Published on 12, July, 2020
As an older person with Autism, I was brought up in very different times with different thinking, values, acceptance, behaviour, etc (1970's & 80's).
The World has changed so much since then - both for better and worse.There have been so many advancements - particularly in science and this has benefitted us ASD'ers immensely.
One thing that is troubling me is that I hold a lot of "principles" that in this day and age would be considered "Old Fashioned", "Traditional", maybe even "Bigotry" or worse.There are things that I struggle to understand or accept which are based on my traditional attitude. I was brought up in an era when....
I openly discuss or rant about these topics along with some others that may be considered taboo with closed friends and family who have all become somewhat numb to my outrageousness / inappropriateness.
I have however managed to "behave" in public (stayed on the right side of the law), but occasionally do mutter things with a level of cowardice.My concern is that now that I am officially autistic, the shackles of having to mask may have been broken and that has the potential of me saying the wrong thing at the wrong time.
Getting "cancelled" isn't really a thing, if you say or do things that make you about as welcome as fart at a funeral people are simply going to treat you as such. The only difference is now it's not just limited to your deeds being known only to you, your victim, and a handful of witnesses, people have always talked about your misdeeds but now they talk about it publically online for all and sundry to find out. And if anyone thinks for a second they are exempt from that then they're the "snowflake", not the folk they've offended.Rather than demand people stop holding you accountable for what you say and do you'd have an easier time just not saying or doing anything that you need be held accountable for in the first place. You're an adult, nobody is denying anyone is a product of their generation but we live in the age of information now, and you are online you can find out what is and isn't acceptable, so the ignorance is wilful and a choice being made. There are plenty here who have lived an learned. We've all had to grow to some degree or another.That is why you will find the youngsters have a hard time forgiving you, because you should know better by now not to say things that are hateful. Wisdom is suposed to come with age.
but what has he done?all he has said here is that he thinks a man is a man.... hes ok to have that view even if you disagree with it... theres no evil committed here unless im missing something?and yes i understand trans exist and they disagree with that... but, so what? ... i like chocolate, there are people out there who dont like chocolate, i do not consider them evil for that...i think galloways is better than greggs.... some people might say greggs is better, i dont take offence or consider them evil for a difference of opinion or view. and it doesnt change my view or effect my view... so i fail to see what bad hes done, unless as i said there is more context thats not on this thread?
Caelus said:but what has he done?
Its seems that I have done something terribly evil in sharing concerns about how my past may be affecting me. I am apparently (as per @Nate97) an unpleasant person and that my friends & family dislike me!
I am being openly criticised for struggling to align my thinking to others' agendas. Was Orwell onto something when he wrote 1984?
My OP has poked a hornets nest and caused a lot of "argument" (I prefer to deem this as discussion or debate) - I can assure you that that was NOT the intention of starting this conversation.
Several members have questioned why I cannot change or open my eyes....Change exactly what though? I don't hate people who live their lives in a way that was widely considered not normal "back in the day". I don't hate on people that have skin of a different colour than mine.
Actually it is kind of. My mother had a very unusual take on the gay marriage thing. Her position as I understood it was that it probably wasn’t the government business to decide what was and wasn’t a legitimate marriage.
‘she would say why can’t two brothers enter a contract to raise their dead sisters child together as equal parents.’ So I suppose in her reckoning she would’ve said the government should have deregulated marriage and just had some sort of civil partnership system which could be completely divorced from sexual relationships conceptually.
in that system anyone can say that they’ve married anything, they can marry their horse if they want. because the word marriage has no legal status. and churches and philosophers and different groups could have completely different ideas about what a valid marriage is and isn’t.
Please clarify which of the two entirely contradictory positions you actually hold.
You can't not agree with same sex marriage but also think that men should be able to marry men. They are literally the opposite.
GPK26 said:I may not necessarily agree with such things as same sex marriage and I am entitled to take that stance.
And your family is entitled to dislike you and avoid you because of it.