Mom shares the less-than-pretty truth about raising a child with autism in ‘Autism Uncensored’

[55853]

Generalisations are useful for brevity.

I disagree. I think it's harmful and fails to pinpoint the reality of what's happened.

You've made your own generalisation here.

And what group am I generalising?

But Imo, occasionally I see NTs show up, I don't see a lot of empathy.
I see please say what I want you to say bro make me feel better.

What you see isn't necessarily the reality. You're assuming their intentions. You must hate when people have assumed the worst of you, right? So how's it any different?

 

[Fridgemagnetman]

What you see isn't necessarily the reality. You're assuming their intentions

So are you.

And what group am I generalising?

You trying to understand or win an argument?

You were hoisted by your own petard.

What you see isn't necessarily the reality. You're assuming their intentions. You must hate when people have assumed the worst of you, right? So how's it any different?

Err... You're kind of repeating my point back to me....

Apply it to yourself.

 

[55853]

So are you.

I prefer "innocent until proven guilty". I'll assume they're well meaning until I see evidence otherwise.

You trying to understand or win an argument?

You were hoisted by your own petard.

I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean. Could you answer more directly please?

Err... You're kind of repeating my point back to me....

Apply it to yourself.

What specifically am I applying to myself? I take it it's about assuming intentions, but when someone flat out says "NTs" are "slow", what else am I supposed to take from that?

 

[Fridgemagnetman]

I prefer "innocent until proven guilty".

I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean. Could you answer more directly please?

What specifically am I applying to myself? I take it it's about assuming intentions, but when someone flat out says NTs are "slow", what else am I supposed to take from that?

Seurat was a pointilist painter.

This interchange has reached that level.

 

[Starfire]

Come on guys, group hug?

 

[55853]

Seurat was a pointilist painter.

This interchange has reached that level.

Art and English were both subjects I struggled with in school, so I genuinely don't understand what you mean. In plain English, what do you mean?

 

[Fridgemagnetman]

Art and English were both subjects I struggled with in school, so I genuinely don't understand what you mean. In plain English, what do you mean?

Pointilist sounds like pointless when spoken

 

[55853]

Pointilist sounds like pointless when spoken

Thank you, I'd never heard that word. So what makes it pointless? That we have opposite viewpoints and neither of us will change them or something like that, or something different?

 

[Fridgemagnetman]

Thank you, I'd never heard that word. So what makes it pointless? That we have opposite viewpoints and neither of us will change them or something like that, or something different?

Something's you just gotta work out for yourself.

 

[55853]

Something's you just gotta work out for yourself.

I can't. I've been lurking this site and others for years, I can't work out how saying "NTs are [negative quality]" is ok because it's venting or whatever, but why it would not be ok to say "people with autism are [negative quality]" for venting.

(for the record, I don't think either are acceptable)

I see it as different to "my child with autism has [negative traits]" or "my NT parents had [negative parenting strategies]", which both look more like venting.

If you make a negative statement about an entire group based on a few individuals, how else am I supposed to interpret that?

 

[Progster]

At first I wanted to make a few (mixed) comments on this, but I feel that unless I've read the book, I'm not in a position to judge.

 

[Fridgemagnetman]

I can't. I've been lurking this site and others for years, I can't work out how saying "NTs are [negative quality]" is ok because it's venting or whatever, but why it would not be ok to say "people with autism are [negative quality]" for venting.

Where are you? An autism site. This mostly means there's anpro autism bias. Isolated people feel safe venting.

If you make a negative statement about an entire group based on a few individuals, how else am I supposed to interpret that?

In the way I've attempted to illustrate above.

Perhaps you're being stricter with the literal meaning than others are.

Like I said - people generalise for brevity.

People do know the difference.

I see it more as venting, and read it as your venting example.
You may be applying your meaning to things too strictly here.
Others may be more flexible about it.

 

[55853]

Where are you? An autism site. This mostly means there's anpro autism bias. Isolated people feel safe venting.

But does that make it ok to generalise? In communities of parents and carers of people with autism, would it be ok for them to vent about their experiences by making statements like "autistic people are so oblivious"?

In the way I've attempted to illustrate above.

Perhaps you're being stricter with the literal meaning than others are.

Like I said - people generalise for brevity.

People do know the difference.

I see it more as venting, and read it as your venting example.
You may be applying your meaning to things too strictly here.
Others may be more flexible about it.

Maybe, but things like racism, sexism, and homophobia have their roots in generalisations of entire groups, and it's uncomfortable how similar it reads. The attaching of negative qualities to something innate to that person/group of people they dislike.

 

[Fridgemagnetman]

But does that make it ok to generalise? I

Yes it does.

You say 'no it doesn't'

Your first statement is a straw man.

Like I said pointilist.

There's something fundamental you're not grasping Imo, I can't help you.

Maybe, but things like racism, sexism, and homophobia have their roots in generalisations of entire groups, and it's uncomfortable how similar it reads

Deal with your discomfort then.

 

[55853]

Yes it does.

You say 'no it doesn't'

Your first statement is a straw man.

Like I said pointilist.

There's something fundamental you're not grasping Imo, I can't help you.

Deal with your discomfort then.

