Published on 12, July, 2020
I’m sure you guys can relate to being fed up with life to the Nth degree. To some degree I want to vent but also I want to make a point hoping at least some people here will agree with me. But I need to start with some background about myself first.
I was diagnosed as an adult. Autism was something that only got picked up during my degree and didn’t get formally diagnosed till much later. Prior to that I’d been home schooled, getting my A levels in a community college. I won’t say autism hasn’t effected my career but it didn’t stop me achieving well academically and getting a job in my chosen career as a scientist.
The one area where autism effects me most in my life is my social life, at this stage it's almost laughable to call it a social life really. I’m actually pretty extroverted. I love spending time with interesting people talking about interesting things. Unfortunately that window of people on my wavelength is pretty narrow and getting less accessible as time goes on. My interests are generally juvenile and nerdy. Obscure video games and anime, weird science and … well things out of the ordinary.
I’m very widely read and my enthusiasm for what I find interesting can come off as arrogant (because I appear to be an authority on everything) or creepy (because I’m generally unable to tell when interest transitions into discomfort for the people I’m talking with unless they express it verbally). I don’t see the line between interesting and disturbing because, well for me it isn’t there to the same extent.
I’ve been banned twice from activity groups and once by a geek themed bar ostensibly for being a ‘weirdo’ and making people feel ‘uncomfortable.’ This is why I’m now taking legal action. I’m not going to elaborate on against who or the specifics of the situation. But I do want to talk about the protection the law affords autistic people and why no one ever seems to have fought for it before.
Because believe me I’ve been reading a lot of case law and I can’t find a case like mine anywhere. The equality act says discrimination arising from disability is illegal. You can not apply the same rule to everyone and say you are not discriminating if the rule penalises people for things that are caused by their disabilities. Not unless you can justify it as a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim.
So for example in a school you can’t expel an autistic student for being disruptive unless you can demonstrate you’ve really looked at every alternative.
In fact it's actually illegal to have rules that unfairly penalised the disabled. An example in employment would be the Bowerman v B&Q case where the tribunal ruled that defining ‘unintentional sexual harassment’ as ‘grose misconduct’ without a provision to take autism in to account was discrimination.
If you have an autistic person who is unintentionally causing upset, as far as I can understand the law, you can’t just ban them on the grounds that’s what you’d do to anyone else. You have to have a process to assess to what degree autism contributed to the issue and if the ban meets the legal tests for being a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim for which the supreme court has laid down a 4 part test.
This principle has been tested in education and in employment but the equality act says it also applies to goods and services. If you ban an autistic person from a venue, event or other activity offered as a service to the public the same principal should apply.
As an autistic person I rely on fairly neich special interest groups to help me make friends and connect with people on my wavelength. They are basically my social lifeline. I suspect many autistic adults who like me are more or less independent but fairly isolated are similarly reliant on activity groups like that.
So why is it that I’m the first, as far as I can tell, to take a stand on this issue?
Disclaimer: I’m not a lawyer, none of this is legal advice
Hi Peter
May I just point out a couple of things that leap out to me on reading your post.
You seem to be very angry at the world for not providing you with a tailor-made social life to the point you're trying to drag someone through the courts - to what end? What are you trying to achieve? You seem to be taking the process as a challenge to 'beat someone' rather than thinking about the situation rationally. More things are achieved with honey than vinegar.
You say your interests are very obscure - so you must realise that the number of people into the same things is going to be a handful at best - and even then, are they bothered enough about the subject to spend time with you talking about it?
Just an observation, but you come across as very intense and intimidating so I can see how you might end up in the situation you are in.
All I can suggest is to realise that, as someone with ASD, we see the world VERY, VERY differently to the NTs and our ability to be an expert in anything we are interested in is very off-putting to the NT ego - they feel inferior so they often become adversarial in response. You appear to not take other's lack of ability to operate at the same level as you as a factor in how they react to you. Your knowledge probably frightens them on many different levels - and their egos can't handle that.
I would suggest a couple of strategies that might help you - like starting or joining a special interest forum - the internet is a big place so you're more likely to find like-minded people there. Either that or maybe find some slightly more main-stream interests that will give you a larger pool of potential social interactions.
