Published on 12, July, 2020
Does this make any kind of sense to anyone?
For me, society seems to be present me with a choice
1. Act normal, uptight and be accepted on the surface, as a walk down the street, but feel depressed, isolated because I have internally obliterated some of the essential quirky parts of my character.
2. Relax, act a bit quirky, and have people avoid me in the street, and be treated like some kind of rapist, mad animal or wierd alien sub-species.
From my own perspective, it seems that people outside have this extra, unnecessary layer, that is like an armed militaristic assault vehicle designed to convince people of their social status - it makes them seem fake, uptight and often rather reactionary, even if they identify as progressive or left wing, because they can't see past their social conditioning needs, that they push in my face at every possible mimenf. If I try to conform to their behaviours of physical uptightness, pushing out my personality like some kind of armed militaristic assault vehicle then my body has to become extremely tense indeed, it's like I'm absorbing all their uptightness, and externally I seem to go to the extreme of their behaviour and often appear robotic or irritable or unreasonably idealistic.
So, that's my dilemma either become robotic or be treated like a potential alien-weirdo-rapist.
Sound familiar, or not?
I live in a village where there is this lad, roughly 17. He is autistic, but to a much greater degree than me. He dresses as a Jedi to go outside and i often see him in the street practicing with his light sabre.
Many people laugh at him or pretend he doesnt exist. The first time i saw him i walked right up to him and said 'dude that is the coolest thing i have seen all year'.
He looked at me and simply said 'thank you.'
Given a choice i am always my quirky self. Let the people laugh or ignore me. That way i know that the people that talk to me are not hostile.
Encouraging him was probably the most evil thing you have ever done in your life. He needed guidance on how to blend in and interact with society, not the contrary.
Why would that be? Why should everyone blend in.
You have a very small minded view. I dont blend in. I dont want to. Neither does he.
T said:I think the way you seem to think gay people are a fairly homogenous group who can easily "be seen as a single body by the public" actually shows how easily autistic people could be seen in the same way.
I think I laid out the thinking very clearly - do you really believe that the public can see such a disparate group who have a single label as a homogenous group?
What other group of people can you think of who have achieved anything like this have such as nebulous range of traits?
Being autistic is not a single trait. It is a label covering a huge range of traits and this is the core reason I think we will not be seen the same way.
I think the way you seem to think gay people are a fairly homogenous group who can easily "be seen as a single body by the public" actually shows how easily autistic people could be seen in the same way.
Gay people aren't any less different from each other than autistic people, especially if you include all people who experience same-sex attraction (idk why this thread keeps shorthanding anyone who isn't strictly into their own sex out of existence).
🐝 Bees 🐝 (they/them) Autism resources in bio #stoptheshock #NothingAboutUsWithoutUs said:You've gone so far from the original point to split hairs over something not relevant to what I was talking about in the first place
The conversation moved on from the original point long ago.
I was very clearly talking about a detail that was brought up as part of it and made it clear what it was and even laid it out plainly to save your time, but I feel you are the one who is now willingly ignoring the point for some reason.
Conversations evolve and arguing that it wasn't what you wanted to talk about and throwing the toys out of the pramb reflects poorly on your debating ability.
You are still trying to compare gays and autists. One group has a single identifiable trait that earns them the label of gay but autists are a massivly complex grouping of traits that are only identifiable through a slightly arbitory definition of autism (ie if you get more than an arbitory score on tests to see if you have enought of a diverse range traits at a high enough level).
It is like comparing apples with a baked Alaska.
Why does the comparison matter? Because of how we are seen by the society we are railing against to get recognition and accommodation from.
A famous quote is something like "you have met one autist and you have met only one autist". We are typically nothing alike so for us to be seen as a single body by the public we are going to have a massive struggle compared to gays for example.
I'm interested in finding out how we are going to present ourselves as a unity - something people can identify and accept that we need to have changes in society made for us.
I believe this will be incredibly difficult so I'm looking for ideas to help develop a strategy for this.
Does anyone have a suggestion on how we can work towards this?
You've gone so far from the original point to split hairs over something not relevant to what I was talking about in the first place I'm just not going to talk to you anymore Iain because you're being wilfully ignorant to what I have to say.
