As above.
As above.
It has been commonly said that autistics have poor theory of mind.
After several months of having interactions with autistics of low support needs, high support needs and self-realised, I'm more inclined to believe Dr. Damian Milton's theory of double empathy
https://www.autism.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/professional-practice/double-empathy
One of my prouder moments last year was distilling this theory into the following, and the good doctor himself (Damian, not the TV guy!) saying that he liked it.
When I was thinking about the often-cited patronising “theory of mind”, I came up with this in relation to your idea:
The last three are largely ignored by the ‘experts’ – and they shorten ‘Allistic Mind’ to just ‘Mind’
But…! Even though Autistic people have a poor Theory or Allistic Mind, it is a damn sight better then the Allistic people’s Theory of Autistic Mind.
Autistic people have good Theory of Autistic Mind
I don't think this is really the case though.
I read on here regularly of autistic people who keep repeating the same ineractions and failing (eg dating, trying to make friends etc) and they admit it is because they don't know the "rules" yet they will not go and learn these rules which would make the interactions easier.
Maybe it is the trait of change aversion that some do not want to learn and evolve because that involves change - there is probably a myriad reasons contributing, but it does reflect that we have a great deal of autists who will not help themselves in some situations.
Yep, understood - Perhaps tho' there is also an element of the "hard wiring" of the brain that means that for neurotypical people they don't need to "learn the rules" - since they are subconsciously applied by them. The typical delay that autistic people experience in interactions that is filled up by formulating a response that "fits the rules" in itself marks us as being "other" to neurotypical people perhaps. Recognition in neurotypical society that this is normal behaviour for autistic people and is no less valid than a neurotypical one (perhaps even more valid as it is more considered... ) would perhaps allow us to meet in the middle ground more often :-)
Thanks Iain I come back to the neurological basis of autism - the very structure of an adult autistic brain means the person is disabled in the same way as someone who has a mild hearing impairment or partial deafness has a physiological cause for it. Society understands (or at least the part that can be bothered to...) that adaptations in how one communicates with such people are necessary in order for social inclusivity - not to do so would be widely unacceptable in neurotypical society. The same process is not unreasonable to be expected for autistic people in my belief. :-) Hehe - I can dream anyway...
I concur - I think that the crux of this issue is that the NT have no insight into ND. ND are waking up quicker to the problems they've been facing than the NT world is. There are strong social pressures for ND to adapt and limited social support to facilitate this. On a separate post you have inquired about any ideas about how things could be improved for autistic adults without government funding. There is perhaps a role for ND people to collectively increase awareness by their actions - however I'm not sure that as a group we are best placed or equipped to do so - I come back to the diagnostic criteria that suggest our capability in relationships and social behaviour by their very nature mean we are disadvantaged and dare I say it lack capability to do so. We certainly are outnumbered in a democratic sense. I regret to say this may mean pushing more to be properly recognised as disabled from a societal point of view. Then collective action to ensure that equality legislation is followed and contraventions prosecuted might be a way? PS I'll post this response too on the appropriate post.if that's OK
I regret to say that downplaying the disability does not help.
I get what you mean here - I am not saying we should be ignored.
I am commenting on the realistic chances of this happening (ie the 99 learning new stuff to help the 1) in todays society.
Forcing change will only bring resentment I fear so a longer, more subliminal approach is most likely to have the desired effect.
The reference I made about learning sign language was more about NTs having to learn it - much as they would have to in order to interact with autists in the way you want.
Considering the "worthiness" or making sign language or autism understanding a priority it helps to look at the stats.
Deaf people - 1,2 million in the UK have hearing loss severe enough that they would not be able to hear most conversational speech.
Autists - 1.4 million autists with (my estimate) half having serious social communication issues., so 0.7 million.
This means there are almost twice the number of deaf people than autists needing understanding so why are we not asking people to learn sign language?
This is only to illustrate the point - we are a very small minority and there are many other minorities (some much larger) who are also deserving.
We cannot expect NTs to learn skills to deal with all groups so do we prioritise, lobby, force the situation or be patient and keep working to change things slowly and positively.
Personally I think that since we can learn to help ourselves then the onus should be on us to do so, ideally with support from the likes of NAS. Deaf people by comparison cannot learn to hear so it seems the responsible approach in my opinion.
I regret to say that downplaying the disability does not help.
I get what you mean here - I am not saying we should be ignored.
I am commenting on the realistic chances of this happening (ie the 99 learning new stuff to help the 1) in todays society.
Forcing change will only bring resentment I fear so a longer, more subliminal approach is most likely to have the desired effect.
The reference I made about learning sign language was more about NTs having to learn it - much as they would have to in order to interact with autists in the way you want.
Considering the "worthiness" or making sign language or autism understanding a priority it helps to look at the stats.
Deaf people - 1,2 million in the UK have hearing loss severe enough that they would not be able to hear most conversational speech.
Autists - 1.4 million autists with (my estimate) half having serious social communication issues., so 0.7 million.
This means there are almost twice the number of deaf people than autists needing understanding so why are we not asking people to learn sign language?
This is only to illustrate the point - we are a very small minority and there are many other minorities (some much larger) who are also deserving.
We cannot expect NTs to learn skills to deal with all groups so do we prioritise, lobby, force the situation or be patient and keep working to change things slowly and positively.
Personally I think that since we can learn to help ourselves then the onus should be on us to do so, ideally with support from the likes of NAS. Deaf people by comparison cannot learn to hear so it seems the responsible approach in my opinion.
Thanks Iain I come back to the neurological basis of autism - the very structure of an adult autistic brain means the person is disabled in the same way as someone who has a mild hearing impairment or partial deafness has a physiological cause for it. Society understands (or at least the part that can be bothered to...) that adaptations in how one communicates with such people are necessary in order for social inclusivity - not to do so would be widely unacceptable in neurotypical society. The same process is not unreasonable to be expected for autistic people in my belief. :-) Hehe - I can dream anyway...
