Aspies For Freedom

I heartily agree. It is the same as most rare variants of the human condition. If you or a loved one (or a close friend) don't have/know someone with a particular 'label', you are never going to find out anything about it, are you? After all, you have to know of the existence of something before you can find out anything about it. And if you only ever hear one or two things about something, those are the things that will spring to mind when you meet someone with that difference.

Just as all 'vision differences' could all come under the umbrella of 'vision disorders' and could all be thought of as tantamount to total blindness with the wrong kind of fund-raising advertising.

My twins have been told by people who only had mis-information at their disposal that they cannot be colour-blind as they can perceive colour! The fact that their range of colour vision (like my father's) is restricted is what gives them the 'label'. By hard intellectual effort they can 'work out' what colour something probably is; those without that difference just 'get' that information 'effortlessly'.

I think that is a parallel to the way their Aspieness means that they have to use hard intellectual effort to 'work out' what the social meaning is behind others' behaviour; those without that difference just 'get' that information 'effortlessly'!

Seconded, thirded, and ninety-seventhed if needs be.

We're very keen to *** off "the media" as if it's a sentient entity with a barrow of its own.  It isn't.  It's just a bunch of people who have to churn out a lot of content very quickly about issues they don't neccessarily know or care about.  

I've worked in the media about a decade, and in that time the press releases I've ever seen that mentioned Autism were:

1.  A meeting notice for an upcoming Aspergers info session
2.  An event notice for an upcoming spectrumites fun day, organised by the same person as 1.  I deeply regret not going to this, as it was just an hours drive away.
3.  Something about water wise shower heads at a school.  I forget where the autism came in.  

But the point is, I've never seen a press release from an autism campaigner, a notice about an APD event, anything like that.  If I wasn't aware of this stuff by virtue of being a part of it, I certainly wouldn't have found out.  Nobody else is going to push our barrow if we're too busy slagging off "the media" to push it ourselves.

This is where the importance of offline activity comes in. If we have local events for things like APD or protests, and send a press release early enough to the relevant media outlets, then the issues will come to light that way. Something like APD where there's an actual event outside of a computer screen would make a much better story than videotaping someone writing on AFF.

Also, Ethel, I remember you had a thread about media contacts. If someone could point to the relevant thread, that'd be a great help. Maybe we should have that information posted as a separate page that gets linked to from the home page.

That would be good for making easier access for activists to organize media contact (personally for me, such things confuse me and I'd need to read over that thing for a lot of time before getting a clear idea of how to proceed).

There is no single correct approach to activism. There is certainly a need and a place for militancy. The problem with Timelord wasn't that he was militant, it was that he was --well -- crazy.

The black Civil Rights Movement is still the great model for social change and revolution -- and believe me; white America would never have listened to Martin Luther King if they had not also had Malcolm X slapping them around a bit.

Usually it is the militants who break the wall of silence, force a degree of change, and pave the way for the "nice acceptable" ones. (At which time everyone hails the nice, less-threatening ones and says "why couldn't those nasty militants have been more like this sweet boy?")

Ah, it makes me recall the good old days.

When I came out at the school where I was teaching, I remember the president of the school trustees (he was a good fundamentalist fag-hater) getting all upset and saying "I don't see why you have to ram it down everybody's throat."

I smiled, leaned in a little closer and said, "When I ram something down your throat, Bill, you'll know it."

My point being that there is no difference between my being openly gay and other teachers being openly straight. I wasn't doing anything they weren't doing. it wasn't about what I was doing, it was about Bill's assaulted sense of supremacy. (This was two years before bill's depressed, closeted son killed himself with bill's gun.)

Those terms like "ramming it down people's throats" really say nothing about wht the activist is doing. It's just a way for the opponents to get all dramatic and act assaulted.

99 times out of 100 it just means "that homo won't stay in the closet!" or 'If that freak is going to [stim] they should do it at home where i don't have to see it" or "why don't those n***ers stay in THEIR part of town."

"Ramming it down my throat" is what people of privilege say when they are having to share even the tiniest bit their own god-given world of unearned privilege with people they consider their inferiors.

There is no approach that is so gentle and cooperative that you won't be accused of shoving something down somebody's throat.

Activist Rule of Thumb: if you're not pissing anybody off, you're not doing anything. The only change agent approved of by the establishment is one whom they can trust to change   n o t h i n g.

