Aspies For Freedom

No, I'm not.  I'm not sure why you'd think that, even.  I do think 'moron' is an insult - and a particularly inappropriate one on here.  I also think it's reasonable to apologise for it - korrigan doesn't.

No, saying someone has clear deficits when their deficits are clear is just commentary.  Meanwhile, I'm British - I know you yanks think you rule the world, but until you actually turn up at my door with your incompetent army, I'll continue to use British spellings.  Two points are telling here - that you can stoop to attacking spelling on a forum, it is really low and totally irrelevant - we have dyslexics here, as well as poor typists...but we don't have an edit button.  The other is that you seem to think two wrongs cancel each other out - not what my mother taught me, but hey, maybe two mums cancel each other out too.

[quote=jedimom777]
And trying to help one's children to learn to adapt in a confusing world is not the same as wanting them to be someone they're not.  And for the record, my aspie husband has a greater tendency to that emotional blackmail you refer to as offense than anyone I have ever known.  And he freely admits it.  And wants to change it.  Let us WORK TOGETHER... don't look for underlying insults in everything.  Relax a little and give people the benefit of the doubt.  
[/quoite]
No, the two different things you mention are not the same - I've never suggested they were.  I've also never suggested that only NTs use offense as blackmail -  just that in the example quoted, two NTs were wilfully offending people...and then claiming to be offended.

Oh, and calling someone a 'moron' isn't an underlying insult - it's right upfront there.

Ah, I had ass-umed you'd been briefed by korrigan (and very likely not bothered to check to source), but I wasn't sure so I didn't mention it.

Again, two wrongs don't make a right - but alas, in this instance, I wasn't wrong.  Since you couldn't be bothered to source the actual quote, I won't either - I'll recollect it as best I can.  It was germane to the topic under discussion and advanced on a comment previously made - I said that the social evolution of women had never placed a high value on intellect (true) and that many women still made little effort to develop theirs (again, true enough).

I went on to say that many women had fought against overwhelming social impediments when they wished to advance their intellect (though that's history, of course - and I'm no big fan of feuds).  I went on to stress that no judgement was attached to my observation.  Given the context in the thread, I didn't need at the time to add that many men these days fail to develop their intellect (though we could have a lively political discussion about what it might be in their youth and school experience that brings that about...)

So, no - no apology.  None was asked for, by the way - nor do I feel one is needed (though I'm open to an explanation as to why you request one - if you're actually open to understanding what was actually said, rather than just leaping into aggressive political 'defence' -ie attack)

How about you, Korrigan?  Apology for calling me a moron?  No?

Didn't think so...

There's another common passive-aggressive bullying tactic - I'm chill, thank you.  I just responded calmly to your post - but you're welcome to try and sway the audience.  I'm sure your chums here will adopt the position with you.

If you really equate spelling with intelligence, then your deficits are clear too.  For the reasons given above, reasonable people with some internet experience tend to let typos go - unless they really are looking for any tiny excuse for confrontation.  Your insistence on US spellings (or ignorance that English is actually two languages) doesn't say much for your intelligence either.

And no, I don't 'believe' whatever you think it is I said about women.  I do believe you're as anachronistic in your half-cocked aggressive feminism as a Flat Earther, or those vietnam vets who go wild in the woods.  I believe that about you, by the way (and korrigan, evidently, and kattoo, very likely.  I certainly don't believe it about the majority of women I speak to in here or out in the wider world.

Do you believe that any remark about any women is applicable to them all?  Do you really believe that any reference to what may be perceived as a negative element of the broad category 'women' is thoughtcrime?  Unspeakable?  That we must only say nice things about women or face the consequences?  Then (by your definition) I think you're a moron too.  Luckily, most of the women I know aren't.

And when I asked you to elaborate, korrigan, to show what judgement you perceived to be lacking, you declined - you dismissed my further explanation of my comment (with a 'giggle', bizarrely) and added nothing to your side of the 'debate' - it stood at 'you're a moron' and there it stays.  I guess now you've made your mind up, it's true, eh?

Oh I was well aware that there was likely to be someone who intepreted 'equality' to mean aggressively oppressive supremacy - so the judgement was there, I just judged myself perfectly capable of standing up to people who judge that the advancement of women during the 20th century is a useful cover for an essentially fascist movement for a supremacist position.  Opposing your gender-oppression, korrigan, doesn't necessarily imply that I want my 'side' to win - some of us are fighting for equality, not for 'our side'.

I think that korrigan can speak for herself - I hadn't realised though, that she might be trying to paint me as anti-NT.  It's a ludicrous idea (moronic, even...), but I'm sure she has the skills to gather up some support for it.  I thought it was just going to be one of those tragically ironic feminist witch-hunts ("misogynist! burn him!").

I do think, given the nature of the site and Gareth's tacit approval of the division of users into aspies and NTs, that the NTs might be smart enough to accept their interests are not paramount here...and that what passes for (barely) acceptable behaviour elsewhere might be wildly inappropriate here.

Again, I expressed my opinion that I don't welcome korrigan, or kattoo - an opinion based on my observation of their behaviour as individuals, not as NTs and not as women.

Past that point, there was no discussion - the giggle came after a lengthy explanation of why what I had said was not the offense you perceived it to be.

Another handy passive-aggressive tool there, for those who like to learn more about these things - if you didn't want to discuss this ('argue' is such an emotive word), why on earth did you set up this elaborate trap for me?

