What are your controversial opinions regarding the autism spectrum?

[Crossbreed]

While NTs come from Apes, evolutionarily speaking, ASD people occurred when dolphins mated with breadfruit.

They sound like they were some freaky dolphins...!

 

[Bella Pines]

That we are the evolved form of NTs

 

[Mr Allen]

That we are the evolved form of NTs

Someone watches too much Pokemon, evolved form? Eh?

 

[Derp]

I hate living with it and I hate when people act like a special snowflake because they watch anime instead of football.

Hey guys im an aspie not one of those dumb "Sheeple" I like random obscure things a small minority of people with autism have an iq above 130 derp im actually genius.

 

[AuBurney Tuckerson]

Really interesting and tough one here. Obviously, there are certain behaviours that many of us truly cannot help, and for those, we do need to be excused. There are other behaviours that are every easy for many of us find easy to control and fit in with society on, and for those, we should not use ASD as an excuse.

But there's a massive middle ground of things that we can control, but cause us varying degrees of discomfort. To what degree should we be expected to control them? Under what circumstances?

When, and to what degree should those of us who stim be expected to control our stims so we don't look weird?

When, and to what degree should those of us with social difficulties be expected to attend social events so that we fit in with society better?

When, and to what degree, should those of us with sensory issues not quite bad enough to cause meltdowns be expected to put up with loud noises or flashing lights?

It's often very difficult to draw the line between knowing your limits and making excuses, and something that I think many of us struggle with.


I don't think this has to be an either/or thing. I have ASD, and it is part of my identity. But it's not my entire identity. ASD is part of who I am, but I am more than just my ASD.

Same here! I agree that those if us with social anxiety and sensory issues shouldn't be force to try to cope, especially when it would send us into a meltdown. I keep trying to tell my mother that. My autism is also a part of who I am. I just don't make videos about it because there are millions of people with autism. If I wanted someone to know I had autism (like a teacher or any friend who doesn't understand my limits), I would tell them.

 

[55853]

I genuinely hope I don't hurt people by what I'm about to say. This is something that has been on my mind a while, and I feel I could use some other viewpoints.

I'm not convinced on the reliability of the autism spectrum. And I don't mean that in the way "Asperger's should be separate". I don't believe that would help anything.

Of course this is impossible (for now?), but if all current mental and behavioural disorders labels were thrown out, and then some kind of statistics was run was used to create new ones based on clustering, I highly doubt the autism spectrum would end up back together. It is just so variable, and not only in the "I don't see what I have in common with people with low functioning autism" way.

I find I have more in common with people of similar personality off the spectrum (as far as I am aware) than I do with many with a "high functioning/mild autism/Asperger's" diagnosis. To the extent that people will often get the wrong idea of me if they know of my Asperger syndrome diagnosis. The more contact they have with others with Asperger's, the worse it seems to be, so it seems to be based on reality, not on stereotypes. So, I'm sorry, but I'm not convinced I have anything at all in common with some of you. If that's the case, is a label such as "autism/Asperger" helpful? Which brings me to...

I believe that labels can do more harm than good. I must stress - "can", not "always will". I know they also do more good than harm.

Too many people seem to cling to labels as identities and use them to define themselves. Be it doing online quizzes and collecting the labels like they are Pokémon, or using a medical diagnosis as an excuse where it shouldn't be. To me, it seems harmful to use something so variable (my first point) to define yourself.

 

[Suzanne]

I believe that a true aspie would never use traits as an excuse.

I am on route to a formal diagnosis.

We have a hard enough time dealing with life, to use it to our advantage.

My husband calls me weird and that the white jacket people are hovering. Happily, I am learning to not take him literally and look at him with this expression:

 

[Tesseract]

I genuinely hope I don't hurt people by what I'm about to say. This is something that has been on my mind a while, and I feel I could use some other viewpoints.

Words can never hurt. They're just words - sound - and you can't be injured or killed by them, in spite of what some these days apparently believe.

I'm not convinced on the reliability of the autism spectrum.

