Aspies For Freedom

I am NT and my boyfriend has AS.  My experience with bf is that I am a much more tolerant person than he is.  He quickly judges people/situations and can get quite animated about the issue.
Example: he sees an SUV/pick-up truck/van with one person driving and starts ranting about what a waste of energy blah blah blah (read statistics and technical words I will never remember).  I point out that it could be a work vehicle and he can't afford a 2nd vehicle for evening driving, or it is a mom with a family who is just running to pick up the kids.  He often calms down, but he doesn't seem able to see a different point of view on his own.
Just my observation of one Aspie. I am here to learn more.  Thanks.

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

I'm not only a high-functioning Aspie, but as a traditionalist and Conservative Revolutionary I also have a very non-conventional view of the world.

What I found shocking to learn on a Dutch Autism-forum quite recently, is that people within Autism-spectrum aren't necessarilly more openminded and tolerant than NTs. In fact, the overall behavior of most of the forum members was just as intolerant as that of the average NT whenever you address opinions that are politically incorrect. I've been called anything from racist, antisemite, idiot, narrowminded, neonazi, etc. just for expressing views that fall within the traditionalist and Conservative Revolutionary areas. Their prejudice about such viewpoints seems to close their minds entirely in a way pretty much identical to the way NTs shun things alien to them.

Therefore I'd like to know how tolerant you guys are? Would you treat LaVey satanists, anarchist punks, goths, skinheads, marihuana-junkies, communists, fascists, homosexuals, transsexuals, Jihadists and other non-conventional folks with respect if they treat you with respect? Would you be willing to be openminded about their lifestyle or viewpoints and discuss with them or would you just dismiss everything they have to say on forehand?

I think this is an interesting topic, because we're all non-conventional in some way and I believe it is important we respect others who are non-conventional, even if their ideas or lifestyle contradicts our own views. If we are not tolerant, in what way would our attitude differ from that of the intolerant and ignorant NT?

i'm a bit like Korrigan in regards being very tolerant of other peoples points of view, alternative views and in fact I am able to learn a fair amount from them. But I am extremely intolerant of people who shove their point of view on myself or others and then restrict my freedom or others.

ocampo Wrote:

Thank you Illusion, for exposing yourself to be the fuckstick you really are. *clicks report*

If they ban me for calling a narrowminded hypocritical *** like you a narrowminded hypocritical ***, so be it. After the way you've been behaving, every single word I said was justified. If your condescending and explicitly offensive behavior is considered an accepted standard while I'm not even allowed to voice me honest opinion frankly, then this community is not what I'm looking for anyway.

earthmonkey Wrote:

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

If what I'm saying is offensive to you, it's probably because you know it is true. Like I said before, people tend to be most offended by what they know to be true but are not willing to admit for themselves....;

If applying this "logic" to you, then if what the people on this forum are saying is being offensive and prejudiced to you, then it must mean that we're true on this. Lots of people who believe homosexuality is immoral are thoroughly offended at the idea of people being gay - by your reasoning this must be proof that being gay is okay is a true statement. Your "reasoning" here is inconsistent.

I'm not offended by the idea of homosexuality. If that would be the case, I would have a lesbian friend. Where do you find the idea that I'm offended by the idea of homosexuality?

I guess you must be referring to those radical "conservative" Christians out there whom I dislike as much as the equally hypocritical and condescending liberals out there.

Besides that, these people are offended by homosexuals in the same way ocampo is offended by my words. They make al sorts of assumptions and see the other as a threat to their way of life, which doesn't necessarilly have to be the case.

earthmonkey Wrote:

People get offended at both true and false things.

True. They just get more offended with facts than with lies, because they can provide rational arguments against lies but not against facts. Humans are at their most dangerous when they lack any rational arguments for the things they do or say.

earthmonkey Wrote:

It's a ridiculous fallacy to say that "you don't believe and take offense to what I say, therefore I must be right"

I said that people tend to be more offended with facts than with lies. I did not say that being offended implies truth. To draw that from my words, my dear, is a logical fallacy.

earthmonkey Wrote:

Also, while the word "primitive" can conceivably be used in a value neutral way, though it's usually not, the word "superior", in the context of one person or one group of people being "overall" superior, CANNOT, by definition be used in a value neutral way. Even if you think the "inferior" groups should be respected, that doesn't make it value neutral.