Elaborate trap, as I say - but apparantly I'm not now welcome on your thread...

You go on to admit that you settled on an idea and then went back to find out of context quotes that appear to support you.  You've ignored my repeated assertion that it aint so.

Clearly everyone isn't welcome here - someone was banned recently, and there are all manner of behaviours that would make someone (NT or aspie) unwelcome.  I have never suggested that NTs are unwelcome - I repeat, with a nod to the various 'homeland island'' threads, that AFF ought to prioritise the interest of its spectrumites - but that's just an opinion.  It is not my opinion that NTs are unwelcome.

Still no apology for calling me a moron?  Even though others have raised, elsewhere, how inappropriate that kind of insult is on a forum designed primarily for aspergians?  No, didn't think so - it's that kind of personal behaviour that leads me, as a person, to be less than welcoming to you, as a person.

Off topic, I know (but your own post meanders round the houses, so...), but I love that book.  He has some very forthright views, a real feel for food and some very entertaining anecdotes.

Oh dear - and it was all going so well.  I read somewhere the other day that people never landed on the moon - but aliens did land on the earth!  IIt is so easy to believe what we read when we read what we believe.  The chatrooms I know are dominated by women - as are most social situations.  The most aggressive contributions I've encountered here recently have been kattoo's on the locked thread.

I'd rather see a world that wasn't NT-dominated in a way that required you to need one.

Maybe we need a catchy slogan...I don't know, something like...

"An aspie needs an NT like..." - no, similes aren't my strong point, that's aspies for you...

sorry, ocampo - less flippantly, I reread your post and much of it resonates for me.  It was a remarkably lucid expression of what must be a difficult state to explain even here.   I admire your courage, openness and honesty.  I empathise with your position, although I don't agree with all of your conclusions.

There it is again - that binary, polarised, simplistic either/or view.  Just as it isn't necessary that patriarchy be replaced by matriarchy, no-one is asking for aspieworld.  Just that the NTs accept that their historical dominance isn't necessarily a model for the future - that doesn't equal 'aspieworld', it equals 'everyoneworld'.

Life on life's terms sucks more for the blind, for example - so TV and film makers provide audio commentary.  Nobody campaigns for the ritual blinding of the sighted.  Life on life's terms used to totally suck for women - but I'm guessing you wouldn't have tossed that platitude out so lightly then.  It still largely sucks for darker-skinned races in most western countries - care to toss that platitude to them?  Life on NT terms sucks for aspies - don't toss your NT platitudes at me.

Or were you just pissing on the various ideas and plans behind the various takes on some kind of aspie settlement somewhere?

we covered this one earlier, jedimom777 - I don't know if works for NTs quite as well, but telling me to chill as if you had some magic insight into my state of mind seems solely designed to wind me up so that I'm not 'chill'.  Thus far, it's failed

I have friends (talk to korrigan about what ass-umptions make you) - but well done for disguising much of your offensive commentary on me as 'concern'.  My friends don't include people like you - yeah, really, there are people not like you, and yet they're real people, leading real, fulfilled lives.  My friends don't always agree on what is 'right' or 'wrong', but the people I know who suggest that there is no need to be 'right' are usually 'wrong' to the point of heroin abuse, shoplifting and personal violence, when it suits them.

I'm a taoist - nothing is right or wrong in and of itself.  But some things said in an NT forum are simply damagingly out of place said here.  

It's disingenuous to deny things that you have clearly stated in other posts - maybe you believe yourself, I've noticed that NTs have an enormous capacity for self-delusion.  
but I think I'll pull one of korrigan's tricks out of the bag and tell you I have no further interest in talking to you if all you can manage is taunting.

Hmmm...I'd probably still have posted that even if I'd not been drafting while you posted, EvilZakkie.  I'm going to make an ass of myself and ass-ume your flawed summary was paved with good intentions.  But I'm not looking to your for guidance either.

Bless, maybe you should take a chill pill?

Did that feel like a useful comment to you, right there and then?

I suspect not.

If you find my posts difficult, skip past them, it's no concern of mine.  I 'interpret' people who have openly attacked me, for reasons they have revealed, as attacking me...when they attack me.

Korrigan admitted the whole thread had been set up to impersonally gather support before trapping me and unleashing an attack.  I manage to add to other threads without this drama - but I have no intention here, anymore than in kattoo's increasingly ugly and now locked thread, of slinking away.  Is everyone welcome here?

So... I could ignore your points...or respond, and stretch this out further?

All I've done is respond to other posts - like it was a conversation, you know?  And if people spoke to me like some of the posts in here, I'd respond in the same way.

Certainly, much of what has been posted here hasn't attacked me - nor has it been (brace yourself) passive-aggressive.  But again, korrigan set the thread up to try and 'win' a grudge she's been holding, and roped in some other NT mothers to back her up.  You might hand her a win in a similar position, I don't do that - but I'm not going for a win either - something the (ready...?) passive-aggressive posters can't see...to them, there has to be a winner.  Now they think they can win by stopping first - had you not noticed, by the way, that the post you just quoted was drafted and posted while evilzakkie was suggesting a ceasefire?  Bad timing, maybe.

Do you not find me reasonable?  I'm using reason, ironically - while the tone of the thread has become more about socially acceptable, but strictly non-reason-based, NT standards of interaction.  Again, the issue here is primarily that I don't care to see this forum become a place where NTs expect their rules to define what is right for aspies - there's enough of that elsewhere.