I agree with a lot of what Stella wrote, but if we ignore the issue of the etiology and nature of AS, how do we counter accusations that we are incapable of being adequate parents or making our own decisions or forming valid opinions because we are too intellectually disabled or mentally ill to do such things? These labels of "intellectually disabled" and "mentally ill" cannot be ignored.

And if we ignore the issue of defining what AS is the disruptive problem of people claiming to be AS accusing others claiming to be AS of not being "true aspies" or autistic at all comes up time and time again. Neglect of the issue of defining AS also allows NTs to be able to discredit what any aspie has to say about AS by saying that aspie is too intelligent or well adapted or articulate or popular or physically coordinated to be autistic or representative of most people with AS or autism.

Well, talking about science: I think the 'right' theroy of autism is that of monotropism theory. But this theory implies everyone who is capable of paying attention would be 'autistic' to some degree. So I don't know how this could help the process. What i think may be a biological significant distinction could be non-verbal learning disoerder. Yet someone told me it would not be esclkusivles exist for autism spectrum Does anyone know about this?

Other biological clear cut distincations may be partial or total lack of face-recognition, and tolerance of pain due to opium-derivates in the blood of some people.

Oh Lili you are right to say that perhaps I oversimplified the difficulties arrayed against us - some of which I'd never thought of until you suggested them.

But I will try to answer as best I can.

1. The debate here is one about Human Rights  - "Equal Rights for Aspies."

2. When a government starts  to respond to political pressure from an action group like ourselves,  it does so at first in a general way, and only  gets down  to all the details of how these rights or benefits can be granted once it has agreed in principle that something should be done.

So we should try our best not to get too bogged down in detail if we can help it, tempting thought this may well be!!!

3. Who is an Aspie? Unsatisfactory though it may well be in some ways, I think we will have to say that an Aspie is anyone who defines themselves as an Aspie.

Gay people, for example, define themselves as gay because they know they are. They don't need doctors to tell them so.

Our case is not so simple, because some of us can only survive on  DLA, where some kind of medical definition becomes necessary, or be dependendent to some extent on Social Services.

But this doesn't stop those who are  able to fend for themselves - but who  still identify with our struggle in the NT world  - from defining themselves as ASD and helping us achieve some sort of fair and equal treatment.

Perhaps a few misguided individuals will claim to be Aspergians who are not for some purpose of their own, but very few NTs would want anyone to think they were autistic!  

I suppose some people accused of criminal offences may claim to be ASD
who are not,   but I'm sure that defendents sometimes
claim  other disabilities or social disadvantages in the hope that the court
will go easy on them. I suggest.

As for worrying about who is Autistic, who is HFA, who is Asperger's, who PDD-NOS and so on, this is simply divisive.

Wherever we are as individuals on the Spectrum, the one thing we all have in common is Autism.

The word "Autistic" falls with such horror on the ears of NT parents that they have scrambled to have Asperger's Syndrome established as a phenomenon in its own right, which it is not. Anything rather than have their children labelled as "autistic" they think!

I am autistic and this is what I think.  :idea:

Stella Maru

ok

Stella,  

I like what you say,. but for the last part.  What is stopping NTs  knowningly or not claiming to be aspie, advocate peace, love and joy in the face of our eradication? When an aspie equal rights is advocated they claim it is aspie supremacy!!!

One lady who does not post anymore on another board did about 3 , said her bf said he doesnt think aspies should be allowed to talk on the net (!!!) *trolling alert*

If NTs are posing as aspies on the boards dont they have a potential to influence the debate to a position that is disadvantageous to aspies?

1. The debate here is one about Human Rights - "Equal Rights for Aspies."

2. When a government starts to respond to political pressure from an action group like ourselves, it does so at first in a general way, and only gets down to all the details of how these rights or benefits can be granted once it has agreed in principle that something should be done.

So we should try our best not to get too bogged down in detail if we can help it, tempting thought this may well be!!!

3. Who is an Aspie? Unsatisfactory though it may well be in some ways, I think we will have to say that an Aspie is anyone who defines themselves as an Aspie.

Gay people, for example, define themselves as gay because they know they are. They don't need doctors to tell them so.

Our case is not so simple, because some of us can only survive on DLA, where some kind of medical definition becomes necessary, or be dependendent to some extent on Social Services.

But this doesn't stop those who are able to fend for themselves - but who still identify with our struggle in the NT world - from defining themselves as ASD and helping us achieve some sort of fair and equal treatment.

Perhaps a few misguided individuals will claim to be Aspergians who are not for some purpose of their own, but very few NTs would want anyone to think they were autistic!

I suppose some people accused of criminal offences may claim to be ASD
who are not, but I'm sure that defendents sometimes
claim other disabilities or social disadvantages in the hope that the court
will go easy on them. I suggest.

As for worrying about who is Autistic, who is HFA, who is Asperger's, who PDD-NOS and so on, this is simply divisive.

Wherever we are as individuals on the Spectrum, the one thing we all have in common is Autism.



