Published on 12, July, 2020
I can't stand stereotypes and do not wish to be defined by my condition. I would rather people saw me as an individual with strengths and weaknesses, some of which can be explained by me having Asperger's syndrome, rather than defining me by a label. This is why I can't stand the word 'aspie'. While having Aspergers is an important part of my identity, it is no more important than me being female, no more important than my sexuality or my age. I would hate it if someone did not see past me being a woman or past my age, why is having aspergers any different? The disability movement campaigned for disability to be seen not as an individual affliction or difference, to move beyond individualising disability and to see it as a societal problem: people with disabilities should campaign collectively to change society, making it imperative to see the person before the disability. I am a person with asperger's syndrome, not an aspie. I share traits that other people with AS may have, but I don't share all the traits, just enough to have aspergers. We are all different, to say I am an aspie suggests conformity with other 'aspies' and obliterates the part of me that defies easy categorization.
No, Hope, I said you were responding emotionally. That much is evident in the language you used:
Hope said:...I can't stand...
Hope said:...I would rather...
Hope said:...I subscribe more to...
Hope said:...I don't agree with...
and so on. These are statements of emotion. Ergo you are responding emotionally.
That is not the same as saying "you are emotional".
Also, the very fact that you state that my arguments are sexist is exactly what I mean by you stereotyping me!
My arguments, in and of themselves, are not sexist.
You are interpretting them as sexist because you believe them to be typical of sexist thinking.
I've stated it before, and you just don't seem to get the point, even though it's a key part of the points you made in your original post - difference does not equate to relative value.
Or, in other words, simply stating that Men and Women think differently does not equate either positive or negative value to either way of thinking!
Both are positive.
You also state that what I've written "suggests that men are not as good at caring as women" - it does no such thing.
I simply stated that men and women approach the world, and roles such as caring, in different ways.
This does not state, or even imply, any kind of value judegment on which approach is, in any sense, 'better'.
Nor does it even state, or imply, that the way men and women think make them any more suited to any given role, or another!
It just states that they think differently!
You are reading things into my statement which are not there precisely because you hold the stereotypical view that "'men and women think differently' equates to 'sexist viewpoint'".
And, lastly, regarding your what is the point question - 'policy' is policy, and 'science' is science - do not confuse the two - yes politicians use the findings of science to shape policy - but it is not the goal of scientists to make policy - it is the goal of scientists to uncover facts about the world.
How those facts are then used is not part of the scientific process, it is part of the political process.