And I don't mean that in the way "Asperger's should be separate". I don't believe that would help anything.

Asperger's should be separate. There is no "spectrum", because if that were the case then every Tom, Dick and Harry could claim to be on it. "I sometimes take things said literally... therefore I'm an aspie!" Bull! Being "on the spectrum" is just the latest trendy thing that some have latched on to, because they believe it somehow makes them special in some way, and apparently being "unique" or "different" is all the rage these days. Are sociopaths on the spectrum as well? The only real spectrum is the EM spectrum.

Of course this is impossible (for now?), but if all current mental and behavioural disorders labels were thrown out, and then some kind of statistics was run was used to create new ones based on clustering, I highly doubt the autism spectrum would end up back together.

Of course, because there is no spectrum!

Too many people seem to cling to labels as identities and use them to define themselves.

Yes, and that's the problem. Why have a label? Why be labelled? I don't "identify" as anything other than "human". Why should I? It's stupid.

 

[55853]

Words can never hurt. They're just words - sound - and you can't be injured or killed by them

I don't even know where to begin on this. Have you never seen posts online of people wanting to die because of what people are saying to them? Language is much more complicated than just "sound".

Asperger's should be separate. There is no "spectrum", because if that were the case then every Tom, Dick and Harry could claim to be on it. "I sometimes take things said literally... therefore I'm an aspie!" ********! Being "on the spectrum" is just the latest trendy thing that some have latched on to, because they believe it somehow makes them special in some way, and apparently being "unique" or "different" is all the rage these days. Are sociopaths on the spectrum as well?

No, "sociopaths" (I'm no psychologist, but I'm fairly sure that's an outdated concept) are not on the spectrum. You can have a read of the diagnostic criteria and look at the latest journals on the subject if you're not sure on what's being included and what's not.

The only real spectrum is the EM spectrum.

Do you mind explaining why any of the many other spectrums in natural sciences are not, in fact, real?

Yes, and that's the problem. Why have a label? Why be labelled? I don't "identify" as anything other than "human". Why should I? It's stupid.

You identify as Asperger's, otherwise you wouldn't have self-diagnosed yourself or be on these forums. You have many "identities", whether you are aware of them or not.

 

[Tesseract]

I don't even know where to begin on this. Have you never seen posts online of people wanting to die because of what people are saying to them? Language is much more complicated than just "sound".

No, I haven't actually, although I have heard of the phenomenon known as "online bullying", and whenever it is brought up as an issue I always wonder why, if someone is being nasty online, they don't just ignore them completely by switching off whatever electronic gadget they are using to access whatever website the insults are being plastered on. Computers, phones and other such devices DO have an off-switch you know. People should learn to use them, and learn to once again live in the real world.

No, "sociopaths" (I'm no psychologist, but I'm fairly sure that's an outdated concept) are not on the spectrum. You can have a read of the diagnostic criteria and look at the latest journals on the subject if you're not sure on what's being included and what's not.

Yes, "look at the journals", and not so long ago these "journals" classified Asperger's Syndrome as a completely separate condition from autism (which I agree with, by the way). Now we're being told that it's just like autism, but of the "high-functioning" variety. They can't seem to make up their minds. Sociopaths obviously do not have autism, and that fact alone tells us that there must be a point at which one can say that the so-called spectrum doesn't apply, that in order to have either condition certain criteria need to be fulfilled, that autism is something that one either has or does not have.

Do you mind explaining why any of the many other spectrums in natural sciences are not, in fact, real?

Well, which other "spectrum" did you have in mind?

You identify as Asperger's, otherwise you wouldn't have self-diagnosed yourself or be on these forums. You have many "identities", whether you are aware of them or not.

No, I don't "identify" as anything other than human. Having a condition like A.S. is a major inconvenience, I will admit that, but it doesn't determine the type of person I happen to be. If a cure were to be found, one that had no side-effects and a reasonable success rate, I would gladly welcome it. Being rid of this handicap wouldn't turn me into someone I, and other people, wouldn't recognise. I would still be the same person, but not so awkward, clueless, rude, stupid and sensitive.

