How do you describe Autism?

The broad gamut of equal rights legislation covers those with disabilities, but doesn't provide full coverage for those with hidden disabilities. Well-meaning schemes like the sunflower system have refused to check the background of applicants, leading to its widespread abuse.

With the NHS issuing certification for the hidden benefit of full innoculation, would it not be possible for them to similarly include a heads-up on hidden conditions? As one of the GAD staff in the stroppy days of the 1980s (I was brought in to do the roll-out of the Dial-a-Ride program once it had successfully completed testing, in an easily-scalable financial package), before going on to one of the guarantors of the ECHR, I find the lack of provision and routine discrimination appalling.

We don't conform to norms which make no provision for anyone who's not white, male and neurotypiucal - which is about 30% of the population. The other "minority" groups refuse to become compliant, why should we? We can't help being born the way we are, and I've paid my way with knobs on. In some respects, even neurodivergent panders to that minority's misguided idea they're the norm.

Once we get beyond one Aspie standing out as a spokeswoman for all, because everyone else had been too badly done over to speak, then perhaps we should start telling the medics our side of the story. The girls in Public Schools are getting a hearing, London's single women likewise, and the BAME community, because Authority has let them down. We're in the same boat.

I use that computer idiom to explain what goes on "under the hood". My brain's using between 30 and 100% of its capacity, per an MRI/EEG study, but is structurally normal. The NT norm is 10%, of which half is taken up by daily experience waiting for overnight reassessment in beta phase sleep. Mine is vestigial, because I process it real-time, making me very fast and accurate on the uptake. But it means I cannot communicate my 70% to their 5%. My simile is that of two identical PCs, one with an updated Opearting System running at 100%, the other with an out-of-date OS only able to use 5%. Which is disordered?

What I don't accept is that we can't communicate among ourseles. I'm not the only high-functioning Aspie in the family, another's the grandson of an Oxford Regius Professor of Mathematics. I think we're slughtly telepathic.

Martian Tom said:

I grew up in an era when 'cowboys' were always the heroes and 'injuns' were always the villains, because of how they were portrayed in dime-store fiction and the cinema - and because of how it was seen as acceptable to portray them: wild, murderous savages pitted against the reason and civility of the white settlers.  History teaches us the truth of those times.  Just as history teaches us that white colonial rule in India and Africa - and the grandness and greatness of the British Empire - were all about far darker and deadlier truths.  Subjugation.  Slavery.  Imperialistic ambition. Greed.

Tom, in the interests of developing this compelling discussion I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment, ok?

What do you say to people who point out that imperialism actually developed and organized the countries where it was implemented and, in fact, united what before, were divisions in the 'subjugated' society? Things like railways, hospitals, democracy, the civil service  and places of education were created only as a result of the British Empire. 

NAS20054 said:

I wish to re-emphasise this and stress this point too.

I have written at length about this in one of my previous posts.

There are two sides to the coin; an offender and an offendee.

The offendee is often the bad person, where the person is not justified in being offended.

The offendee is sometime responsible for deciding to be offended, but they place the accussations and blame on the offender for doing the offending.

Offense is then in the eye of the beholder.

( I am not talking about N words and such, but other benign communications an offendee may disagree with in any conflict situation. )

I agree, Aspergerix, and I suppose 'the acid test' is whether someone was using a term in a pre-meditated sarcastic way designed to denegrate or humiliate others, or as a reference made within an objective discussion. The fact is, human beings can make connections that are not really there when hysteria takes over and then it's impossible to cultivate an atmosphere of free exchanges, something akin to the hysteria found in times of political and religious fervor, such, for example, as the Spanish Inquistion or The French Revolution, etc. 

I'm all for political correctness as long as it is correct for everyone.

Tom, I agree with a lot of what you say, however, I do think there is a tendency for people to rake up the past too much and focus on what happened in a completely different social and political era.

The wounds will only heal if we all strive to get on in the modern age and to keep referring to stuff that has long been outdated just keeps divisions going.

I used to have a rag-doll type toy which I really loved when I was small.  No way did I associate it with any sort of person at all, anymore than I associated Rupert with being a real bear.  Used to collect the coupons from Jam for a brooch or pottery model (which by the way are valuable collectors items now). 

But I suppose that was the innocence of chldhood.

I agree about showing people respect, Tom, but sometimes I feel some people look at anything they can claim is 'offensive' because they don't happen to agree with it. If this is taken too far nobody would disagree with anyone else for fear of causing offence.

I also agree that it is better to openly debate something and show it for what it is rather than bury it underground where it will just fester and grow. And some of the distasteful terms you have mentioned are very offensive when used to put down, humiliate and generally cause hurt to people but shouldn't automatically be banned when discussing their pernicious impact on society.

I think education is the key here but without open discussion this is difficult to accomplish. Simply sweeping things under the carpet will allow things to grow and become even worse and while I'm all for showing people respect, some issues do need to addressed and aired, even if some people don't happen to like some of the views expressed.

Trainspotter, I think the human family contains such a richness of talents and we should be glad not everyone is a carbon copy of one another.

This is what annoys me so much about 'political correctness', i.e. the feeling that one should 'go along' with the herd on pain of being in a minority. We have always and will always need people who can think 'outside the box' and challenge the orthodoxy because otherwise innovation will stop and society will stand still, and this applies to all fields of human activity such as science, art, mathematics, politics, technology, etc. 

I have spent my life being thought of as 'awkward' and not giving straight answers, being long winded and pedantic and often going off on strange tangents and supposedly not getting to the point.

I can misunderstand instructions, instantly forget what I am doing but have a very good long term memory, have great trouble with all the buttons on phones, remember verbatim a conversation I had last week but where I put my keys five seconds ago I have forgotten (oh, there they are, I had them in my hand all the time!)

Although I can talk people to death, I'm sure it isn't an enjoyable experience for others.  But I came to the conclusion long ago that nothing can change how I am.  And I hate it when people try to change me.  I'm never going to like certain food, am never going to suddenly enjoy social occasions, and I am never going to change the way I think.  And if people can't accept that it is their problem.

I think we are thought of as some sort of threat to the run of things.  We are thought of as some sort of anarchist, rebels, people who want to do things our own way in order to annoy others.  But nothing could be further from the truth. 

All that I want is to be left alone to be the person I am.  And this person is trapped inside me most of the time, the person 'outside' is merely a rather poor actor trying his best to remember his lines.

Although I'm not an Aspie as such, I think that because they 'dance to a different tune' they often look at the world differently and in novel ways that many other people miss.

Maybe because Aspies don't really worry too much about what people think of them gives them the freedom to 'daydream' and pursue lines of thought that others might be reluctant to do.

You only have to look at some famous historical examples of individuals who have gone their own way and who have benefited society as a result. If everyone behaved in a politically correct manner I believe society would stagnate. Perhaps, then, a degree of 'social blindness' can be a positive thing.