🐝 Bees 🐝 (they/them) Autism resources in bio #stoptheshock #NothingAboutUsWithoutUs said:No. Look it's very simple: we are talking about categories of people, and the categories are gay people and autistic people.
Completely wrong,
We are talking about easily identifiable groups of people with identifiable traits.
The point was that one easily identifiable group (gays) could advicate for their rights while autists (who are not easily identifiable for any single trait) are in a much smaller group and are less able to advocate for their rights.
The whole issue is around autists being so hard for the public to identify as a group and that we are only identifiable as smaller groups with similar traits (eg don't like crowds) and that these small groups are statistically much smaller than groups like gays.
Your insistence on changing this to be about a groups with nebulous traits (ie all autists) is why I said it looks like you have an agenda. Please stop trying to make this about something else.
🐝 Bees 🐝 (they/them) Autism resources in bio #stoptheshock #NothingAboutUsWithoutUs said:But again that is irrelevant, because we are not talking about individual traits
You have failed to read the parameters of the discussion so have wasted more of your time I'm afraid.
I think we need to reset the parameters of the discussion so you can get on the same page. My input started in relation to this post:
Judge Dredd said:ASD are about 4% of the populace, even less. There is just not enough clout and manpower to influence society as a whole.
I believe official stats on autists with a diagnosis are currently around 1% of the population while gays are around 3.1%
For autists to be seen by the general population as a group we need to be identifiable with one or several identifiable traits (otherwise we will experience the "well everyone is on the spectrum then mate" response from the public) - expecting a wider understanding and acceptance is not a realistic expectation in any sensible timeline.
On that basis I don't think we are going to get the force behind us to be able to make progress in the way that gays (or the LGBTQ... group) have managed,
Is that simple enough to follow?
No. Look it's very simple: we are talking about categories of people, and the categories are gay people and autistic people.Gay people are also
Iain said:highly variable
in their experiences, for eample not all of them have the exact same relation to their romantic or sexual attractions, some experience a Kinsey scale and yet do not identify as Bi. But you don't split gay people out of the category of gay based on different experiences they have. And you can't do the same to autistic people just because we are not exactly the same either that's not how categories work, another example is a hammer and a wrench both fall under the category of tools. It is a basic concept.
Iain said:I pointed out that autists have no single identifiable trait,
But again that is irrelevant, because we are not talking about individual traits, the way language works we are talking about categories. And to keep going on about traits (which I never brought up, you did) is a strawman argument that has been used to derail from my original point. And while I've tried to be generous with my time and the giving you the benefit of the doubt frankly if you bang on about traits again I'll have no choice but to conclude you are trolling.
🐝 Bees 🐝 (they/them) Autism resources in bio #stoptheshock #NothingAboutUsWithoutUs said: Blimey it's not that difficult a concept that Autism is it's own thing,
That is where you are making the mistake - at least in the context of this discussion.
We are discussing the comparability of autists to gays - that is the essence of the arguement here, not the textbook definition of autis.
Look at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism_spectrum
It is now known that autism is a highly variable neurodevelopmental disorder
The spectrum model should not be understood as a continuum running from mild to severe, but instead means that autism can present very differently in each person. How a person presents can depend on context, and may vary over time.
Look at how autism is diagnosed - we are given a score on a range of tests and the arbitary value was assigned by which a higher score = autism. It is a flawed classification system.
Judge Dredd was being shot down for saying that gays (a group with a single, identifiable trait) are much more numerous than autists.
I pointed out that autists have no single identifiable trait, even within their own lifetimes they change in their traits and the intensity of them.
This means to have an equivelant comparison of a group of autists with the same traits you woud have a much smaller number, and hence the arguement about representation holds.
I suspect you are arguing about something different and not the subject here.
They can, I know when my mask has accidentally slipped with strangers, either with curiosity or distrust I can see a subtle change in their faces (I learned to be a face reader even though I don't have the allistic autopilot for it) and the look on their faces is like they have just seen a cat say woof.
Iain said: Bees (they/them) said:The "single trait" is still autism, even when autism is on a spectrum. Then explain to me what the single identifiable trait of all autists is?