Stella, the points you make are so right, I agree entirely, I am wary of spending too much time getting bogged down in minute detail when really we have so far to go as a community to get recognition, I think if we start the process, it will take a long time, and during the process changes can be made as we proceed.
It would be good to have unity on the issues of labels, and the differences between them, I feel aspie, autistic, HFA, LFA, hyperlexic, etc, we are all on the spectrum regardless of label differences.

oh ASMan I'm sure there  aren't lots of people pretending to be autistic coming to interfere with us on the net.

Of course there may be one or two imposters now and again, and some who come to make a nuisance for some reason of their own, but this must true of every kind of group, association,  or society that has general access on the web.

Even if there are people who want to come in here and other ASD places to poke fun, or harm us, or manipulate us as you suggest, what can we do about it?  Mostly, I think NTs are too much involved with their own world to bother with us.

They do their best to forget we exist in the world outside the net, so why would they come to look for us here?

Best Wishes

from Stella in Brighton.

We can use 'two ancestor hypothesis' to make our claim.

And yes - this may sound strange for Aspies - but NTs define everything by social criteria - even ilness. The very existence of autisms spectrum/asperger is not defined by biology, but because of social behaviour. And our couase is about human rights, with is a social issue again. Thus it should be all right get minortiy group status, because socially, that's what we are! Let's go for it!!

I don't think that lady sounds like a troll; she's probably another lonely naive aspie who didn't understand the dangers of getting involved in relationships with abusive NTs.  

I agree with Stella that self-identification, as with other minorities, is the most reasonable way to go.

Stella wrote

I have been in many an argument defending the idea of self-identification. I like the idea because I don't think I would get a diagnosis if I sought one and I don't believe I am mentally ill or retarded so I refuse to submit to official labelling as a mentally ill or retarded person, which is the official majority view of AS.

I agree with most of what you write, but I am concerned that you seem to regard autistic people (or people who only think they are?) who can "fend for themselves" as only identifying with the struggle but not struggling themselves. I think a person with AS can be fully capable of "fending for themselves", but still have a huge struggle to face, because their problem is more one of bullying and discrimination than their own lack of ability. You have probably read about my complaint that a past supervisor once criticised me for having a look on my face that he did not like, but he made no criticism of the standard of my work or my abilities. I see that as a plain case of discrimination rather than disability, analogous of a hypothetical situation in which an effeminate guy who can do the job well is told off by his boss because his boss does not like the guy's image.

This too might seem like hairsplitting detail, but people have to be made to realise that so called "disabilities" can simply disappear when the environment or expectations change in a minor trivial way.

another quote from Stella

On the internet you can claim to be anything that you like, but people who know you IRL might never know about it, so I don't think there is anything stopping some imposter from making mischief online. Whenever someone advocates the services of some pharmaceutical or health professional I become wary of possible commercial interests. I wouldn't be surprised if there were NTs out there who have a grudge against people on the spectrum because they were in a bad relationship with someone on the spectrum once, and maybe they might try to make mischief. A lot of the stuff written on web sites about NT/AS relationships has this kind of rancourous and defamatory tone about it.

Yes, I've seen that, NT woman breaks up with AS guy and decides to start harassing people on aspie boards.

I don't think it happens very often, though, and usually trolls like that will lose interest pretty quickly.

You cannot blame parents who don't see an alternative, don't know better and just want to help their childs. But you can run an NGO and offer alternatives ways if you have them. But someone will have to take action in the first place. And if its about money, you can also make the parents pay donation to your non-profit organisation dedicated to change the world. Lots of people do it. Did you know there is an Institute for Autistic Action? They give some hints on what could be done.. at http://institute.autistics.org/

Lili said "Am I being paranoid if I wonder if agents who have commercial interests in the autism industry might want to put a spanner in the works of organisations that disseminate the view that autism/AS is not some terrible disease that any good parent would want to cure if their child had it?"

I think you are being realistic Lili, there is so much money involved for some of these people, it is their livelihood, they won't want to see it taken away from them.
NAAR and CAN make millions and fund so many scientists, plus we have all the cure-mongers selling chelation remedies and so much more, if someone like AFF could put even a few out of business I will be expecting a backlash from them.

Yes, it's entirely realistic.  As Amy mentioned, in one of her e-mail conversations with Simon Baron-Cohen, he disagreed with the idea of calling autistics a minority race... of course, he wouldn't get any funding to do amniocentesis studies on a minority race...

There seems to have arisen around us a great array of quack cures and patent medicines.

Pure natural bilgewater has been proven in clinical trials to reduce the visible signs of neurotypicalism when taken as part of an unbalanced diet.  :roll:  


Straws to be clutched at!

Stella Moo

There has been a post about the minority idea.
It included a poll, here are the results-

Should we declare ourselves a minority?
Yes

51%   [ 17 ]
No

33%   [ 11 ]
Dont Know

15%   [ 5 ]
Total Votes : 33

The majority did want to be officially seen as a social minority group. I think thats quite encouraging so far, considering its such a new concept to some members of the community.

This post was last modified: 02-23-2006 04:59 PM by Amy.