11-13-2004, 06:05 PM
11-13-2004, 08:42 PM
Greetings,
I like it
But I can see the 'professional' up in arms over it. We will have to simultaneously address the fact that they are ignorant and do not have any understanding of how we think and feel.
In effect we will have to discredit every one of them.
I like it
But I can see the 'professional' up in arms over it. We will have to simultaneously address the fact that they are ignorant and do not have any understanding of how we think and feel.
In effect we will have to discredit every one of them.
11-14-2004, 03:19 PM
I think it should be a social difference. I mean there's a possibilty of us being a different 'race' due to having Neanderthal genes and all that, but like Amy said, it'd be rather difficult.
Fortunately, I've never heard 'autism' being used as an insult before. I've heard 'gay' and '***' (in fact 'gay' is the most commonly used insult at my school, blegh) but not 'You autistic... erm, thing!'.
Fortunately, I've never heard 'autism' being used as an insult before. I've heard 'gay' and '***' (in fact 'gay' is the most commonly used insult at my school, blegh) but not 'You autistic... erm, thing!'.
11-14-2004, 04:02 PM
A journey of a thousand miles begins with one step; and this a great first step Amy!
I think we should also generate a statement (seperately?) that makes clear we are discriminated against, in the main, not due to any odd behaviour on our part, but rather because of the odd expectations the establishment impose on others. I can't see many NTs thinking too hard about issues based on how we see the world, but if we focus on things that a lot of NTs also see as pointles and stupid (especially in the work place) then they may well take notice?
The more I study the more sure I become that AS has become so distorted as to be beyond recovery, and the core issue is the classic definition of autism and the difference in outlook and attitude it implies (I'll see if I can get some of the early works on this, but as we are talking pre 1920 here, there's not much on the web; does anyone live close to a medical library? Here's some names to check when looking for relevant papers: Doncaster Humm, Guy Wadsworth and Aaron Rosanoff which should be enough to get one onto other luminaries?).
It should be core to our movement to emphasise this as it is uniformly positive; autism is essential, autism is part of being human, there's not the slghtest possibility that we would be where we are today (for better or worse) without autism (and it's equally clear that most of the World's problems come from the activities of the low autism types; it's a great shame the Neandertals didn't survive independantly from those grasping greedy "modern humans" ). The problem, once again, is the word itself; but I really don't like "Aspergian" either!
As for the question of categorising; imagine the degree of "colour" that's been used for discriminatory reasons in so many societies, or the caste systems such as that which is still rife in India. Surely if such pointless and arbitrary distinguishing features can be defined for the purpose of discrimination, then surely "autistic mindset" is sufficiently powerful a designant to use to protect us from discrimination? There's a downside (isn't there always?) insofar that, if this is to be valid, then we must begin to distinguish ourselves from those DSM Aspies who are not autisitic (let them keep the label if it makes them feel better, it's the non-auties who seem to care about such things) and I note that very few of you are prepared to tackle this issue. You think it's cruel? Discriminatory? Why, when if we can succeed, we can then help others of that kind, and will have helped them by setting a precedent! Until we acheive such seperation we'll get nowhere, to the detriment of both parties. This in part is why the DSM evolved such a woolly method of diagnosis, to prevent those of us who have the smarts from actually enforcing recognition! As long as we continue to accept this artificial imposition then we're stuck where we are.
I think we should also generate a statement (seperately?) that makes clear we are discriminated against, in the main, not due to any odd behaviour on our part, but rather because of the odd expectations the establishment impose on others. I can't see many NTs thinking too hard about issues based on how we see the world, but if we focus on things that a lot of NTs also see as pointles and stupid (especially in the work place) then they may well take notice?
The more I study the more sure I become that AS has become so distorted as to be beyond recovery, and the core issue is the classic definition of autism and the difference in outlook and attitude it implies (I'll see if I can get some of the early works on this, but as we are talking pre 1920 here, there's not much on the web; does anyone live close to a medical library? Here's some names to check when looking for relevant papers: Doncaster Humm, Guy Wadsworth and Aaron Rosanoff which should be enough to get one onto other luminaries?).
It should be core to our movement to emphasise this as it is uniformly positive; autism is essential, autism is part of being human, there's not the slghtest possibility that we would be where we are today (for better or worse) without autism (and it's equally clear that most of the World's problems come from the activities of the low autism types; it's a great shame the Neandertals didn't survive independantly from those grasping greedy "modern humans" ). The problem, once again, is the word itself; but I really don't like "Aspergian" either!