Bees (they/them) said:The "single trait" is still autism, even when autism is on a spectrum.
Then explain to me what the single identifiable trait of all autists is?
Being Autistic. Blimey it's not that difficult a concept that Autism is it's own thing, if we were just a set of symptoms unlabled we'd never be diagnosed with anything, the GPs would just say I diagnose you as not being able to walk, to which a patient would say "well no 5h17 Sherlock". You're even on the forum for the National Autistic Society, not the National Anything Not Neurotypical Society.
Iain said:Do you want to discuss the fundamentals of this or does it not suit your agenda?
I don't wish to fall out with you, but accusing me of having an agenda (agenda of what? warning against belief in unsubstantiable claims, wow how evil of me) when I have tried my best to put the fundamentals in laymans terms is incredibly cruel and perverse. I have written in plain English, if you cannot understand because it's gone over your head then fine, it is not a moral failing and I don't consider you any lesser, but either way if you cannot or refuse to understand me for your own reasons that is not my fault at this point.
🐝 Bees 🐝 (they/them) Autism resources in bio #stoptheshock #NothingAboutUsWithoutUs said:The "single trait" is still autism, even when autism is on a spectrum.
You can't because there isn't one. We hare a group of people with a wide range of behaviours / traits that are hugely diverse and sometimes contradictory.
That seems to be what our disagreement boils down to.
Do you want to discuss the fundamentals of this or does it not suit your agenda?
🐝 Bees 🐝 (they/them) Autism resources in bio #stoptheshock #NothingAboutUsWithoutUs said:If you can't or refuse to discuss what I'm actually saying then please do not bother, I'm too busy this weekend for bothering going back and forth with anyone set on miscontrueing me no matter what I say.
Been there...
I'm reading a really interesting book on Autism right now, but I've still got 350 pages to do, I'll wait until I finish it, but it DOES seem to show a commonality that cuts across the Autism spectrum.
The bloody normies can smell it from about 10 yards...
Iain said:Autists do not fall into one identifiable group of people in the same way that gays do - there is no single trait or characteristic that you can say makes them obvious. Instead we use an abritary number of characteristics from a wide spectrum of such characteristics to meet a threshold and thus qualify for the label. We lack an identity in the public eye this way - some of us can't stand crowds whild some love them. Some hate loud noises and some are concert going metalheads. Some go mute when nervous while some cannot stop talking.
Autists do not fall into one identifiable group of people in the same way that gays do - there is no single trait or characteristic that you can say makes them obvious. Instead we use an abritary number of characteristics from a wide spectrum of such characteristics to meet a threshold and thus qualify for the label.
We lack an identity in the public eye this way - some of us can't stand crowds whild some love them. Some hate loud noises and some are concert going metalheads. Some go mute when nervous while some cannot stop talking.
I really do not see how you can say that with any seriousness. Autistic is autistic, you are not "more" or "less autistic" because you are not on the same place on the spectrum as another autistic person. The "single trait" is still autism, even when autism is on a spectrum.
Iain said:Comparing the numbers of one group who have a sexual preference to others of the same gender with those who have selective mutism
Again you should read what I say because I literally never did that. Only you have mentioned selective mutism in this chat between us and as selective mutism is not autism that is a strawman argument and moving the goal post of the original point that was being made.If you can't or refuse to discuss what I'm actually saying then please do not bother, I'm too busy this weekend for bothering going back and forth with anyone set on miscontrueing me no matter what I say.
🐝 Bees 🐝 (they/them) Autism resources in bio #stoptheshock #NothingAboutUsWithoutUs said:Please read what I say very carefully
Fair point, but this is an internet discussion forum, not a court case so there are likely to be disagreemnets and a lack of attention at times.
The reason I quoted back was that your statement of "thats not true" implied a binary situation of true and false when in fact different, respectable information sources do not agree with one another.
So to compare gays with autistics with particular identifiable characteristics, the original point is spot on. Comparing the numbers of one group who have a sexual preference to others of the same gender with those who have selective mutism will be a huge mismatch.
Taking all autistic traits and compaing this disparate group of people to another group of people with one very selective trait is not a fair comparison so would need to be considered as lots of smaller groups instead - confirming the arguement.