I can't help but see it this way without understanding the opposite perspective. What makes this type of generalisation different to the ones frustrated mothers of autistic children make? What makes it different to the broad statements of entire groups made by bigots? What fundamental difference am I missing here?

 

[Fridgemagnetman]

I can't help but see it this way without understanding the opposite perspective. What makes this type of generalisation different to the ones frustrated mothers of autistic children make? What makes it different to the broad statements of entire groups made by bigots? What fundamental difference am I missing here?

Somethings you have to work out for yourself.

Is this groundhog day?

Imagine a closed world.
You make a statement.
I make a statement.
They have a relevance.
My statement uses words to make a point within the closed world.
Things have meanings within contexts. A closed world.
They can have different meanings outside of that.

You keep introducing other worlds into the equation.
Specious.

Go back to the straw man you introduced. Start from there.

Seriously work it out for yourself.

 

[55853]

Somethings you have to work out for yourself.

Is this groundhog day?

Imagine a closed world.
You make a statement.
I make a statement.
They have a relevance.
My statement uses words to make a point within the closed world.
Things have meanings within contexts. A closed world.
They can have different meanings outside of that.

You keep introducing other worlds into the equation.
Specious.

Go back to the straw man you introduced. Start from there.

Seriously work it out for yourself.

It's not intended to be a strawman. I'm not sure I understand you - by "worlds" do you mean situations? I'm "introducing" them because that's how I think - if it's ok in the context of one "world", is it ok in this other "world", and if not, why not? What's different? If I can isolate that, I can understand. But I can't isolate the difference, despite lurking for years. That's why I'm asking. Because I've tried to understand, but I can't.

Something must be different to mean one is ok but the other is not, right? So in plain English, relating specifically to what we're talking about, what's the difference? Please don't reference foreign (to me) films or play on English, I genuinely can't follow it like you're intending, therefore meaning is being lost in translation.

 

[Fridgemagnetman]

It's not intended to be a strawman

Whether intended or not. It was.
Big difference.

Use of the word ''intended' here is very interesting.

It's what I would call a slippery word, distancing and reframing a previous statement after being called on it. At the same time not addressing the statement I made about it.

A trend that creates circular non productive discussion.

if it's ok in the context of one "world", is it ok in this other "world", and if not, why not? What's different? If I can isolate that, I can understand. But I can't isolate the difference, despite lurking for years. That's why I'm asking. Because I've tried to understand, but I can't.

Situations within a world. You're introducing 'them' as aliens into the closed world.
My example refers to a specific thing. What you originally said.
You introduce 'them' and while it seems to relate and it may do in a different context. It doesn't.

Ie you're introducing a wider discussion to a specific example.

Think of it as putting legs on a snake.
My example was a snake.
Your wider argument was the legs.

Something must be different to mean one is ok but the other is not, right? So in plain English, relating specifically to what we're talking about, what's the difference?

Context.

 

[Mary Anne]

This is why austistic people of all spectrum levels could open up and share with the NT world more. Really, society is being fed the most extremes in either end of the spectrum and does not understand there is a vast ranging middle. I don’t think the majority of NTs would go of their way to learn the incredible spectrum, unless they were touched in some way by autism in their family, co-worker, or school. Fear, and stereotypes are all that currently reaches the public. Heck, society has not yet come to grips all of the subtleties, misdiagnosis, or lack of diagnosis even within their own world. Awareness has got to happen only when more wide ranging spectrum people make themselves more vocal and open to social media, book writing, etc.

It’s not the NT world’s fault that they do not know anything beyond the extreme of the spectrum! It’s really a two-way street, so to speak. Educate the NT world, and stop being so judgemental and negative on a autism blog that is mostly read by those with autism. I learned a long time ago that to change people’s perceptions was up to me, and I could never count on anyone else to do it for me. This goes for any subject one believes in, or cause one feels passionate about.

One other thing that always surprises me in this thread is the “us versus them.” Could it be that the NT world has a spectrum too????? I most certainly believe there is a spectrum for NT people too. How unfortunate to categorize an entire population of billions of people, in the same way you would black, Asian, or “white” people. This is how I see it. People here do the same when they say “I am autistic but I don’t like non-verbal people (I read that another thread.). Or, Non communicative autistics who don’t like “high functioning” autistic people. Or those who call autistic people “traitors” for talking candidly about living an autistic life. Or those who hate others for writing a book about raising an autistic child (not to mention that the author might also suffer with autism too). I see it all as very human to hate and dislike each other, and as humans, the whole lot of us (on the planet) is problematic in that way- living in the spectrum or not. The happiest people I have ever worked with have cognitive disabilities and do not realize what a f-kd up world we all live in. I really enjoyed working with them as a mental health professional.

 

[Mary Anne]

My take is they don't. People know the difference.
Generalisations are useful for brevity.
In a life of ostracization venting is ok imo

But Imo, occasionally I see NTs show up,

I ask you, how on earth would you know if an “NT” shows up? They might be in the autism spectrum too! They might have an autism child in their family. What does it matter to LABEL each other? I say if anyone shows up here, they are seeking answers, and knowledge. I found out I am aspie, and suffered my entire life because it. But it does not matter why someone comes here, it matters that they came here to educate themselves, and find help.