People who "identify" as (fill in the blank), like to do so because in their imagination it somehow sets them apart, makes them feel special. They usually also like to portray themselves as being a victim of some form of imaginary oppression (like the "patriarchy"). When I say "I have A.S.", I simply mean that and nothing more. It's like stating any other fact, like the fact that I have grey eyes and still have all my hair. There's nothing special about it.

 

[55853]

No, I haven't actually,

There's been plenty of posts on this site and on similar online communities, where people feel safe confiding.

I have heard of the phenomenon known as "online bullying", and whenever it is brought up as an issue I always wonder why, if someone is being nasty online, they don't just ignore them completely by switching off whatever electronic gadget they are using to access whatever website the insults are being plastered on. Computers, phones and other such devices DO have an off-switch you know. People should learn to use them, and learn to once again live in the real world.

I was thinking more of bullying in the real world, and posting online about it. However, for teenagers (the most vulnerable group) now, the real and online world are usually interlinked now that everyone is on social media with a smartphone. You'd have to find a young person to explain it better, but it really isn't as simple as "turn your phone off".

Yes, "look at the journals", and not so long ago these "journals" classified Asperger's Syndrome as a completely separate condition from autism (which I agree with, by the way). Now we're being told that it's just like autism, but of the "high-functioning" variety. They can't seem to make up their minds. Sociopaths obviously do not have autism, and that fact alone tells us that there must be a point at which one can say that the so-called spectrum doesn't apply, that in order to have either condition certain criteria need to be fulfilled, that autism is something that one either has or does not have.

It's the same in the natural sciences - things change with new analysis. That's why I recommend journals if you want to have a current, up to date understanding of what and why the autism spectrum is what it is. You can read the diagnostic criteria to see what a medical diagnosis is based on, but there is also the idea of autism traits in the wider population - I've not looked at this recently, but it was described as "broad autism phenotype" before.

Well, which other "spectrum" did you have in mind?

Since you mentioned it earlier, sound.

but not so awkward, clueless, rude, stupid and sensitive

It's possible to do this while being on the autism spectrum.

When I say "I have A.S.", I simply mean that and nothing more. It's like stating any other fact, like the fact that I have grey eyes and still have all my hair. There's nothing special about it.

You've not seeked out others with grey eyes and all their hair, though. It clearly means more to you than physical descriptors of yourself. And is it a fact? It's something you've determined for yourself, on something you can see is an unstable concept - give it another 10 years and it'll be completely different again.

 

[4gottenLoreKali]

Psychologists of future centuries will regard ABA "therapy" the same way people in the modern era look back on massas "treating" draeptomania by flogging the condition out of their slaves.

 

[GrownupGirl]

Human beings are not capable of feeling real love for each other. Ever notice how much easier it is to say things like "I love pizza" or "I love my cat" than it is to say "I love you" to another human? It's because humans are only capable of showing love for animals or inanimate objects, not because they were raised not to show emotion or because of society. But since people believe not feeling love for other people makes you a psychopath, even if you feel it for other things, we must tell other people we love them even if it's a total lie.

Of course, love is not the same as sexual attraction, which most humans are definitely capable of feeling because I never hear them shut up about it.

 

[AprilR]

^Real love requires effort and many people don't like the idea of wasting effort for anything.

 

[dragonfire42]

I actually want some sort of “cure,” or at least some way to ease my symptoms. I don’t think it should be forced on anyone or that being autistic makes anyone inferior or anything, just that for me personally, it causes me many issues without providing much in the way of benefit.

I do not believe that there is solely one cause of autism, or that the cause(s) are necessarily the same even for two people with the exact same symptoms. Therefore, I also believe there will never be any sort of universal “cure” that will work for everyone.

 

[BrokenBoy]

I actually want some sort of “cure,” or at least some way to ease my symptoms. I don’t think it should be forced on anyone or that being autistic makes anyone inferior or anything, just that for me personally, it causes me many issues without providing much in the way of benefit.

