who are good at science but cannot make eye contact. I don't think it is a coincidence that he put those two characteristics together.
He wouldn't have been talking about aspies, just people he would think of as nerds. Probably those kids he bullied at school. Ok, I'm making unfair assumptions, but next election's my first election, I'm voting Green.
I'm wondering if Mr Birney knew that he was criticising a certain kind of person in his reference to kids who are good at science but cannot make eye contact. I don't think it is a coincidence that he put those two characteristics together.
Well I think it kind of sounds like he is referring to nerdy types with perhaps some Aspie traits. Not sure if he is just plain ignorant or prejudiced to boot though.
If he hadn't mentioned the science thing then it could have been just a comment on how today's youth is lacking respect etc. but the fact that he mentioned *that type of person* being great at chemistry etc. does seem to indicate he means a very specific kind of person rather than trying to make a (perhaps valid) comment on the attitude of young people.
So, who would he take out of these 2:
Applicant A - dressed in a nice smart suit, friendly, can look you in the eye and "seems like a well-mannered young man/lady", maybe has a few qualifications but not as high marks and not as much practical experience.
Applicant B - very impressive CV, seems to have a passion for their field of expertise, has higher qualifications and more experience, turns up to interview and appears to be nervous, can't look you in the eye and not as chatty.
Who is better suited to a job as a programmer, engineer or other classic aspie-type job?
Who would you hire?
Knowing what I know at this point in time I would choose applicant B, subject to reference checking (which some employers do not do properly).
I would really love to put this question to a group of NTs and a group of aspies, the groups comparable in every way except neurotype, and see if there are significant differences in the results between the groups.
I couldn't answer the poll as it depends on the job. For example, charm is more important in sales while academic achievement is more important in science.
That's a good point, Atlantian_1. If Mr Birney was interviewing someone for a job that has personal charm as a definite main requirement, it would be fair enough for him to choose a charmer over a less charming intellectual person.
The thing that I object to is the idea that Mr Birney seems to have that all people who can't put on an image are losers.
Lili, this guy sounds like a used-car-salesman type personality. Which explains why he's in politics, doesn't it.
People bug me for nto making much eye contact all the time. I ignore them.
[quote]People bug me for nto making much eye contact all the time. I ignore them
oooo the eye contact thing GRRR. i bet you could stare them down in a match, Nemidaelius. I could and i would like to go one on one with anyone who insists that eye contact is an indicator of respect or trust or whatever.
For some cultures around the world it is a challenge.
I wish i could sell myself better. I just trust that i am as honest as the employer and if nothing comes of it is better that way. There is a place for everyone.
becca
So, who would he take out of these 2:
Applicant A - dressed in a nice smart suit, friendly, can look you in the eye and "seems like a well-mannered young man/lady", maybe has a few qualifications but not as high marks and not as much practical experience.
Applicant B - very impressive CV, seems to have a passion for their field of expertise, has higher qualifications and more experience, turns up to interview and appears to be nervous, can't look you in the eye and not as chatty.
Who is better suited to a job as a programmer, engineer or other classic aspie-type job?
Who would you hire?
Boy, that's a good one, Gareth. The truth is, an employer runs his/her business to make money. That employer is going to want someone to represent their business. In the above example, they would most likely hire the less experienced person who doesn't have but a few qualifications. The reason for that, is that the less knowledgeable applicant appears to have better interpersonal skills and would apparently be more of team player and a better sales rep. They may be hiring a scientist, but believe me they like a good wheeler dealer better. Besides, they can always train for the position. Life isn't always fair. There are a lot of folks with PHDs who live on the street, many of whome aren't even on the spectrum. It's just the way stuff flows down hill....
MrCoffee