It's a very good point that more media involvement is needed.

In the interest of taking this from discussion to action, would anyone be interested in forming a media liaison team? Basically, it would involve splitting up the job of scanning major news sites for autism-related articles & co-ordinating responses, as well as drafting and issuing press releases about autistic events, campaigns, etc.

Militancy.  Anyone willing and able?

When I attended the Coalition of Citizens with Disabilities in Illinois (CCDI) conference in April at Springfield, I attended an advocacy workshop that focuses on different advocacy styles. One of the presenters there mention that one will need different tools for different advocacy events.

I agree that just being who you are openly can be provocative allready. There is a difference though with the homosexual coming out. People knowing that I was not completely straight could get reactions of abhorrence or fear.

The AS thing brings out disbelief and pity.
Both ways can be debilitating. But I notice my reactions on 'their' reactions are different. The defense mechanism is a bit different.

The reactions people had on my sexual preference made me defend my self. Telling that I was not dangerous. That I would not go out hunting for fresh female flesh tonight. (nobody feared my straight traits)

The reactions on my AS are disbelief, so I have to explain. Wonder, that's the one I like the best, it's very open. And pity. That's the hardest. Because it's often expressed in a way that's most difficult to me. There is this meaningfull look. I think it's about compassion, in a sad way. It makes me dizzy. I will explain that I don't want pity. But my verbal info won't reach the non-verbal pity. Pride does help. If people want to see.

It won't stop me from being open.

Rambling here.

Lack of sleep.

Great Thread Rossco.

It might even make me read the newspapers more.

Chatting about this to OH he thinks the way forward is to 'normalise' AS.  Stop using scary words and making it sound like a disease!  The first time he looked at this site he made me smile by saying 'I may be weird and I can put up with occasional depression but I don't want to catch co-morbids!'  Have to say I'd never heard the word until I started looking at sites about AS.  Consequence or side-effect or goes alongside sound more 'ordinary' somehow

When our nephew was first diagnosed it was partly because he had problems relating to other children and often lashed out at them if they didn't play his way or invaded his space.
My OH attended one of his assessment meetings wiht his sister and after hearing doctor witter on for ages about 'issues with inter-child integration procedures' (think she meant doesn't play nicely) said quite bluntly.  You mean he is horrid to other children.  We need to explain that you can't be horrid because you are unhappy, you need to tell an adult when you are unhappy and ask them to deal with it.  Then we need to explain to the adults that he needs to be left to play alone if that is what he wants'. The professional said 'That is what I meant' and husband said 'Why didn't you say so then'.

Reading through these sites it does often seem as though AS is shrouded in mysticism with a whole load of special jargon.  At work I always feel wary if any one says they have 'issues' as I feel it is going to drag on and on.  If they say they have a 'problem' it sounds like it is something that can be solved.

I realise that jargon makes lots of people - healthcare professionals for example - feel important, but in many ways it also makes the whole thing sound more scary than it actually is.

I used to work in a prison - not as a prison officer, but in the offices. Maintenance of records mainly, but it also involved a large amount of prisoner interaction - reading bail rights etc. It was fantastic for the degree I was doing in criminology/sociology, because I got to see for myself that prison does not work. Thats not a bleeding heart liberal attitude - its fact. Throwing someone in prison for 10 days does nothing except screw up someone's future employability; it does not solve the problem that resulted in the imprisonment in the first place. I once had to spend 5 days in hospital and I hated being out of hospital - I had become institutionalised in a matter of days in a relatively benign environment. I can completely understand why people get caught in the revolving door of the prison, especially when their personal lives are so chaotic and lacking structure and opportunity.