As for the question of categorising; imagine the degree of "colour" that's been used for discriminatory reasons in so many societies, or the caste systems such as that which is still rife in India. Surely if such pointless and arbitrary distinguishing features can be defined for the purpose of discrimination, then surely "autistic mindset" is sufficiently powerful a designant to use to protect us from discrimination? There's a downside (isn't there always?) insofar that, if this is to be valid, then we must begin to distinguish ourselves from those DSM Aspies who are not autisitic (let them keep the label if it makes them feel better, it's the non-auties who seem to care about such things) and I note that very few of you are prepared to tackle this issue. You think it's cruel? Discriminatory? Why, when if we can succeed, we can then help others of that kind, and will have helped them by setting a precedent! Until we acheive such seperation we'll get nowhere, to the detriment of both parties. This in part is why the DSM evolved such a woolly method of diagnosis, to prevent those of us who have the smarts from actually enforcing recognition! As long as we continue to accept this artificial imposition then we're stuck where we are.
12-21-2004, 05:32 PM
Unlikely, but it will go along way to us getting equal treatment. There will always be some out there who will hate us.
03-11-2005, 10:51 PM
"I was doubtful about it. My first doubt was the case that people would accuse Aspies and HFA's of trying to milk the government for SSI income becasue we are a disadvantaged group."
In my opinion a social minority does not have to be financially disadvantaged, but simply be a social minority that suffers discrimination.
So essentially money, welfare, benefits, is not the issue. It may be a side issue that others wish to imply is a motivation, as you pointed out.
In my opinion a social minority does not have to be financially disadvantaged, but simply be a social minority that suffers discrimination.
So essentially money, welfare, benefits, is not the issue. It may be a side issue that others wish to imply is a motivation, as you pointed out.
05-10-2005, 05:32 PM
Welcome Rosie.
05-31-2005, 05:29 PM
I think cultural minority is right, in the same way that the deaf culture could be considered a cultural minority.
I'm not sure how neurological minority can work, how would we approach that idea and explain it to people?
btw Hi Roderick. :smile:
I'm not sure how neurological minority can work, how would we approach that idea and explain it to people?
btw Hi Roderick. :smile:
05-31-2005, 08:54 PM
Hi Roderick, joining with the disabled movement has been suggested before.
There are 2 problems with that. One, if we campaign for all disabilites to be classed as a minority people will say to us as a group, or individually, but you aren't disabled so what has it got to do with you. They already try to do this with autism, as the majority of us have AS, even though, of course AS is high functioning autism.
The other thing is that if autism was classed as a minority through disability, then I, and 1000's of others would not be within that category as we are not disabled.
I would not be classed as disabled in the UK at all, and could not get disability living allowance. Some aspies and auties can get it and would be classified as disabled, it depends on the needs of the individual. But I wouldn't want everyone on the autism spectrum to be divided as far as rights are concerned by their having or not having a disability.
Also there are groups working towards the UN minority status for those who are disabled, and I hope they can achieve it, if anyone wants to help they can of course do that.
I think cultural or neurological is the most positive way to move forward. I'm still not sure how to explain neurological to potential supporters, to some the whole idea is a new concept, and we still get 'brain disease' as a description of autism. :roll:
There are 2 problems with that. One, if we campaign for all disabilites to be classed as a minority people will say to us as a group, or individually, but you aren't disabled so what has it got to do with you. They already try to do this with autism, as the majority of us have AS, even though, of course AS is high functioning autism.
The other thing is that if autism was classed as a minority through disability, then I, and 1000's of others would not be within that category as we are not disabled.
I would not be classed as disabled in the UK at all, and could not get disability living allowance. Some aspies and auties can get it and would be classified as disabled, it depends on the needs of the individual. But I wouldn't want everyone on the autism spectrum to be divided as far as rights are concerned by their having or not having a disability.
Also there are groups working towards the UN minority status for those who are disabled, and I hope they can achieve it, if anyone wants to help they can of course do that.