That is the angle I was approaching the discussion to use your technique of plain speaking.
Not really, my point is the true number is unknowable and the discrepancy of statistics from one source to the next prove lack of definitive data collection, or error in the data collection, to which the result is the same conclusion, the true number is unknown ergo "there are way more homosexuals than aspies" is an unreliable and unproven statement. The satistics I provided were examples of statistics, to illustrate the issue which I already explained in my last reply.The links should have been read because they explain the problem with how their data was collected re the census and autism diagnosis numbers: "Around 3.6 million people (7.5%) did not answer the question on sexual orientation, while 2.9 million (6.0%) chose not to disclose their gender identity." " The new study, based on school records that usually underestimate the actual proportion of children who meet diagnostic criteria, shows a considerable increase in the autism prevalence in England. The researchers say the increase is likely to be because autism has become better recognised by both parents and schools in recent years."This is important because statistics rely on people taking part A in the first place, and B the data input without error. And since we know autism diagnosis is still improving. It would be near imposible to say what the real number is when the reality is not fully reported into the data sets to form those statistics. Statistics are interesting, but they are not gospel. That's not to say you should never share statistics, but you must be aware of the unreliability of them. And at any rate I don't even have reason to think Judge's statement was anything over than opinion, as not even he cited a source for his claim.TBH when the response to my point about statistics not being definitive is to post more statistics showing different results which proves my own point I'm inclined to believe you didn't really read what I said, made some assumptions about what I meant, and just reactionarily went NOPE on it because "reasons". Please read what I say very carefully, I do try my best not to mince words and use plain speak whenever possible so it shouldn't be that difficult to understand my meaning.
🐝 Bees 🐝 (they/them) Autism resources in bio #stoptheshock #NothingAboutUsWithoutUs said:That's actually not true. Gay and lesbian (census) population is 1.5%
The office for national statistics has that figure at 3.1%
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/sexuality/bulletins/sexualidentityuk/2020
The same site you used shows just over 1% of the UK population is autistic:
https://www.beyondautism.org.uk/about-autism/understanding-autism/statistics/
That would support Judge Dredds case.
To be clear, my drive is not to educate, but rather to set up a procedure in which I am most-efficient..
This sounds like a loud thing, like you stated above, but really it just translates to things like: Not expecting me to sing in the company choir or collect coffee for the team when I go to the toilet. Change for me is not-being questioned and challenged on why I don’t adhere to the unwritten rules, change for me is being allowed to adapt my personal-bubble to expel the sensory chaos around me, it is having a means of communicating with others in a way that I am comfortable. Social change for me, is anything but an additional element to the chaos, it is a reprieve from the chaos..
I believe that NTs believe it is a big thing to give one a free-pass from the chaos, and I believe it is for another’s ego, but I thing that autistic change is anything but loud and inconvenient. It is inefficient to appease the status-quo against the pursuit of individual efficiency. It doesn’t take manpower to help autistic people, I feel, it simply takes a nod.. ‘the blue badge of the employment world’..
Judge Dredd said: There are way more homosexuals than aspies
.That's actually not true*. Gay and lesbian (census) population is 1.5% https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64184736 Autistic (diagnosed) population (just the kids, not including adults) is 1.7% https://www.ncl.ac.uk/press/articles/archive/2021/03/autismratesincrease/It's not a true* statement because the true population of autistic and lesbian and gay people is throttled back by fear of being outed to homophobic family when completing the census for those that live at home, and the lack of diagnosis of autism due to wait times, high maskers that never get assessed, underfunded NHS, and assessors that innacurately misdiagnose autistic girls as other things. Therefor the true statistics are currently unknowable.For clarity true here being used by definition as accurate, reliable and trustworthy.
DeSpereaux said:But I would say that it doesn’t matter how close to normal you try to be, the group will always see through your camouflage, even if it’s as you try to catch your breath. So I would say that it’s a recipe for misery to pursue others’ ideals
Yes. The only way is to pursue your own. It seems impossible unless you comprehend what it means. I found it very hard to get there though, I have to say.
1) There are way more homosexuals than aspies
2) There is way more support for homosexuals than for aspies
3) Homosexuals tend to be way more functional than the average aspie