If you want to interact with NTs you need to understand them and cut them some slack - it's like you shouting in English in, say, a German pub and expecting them to bend to your language - you know you'll end up being thrown out.
It's worth watching some Jordan Peterson on Youtube - he's good at explaining the fragility on delusions of NTs so I'm sure you'll be able to create a model in your own mind of a better way to interact with them.
What am I hoping to achieve is a valid question. Honestly I want to go back. I was seeking an injunction to that effect. The equality act was specifically designed to give courts, even a small claims court, the power to make injunctions forcing organisations to change discriminatory practices.
More generally I may establish in law an important principal and test a new area of autism law in court. If a case goes to appeal the result of the appeal case is binding on all lower courts.
Depending on how things go it may never get to court. Settlement out of court is a possibility. But if that happens I’m not likely to drop this. I’ll just change tack. I’ll push parliament for legislation to explicitly clarify the law so in the future it will be spelled out clearly that autistic people can not simply be excluded from social settings for being ‘weirdos.’
I see a threat on the horizon for autistic people. For years I had no trouble, at least none on the scale I’ve recently had, in these little geeky enclaves my social life existed in. But more recently a transition has occurred. People are more sensitive and more likely to interpret any thing that offends or upsets them as some sort of crime rather than mere rudeness.
Before if people had an issue with something you said they tended to take it up with you directly so you had a chance to mend fences. now they are more likely to go directly to an organiser and demand ‘something be done.’
It causes this absurd situation where autistic people can be told they’ve caused some sort of incident of which they themselves are totally unaware. Incidents no one will actually reveal to them incase doing so reveals the identity of whom even has complained about them.
As the world becomes more sensitive, dare I say politically correct, there is a real risk more and more autistic people will find themselves being kicked out of organised social groups and activities on the basis of complaints they aren’t allowed see but where the details may very well boil down to ‘this person is a weirdo.’
I personally believe someone has to take a stand and nip this trend in the bud. Am I really the only one concerned about this?
I still don't get it - you want to legally *force* everyone around you to put up with your behaviour - no matter how obnoxious you might choose to be at any venue - and they will be unable to tell you what any problem could be because whatever they might say, they would risk you taking them to court again?
I don't know why you would insist on being somewhere where you aren't wanted? Is this some kind of power-play? Your rights exceed anyone else's? What happens if everyone just walks away from you and you're left sitting alone in the venue? Who would you take to court? Would that be the manager's fault for not locking the doors?
Like it or not, we are a tiny minority so really, if we want to be accepted, the onus is on us to fit with the majority in this instance - you can't *force* people to like you or want to be near you. Surely being amenable and respecting other people's views is the whole point of socialising?
Even if we accept as you seem to assert that neurotypicals might find the innocently intentioned behaviour of autistic people threatening it doesn’t follow that perception is rational.
There are women who find sharing toilets with trans women threatening. People who find sharing dark alleys with black people threatening. It doesn’t follow their perception is rational or that it should be accommodated.
Part of life is sharing spaces with people you’d rather not be around. For example you can’t stop your mean boss or bitter ex from going to the same bar or event you do. It doesn’t mean you have to interact with them.
You seem to be suggesting I’m advocating forcing people to interact with autistic people? Just because someone attends an event it doesn’t follow any one has to interact with them. If they don’t want to talk they can just say so.
Many will want to interact but if some don’t no one is forcing them to do so.
I totally disagree with you about every point you made in the post above. I have no axe to grind with anyone but I try to stand in a position of logic and reason (in my opinion) so if people make contentious posts, I will ask the basis for their thoughts.
I have nothing against you at all - I seem to remember you got in over your head in a heated discussion and then backed out - so what? I don't hold any grudges or ill feelings toward you - I think I even mentioned that typing is a clumsy way of having a discussion and things would be smoother verbally as things written get other people's misinterpretation of feelings put on them where they might not exist.
I ABSOLUTELY have never mentioned anything about where you live - which until now I was unaware of - so what's your point?
From other threads you have posted on I can imagine that you are lonely and wanting a social life too - is that why you are attracted to this thread?
Do you feel legally forcing NTs out for a social evening to accept potentially threatening or disturbing behaviour from ND people to be a sensible way to go?