I think cultural or neurological is the most positive way to move forward. I'm still not sure how to explain neurological to potential supporters, to some the whole idea is a new concept, and we still get 'brain disease' as a description of autism. :roll:
05-31-2005, 09:48 PM
Bonnie said "As for disability advocacy, while I agree that society's view of disabilities is greatly in need of improvement, we need to be careful not to spread our focus too widely and perhaps end up with scattered and ineffective efforts."
Indeed, we did have someone approach us and felt that all people who are left handed should be included in the UN minority effort, as it was a difference.
They felt very strongly about it, but do left handed people really need any such protection? They face no danger of genocide, merely society having a bias.
Indeed, we did have someone approach us and felt that all people who are left handed should be included in the UN minority effort, as it was a difference.
They felt very strongly about it, but do left handed people really need any such protection? They face no danger of genocide, merely society having a bias.
06-03-2005, 08:16 PM
M your post made a lot of sense to me.
On a practical level in the UK aspergers being classed as a disability is a double edged sword.
You can be seen as being disabled/mentally ill and that is undoubtedly held against you. Particularly if you have children, Debbie Storey's tragic situation is not unique.
Yet if you want help and ask for it, such as help getting employment, you can be told that you are too able to get that advice and support (as has happened to me). Also you have a slim chance of getting disability benefits if you CANNOT find a job.
On a practical level in the UK aspergers being classed as a disability is a double edged sword.
You can be seen as being disabled/mentally ill and that is undoubtedly held against you. Particularly if you have children, Debbie Storey's tragic situation is not unique.
Yet if you want help and ask for it, such as help getting employment, you can be told that you are too able to get that advice and support (as has happened to me). Also you have a slim chance of getting disability benefits if you CANNOT find a job.
08-24-2005, 01:27 AM
I admire your patience to work with children.
I wish there were more (or indeed any in my area) job opportunities where one can work from home.
I wish there were more (or indeed any in my area) job opportunities where one can work from home.
09-18-2005, 12:04 AM
"So you guys want to be declared a minority?
First you need numbers.
What do you mean numbers? There are millions of autistic around the world, so maybe you mean something other than that.
Then you have to have a reason.
We already are a minority group, its a fact, official recognotion will just mean that more people are aware of it, and it may help stop the torture and murder of some of us.
Why do you think you are struggling?
We know why, do you know why?
Here in the US,and other countries I can think of a few minority groups.
Women-Glass Ceiling. I think I bumped my head on it a few times.
Women only fulfill 4 of the 5 criteria for minority group status, so are not techincally a minority group.
AfricanAmerican- Does this forum love or hate PC? Anyway this is pretty much self-explanatory.
Jews- Hated by most nations,but beloved by God.If suffering for 2000 years isn't good enough I don't know what it.
Roma- Or Gypsies. Living in poverty."
There are other minority groups, you don't have to be noticed and written about as one to be one, and new ones can be created by war, and exile.
First you need numbers.
What do you mean numbers? There are millions of autistic around the world, so maybe you mean something other than that.
Then you have to have a reason.
We already are a minority group, its a fact, official recognotion will just mean that more people are aware of it, and it may help stop the torture and murder of some of us.
Why do you think you are struggling?
We know why, do you know why?
Here in the US,and other countries I can think of a few minority groups.
Women-Glass Ceiling. I think I bumped my head on it a few times.
Women only fulfill 4 of the 5 criteria for minority group status, so are not techincally a minority group.
AfricanAmerican- Does this forum love or hate PC? Anyway this is pretty much self-explanatory.
Jews- Hated by most nations,but beloved by God.If suffering for 2000 years isn't good enough I don't know what it.
Roma- Or Gypsies. Living in poverty."
There are other minority groups, you don't have to be noticed and written about as one to be one, and new ones can be created by war, and exile.
01-03-2006, 01:03 PM
I have problems with my fingers, and have seen the doctor in the past about it, but never made a connection with AS.
She couldn't offer any treatment to help.
She couldn't offer any treatment to help.
09-13-2007, 01:21 PM
I don't believe in this cause at all.
Saying this is like saying all ginger people or all dyslexics should have minority group status as well.
It would just complicate things too much. I don't see myself as some 'outsider' from the rest of the population.
All that's needed is better understanding of the condition from 'NTs'.
Saying this is like saying all ginger people or all dyslexics should have minority group status as well.
It would just complicate things too much. I don't see myself as some 'outsider' from the rest of the population.
All that's needed is better understanding of the condition from 'NTs'.