To me, the word "inferior" implies no more than "being of lesser capacities". I rarely use it myself, because no individual is of lesser capacities in every area. I do use the word "primitive" more often, but I do not link it to inferiority. For me, "primitive" merely implies a lack of complexity.

earthmonkey Wrote:

Also, equal in the context of people doesn't mean "identical". Equal is about equivalent worth.

That's a nonsensical Orwellian meaning that I refuse to apply.

hyke Wrote:

The bolded pieces of text are full of valuations of you. It should. Who says so? You do, it is your opinion.

It is an opinion based on a rational argument and not on a value judgement.

hyke Wrote:

Then you base that opinion on the simple fact that a male-female relationship is the best environment for any child to grow up in . Were do you find that fact. It is how it is mostly happening in western culture. But it is not an overall fact. Lots of non western children are raised in matriarchal structured families.

Let me broaden it : the simple fact that the best environment for any child to grow up in contains at least one male and at least one female role model and the fact that procreation implies a male-female-relationship.

hyke Wrote:

That is the point. We only have your words and they are not as 'neutral' as you state.

They are neutral in the sense that they reflect a rationally argumented opinion and not an opinion based on prejudice.

earthmonkey Wrote:

No one's saying that everyone should become gay, even if it were possible.

They are promoting it as something cool and normal, which makes a lot of teenagers experiment with homosexuality who would otherwise not even have thought of the idea. As a consequences, many people unnecessarilly go through the more horrible identity crises for no reason whatsoever.

earthmonkey Wrote:

The problem is the statement I italicized, which is NOT a "simple fact". Most research indicates the opposite.

In every single human civilisation, the marriage between a man and a woman has been the norm. Sometimes it's more men for one woman and sometimes it's the other way around, but homosexual relationships have always and everywhere been a deviance.

earthmonkey Wrote:

I wasn't addressing your statement that people tend to be offended with facts that go against their beliefs. I was addressing your statement, towards people who took offense at your statements, that:

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

If what I'm saying is offensive to you, it's probably because you know it is true.

'Probably' in reference to particular individuals is different from "tendency" in reference to general population, and you make the implication that, "If what [you're] saying is offensive to [us], it's probably because [we] know it is true."
That pretty clearly implies that because we're finding offense with it, that it's probably because it must be true.

Also, in my example, I did not say that you are "offended by the idea of homosexuality". I was giving an example of how, if a person uses your "if you're so offended then it's probably true" argument in a reversed situation, then you'll come up with two opposing "facts", and that this isn't a valid way to argue a point.

My point was merely to illustrate that something being offensive to someone shouldn't be a criterium for that statement being said or not. Something being offensive to someone does not imply that the statement in question is false, far from it. That's all I was illustrating.

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

earthmonkey Wrote:

No one's saying that everyone should become gay, even if it were possible.

They are promoting it as something cool and normal, which makes a lot of teenagers experiment with homosexuality who would otherwise not even have thought of the idea. As a consequences, many people unnecessarilly go through the more horrible identity crises for no reason whatsoever.

If nothing else managed to show your ignorance, the above post really, really, really says it all.

KorriganToo Wrote:

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

They are promoting it as something cool and normal, which makes a lot of teenagers experiment with homosexuality who would otherwise not even have thought of the idea. As a consequences, many people unnecessarilly go through the more horrible identity crises for no reason whatsoever.

If nothing else managed to show your ignorance, the above post really, really, really says it all.

I'm not speaking out of ignorance. In fact, I'm speaking out of personal experience.

I know quite a number of lesbians quite personally and I've seen them evolve from when they were teenagers to the age of adolescence. Some of them were absolutely straight, but they somehow became lesbian because their ex-boyfriends were too bad in bed or because the love of their lives turned out to be a homosexual. Around here, it's been almost a fashion to become lesbian for the lamest reason imaginable. Homophobia may still be the norm where you live, but where I live it tends to become the other way around.

Mahler5 Wrote:

Just because you cannot see that you are offending others-doesn't mean that you are not. You are being offensive-that's the truth. Can you handle it?