That is usually the attitude one must enter into prison work with - you can go in the most ardent right wing zealot you want, but being in prison tends to give you a rude wake up call. I was lucky enough to go into prison with that attitude, and prison is one of the first jobs I've been popular in. Anyway, we got this one dude who started work a few months later. I disliked him from the off - he just gave me the worst feeling. Most people at work knew I'm gay because I really fail to see the point in pretending I'm not; and unfortunately, The Lesbian is less 'intimidating' than The Gay Man. Its a pathetic hang-up of society, and my overall appearance probably makes me more 'acceptable' yet again. The more the non-conformist presents conformity to the majority, the more accepted they will be. A long haired lesbian who dresses in a relatively feminised way may be the biggest raging dyke but she is 'one of the okay ones'. I used to have quite short hair and do the whole dykey thing - just for the record - but I personally find it boring, unattractive and just as desperate to conform as the heterosexual dolly-bird who vomits at the sight of her underarm stubble in the morning. A lesbian in the prison/police/military service does nothing for queer politics beyond tie in with its patriarchal terms - it relates to the subjectation of the female as not 'strong' enough, and the only way a female can be 'strong' enough is to 'adapt' her gender conformity. Lesbianism is the most obvious symbol of this, hence why the media will enforce strong women as 'lesbian' and continue the stereotype. I had this argument with a girl I know who joined the navy; personally I think she had some delusion of looking hot in a uniform, or white vest and combat trousers. I didn't kid myself on that I wasn't just another cog in the patriarchal wheel who was still a scrotum short of being able to be taken completely seriously.

Incidentally, in so far as 'looking' gay: http://www.aspiesforfreedom.com/showthre...#pid202607

Anyway, this dude honed in on me within a fortnight of being put in my department. I leave the politics out of the office, but mentioned my discipline in passing conversation. That was obviously it in his head - I was one of those left wing, militant feminist, lesbi(t)ches intent on **** up Traditional British Values with my just being. Mother's Daily Mail editorial warned him about girls like me.

So every day, everything was 'gay' that I did. I couldn't do or say anything without it coming around to my sexual orientation. And I mean, it was the most dumb *** you've ever heard - I once got asked 'who is the man and who is the woman'. I mean really, I haven't heard that since the 90s. Asking why 'you lesbians' always need to use gay men as sperm donors (cheapness and proximity usually ) - "are you trying to keep the gay gene in your kid?" When I complained, his questions were 'valid curiousities'. Oh okay. Maybe I can ask him why he doesn't do humanity a favour and slam his testicles in an iron doorframe, and that would be equally valid. Him telling me, and only me, he was voting for political parties known for their homophobic values. This was 'conversation'. Okay, I'll mention to the next black person I see that I'm cool with them but I agree with the KKK.

In the end I got sacked because I said I wouldn't work alone with him and refused to accept their bullshit excuses for his behaviour. I got a pay-off out of court, but if my life wasn't chaotic right now, I'd have fought it all the way.

No-one ever changed anything without putting a few noses out of joint.

Horrid story Ocampo.

It also shows that just being who you are allready is activism.

Yes, ocampo's story is the kind of thing I thought had been relegated to history.

You are both strong, brave women - ocampo and hyke - and I understand what hyke says about simply being yourself is activism; and we change more people's opinions by being ourselves than any other way.

We still need the militants to counteract the bile of Autism Squeaks and the like; but in everyday life we can do no better than simply being open about who we are.

Sadly, we'll still encounter dick-heads like ocampo's tormentor; I've met similar in the past when simply being female made me fair game, regardless of orientation/neurotype. In those days there was no come-back at all, so we have come a long way since the seventies.

I second, third, and forty-ith the idea that every persons way of activism is needed.  
The more zealous - some might even call it militant - approach is necesary, to help pave the way, for the "nice, non-threatening, type" to walk in.  The more extreme the bias, the more extreme (sometimes) the response, that is needed to cancel out - extremeism though, perhaps might not get a movement any further than even.  The positives have to outweigh the negatives (or negatively perceived) to get any traction.  
I think that if we -( the not an in-your-face type)( the non-threatening, mom next door types (fill in the blank) (me) KNOW that the extremes are being taken care of - putting pressure on, making waves - then I can focus on making a difference in my physical neighborhood.  I think that I will plan a picnic (small) with my areas freinds of different learners (of which I am a member of course) over the summer - and have all the auties and aspie (kids and their parents/siblings as that is who I know - but this time I will look for adult aspies to come (just a few) AND call the newspaper and frame (positively) the article I would like them to print on our ordinary get together - a bunch of happy, family next door families  (as suggested on a silver platter).  Then some one other than me - the larger group AFF can take each individual positive and send it out to show the truer picture .  That I am not suffering, my family is not suffering, my son is not suffering, we are just like anyone else - Not a terribly front page type of thing - but grass roots.