Again : it is not my fault that others are offended by opinions they don't like. Every opinion can offend someone.

Besides that, y'all seem to apply a double standard when it comes to controversial views. If I would get a dime for everytime someone said someting that was far more insulting to me or my views than anything I ever said on this forum, I would be a millionaire now.

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

I'm not speaking out of ignorance. In fact, I'm speaking out of personal experience.

I know quite a number of lesbians quite personally and I've seen them evolve from when they were teenagers to the age of adolescence. Some of them were absolutely straight, but they somehow became lesbian because their ex-boyfriends were too bad in bed or because the love of their lives turned out to be a homosexual. Around here, it's been almost a fashion to become lesbian for the lamest reason imaginable. Homophobia may still be the norm where you live, but where I live it tends to become the other way around.

Homophobia is certainly NOT the norm where I live.  You obviously have no idea where I live.

But the thought that "a fashion to become lesbian for the lamest reason imaginable" would be even remotely acceptable, anywhere, is just, awe inspiring.

Speaking from personal experience?  So you have been a lesbian then?

I am sure that you have spent some time inside their minds, inside their bodies, right?  You can tell exactly why everyone does what they do?  Nope, you cannot, so judging someone by saying that they would "become lesbian for the lamest reason imaginable" is horrible.  Horrible.

KorriganToo Wrote:

But the thought that "a fashion to become lesbian for the lamest reason imaginable" would be even remotely acceptable, anywhere, is just, awe inspiring.

Speaking from personal experience? So you have been a lesbian then?

I'm not a lesbian, but I spent quite some time among lesbians for a certain period of my life. In such a situation, you get to hear a lot of stories on a very personal level.

KorriganToo Wrote:

You can tell exactly why everyone does what they do? Nope, you cannot, so judging someone by saying that they would "become lesbian for the lamest reason imaginable" is horrible. Horrible.

When these people had their first girlfriend, they told me in person that they did so because their ex-boyfriends were too bad in bed or because the love of their life turned gay. I'm not making this up but basing this opinion on what they told me at that time.

ocampo Wrote:

And with regards to 'experimentation', I would have thought the idea that a bit of a gay fumble in your late teens led to you having an identity crisis in later life died in the 1980s Rolleyes

I don't wake up in a cold sweat remembering when I had a fumble with a guy when I was 17. If anything, its gay people that have to go through identity crises because they spend their entire lives being told that they're 'ineffective' in some way. Not that I really expect you to grasp that theory.

One person goes through an identity crisis because he/she is too smart, another because he/she is homosexual and yet another because he/she is ugly. I doubt there are many people who didn't go through hell for some period in their lives. Why should you homosexuals be spared from the consequences of their deviance?

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

One person goes through an identity crisis because he/she is too smart, another because he/she is homosexual and yet another because he/she is ugly. I doubt there are many people who didn't go through hell for some period in their lives. Why should you homosexuals be spared from the consequences of their deviance?

STOP STOP STOP, YOU ARE SUCH A MORON!

YOU HOMOSEXUALS, OH MY, GRAB YOUR TORCH AND PITCHFORK, WE FOUND US A GAY!

Whatever..... I have other things to do right now, so I leave you all bickering of how a person should behave in which situation. Jeez, if I didn't know better I would think this was a community of pure NTs when I look at how little of a spine so many of you've got and how much many of you insist on silly social conventions.

earthmonkey Wrote:

So you're implying that NTs are of little spine? *whistles and reports*

People should learn to take criticism instead of crying like a little child who just found out that Santa isn't real.

Nevertheless, cowardness, narrowmindedness and arrogance are obviously not just NT traits. You folks have all made that pretty clear to me.

Anyway, I'm really off now.

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

Anyway, I'm really off now.

Oh my, apparently I need 2 giant pooper scoopers! Korrigan again hopes she does not get any Illusion on her...ew.

kimberkara

micgrace

IlluSionS667

IlluSionS667

IlluSionS667

WilheminaAsWell

IlluSionS667

IlluSionS667

WilheminaAsWell

IlluSionS667

IlluSionS667

WilheminaAsWell

IlluSionS667

IlluSionS667

WilheminaAsWell