I do not believe that there is solely one cause of autism, or that the cause(s) are necessarily the same even for two people with the exact same symptoms. Therefore, I also believe there will never be any sort of universal “cure” that will work for everyone.

 

[Derp]

I actually want some sort of “cure,” or at least some way to ease my symptoms. I don’t think it should be forced on anyone or that being autistic makes anyone inferior or anything, just that for me personally, it causes me many issues without providing much in the way of benefit.

I do not believe that there is solely one cause of autism, or that the cause(s) are necessarily the same even for two people with the exact same symptoms. Therefore, I also believe there will never be any sort of universal “cure” that will work for everyone.

Every time I try to express that I hate this condition or that i personally want it to be cured everyone gets very defensive because they associate autism with the core of who they are. A lot of people act like autism is the only reason there good at something or that they have a monopoly on being smart

 

[4gottenLoreKali]

Referring to an autistic person as just "an autistic" or "autistics" reeks of eugenics - I know it comes from a good place, and many disability liberation activists favor this wordage. I just think it just comes off as soooooo awkward and pathologizing. "Autistic person" or "person on the spectrum" is sufficient. This whole person-first or identity-first debate is getting played.

I'm really conflicted about retiring Asperger's as a diagnosis; I've always gravitated toward identifying as an Aspie for a number of reasons. The overwhelming majority of the neurotypical public still pictures an autistic person (regardless of how they actually stand on the arbitrary, "functioning" spectrum - more on this later) as profoundly low-functioning or a clueless adult baby, but those with Asperger syndrome get a slightly better image. This distinction is important from an optics point-of-view, but it also means that individuals can access the services most appropriate to their own situation. I want life skills training and talk therapy, not to be incarcerated in a kindergarten-ass group home for the rest of my days.

Whether you like it or not, the notion of "curing" autism means eradicating it from the gene pool, and with it any positive traits or nuances associated with the condition. Auti$m Speaks is in favor of this, naturally, and Aktion T4 would concur with them. Even if possible, I would never trade my Aspie-ness for the world; I accept the challenges that come with it and most any measure to make them easier. We should always be improving the lives of autistic people and helping them reach their fullest potential, as they define it. But I find it alarming and frankly disheartening how many of you would euthanize an integral part of your identities if given the chance.

"High-" versus "low-functioning" is exploitative tripe. What is really meant by this paradigm is how much a disabled person can be exploited by capitalism or not; corresponding to high and low, respectively. The reality is that level of functioning is fluid; it depends on environment, and whatever's going on in the person's life at the moment. I'm sure there've been days when Temple Grandin has felt utterly in shambles and unable to get outta bed. Conversely, if you went back in time and asked an elementary teacher who had to put up with yours truly if I'd ever make it to college, much less graduate cum laude, they'd say it's a nice thought but highly unlikely. I guess what I'm trying to say is - you can't just cram everyone into a neat, simple label and just call it a day, assuming it's set in stone for life. People can grow, people can regress, and life is not a straight, upward line toward having it all. But we all should be striving toward achieving our ideal selves regardless, and no one can tell you what that looks like other than you.

And finally... any "parent" who pumps their kid's bowels full of bleach or drags them to a shrink to put them on "aNTi-pSyChoTiCs" in hopes of shutting them up is gullible, clueless, patronizing, and smothering, and realistically, sadistic, irredeemable and has voided their right to have children. These are cases where an unambiguous label is absolutely necessary - that of abuser. Their kids need to be re-homed posthaste, and social services organizations must recognize this in keeping with their supposed mission.

 

[Wolfsage]

The name. Asperian Emperor's sounds better.

 

[Aspychata]

Referring to an autistic person as just "an autistic" or "autistics" reeks of eugenics - I know it comes from a good place, and many disability liberation activists favor this wordage. I just think it just comes off as soooooo awkward and pathologizing. "Autistic person" or "person on the spectrum" is sufficient. This whole person-first or identity-first debate is getting played.

I'm really conflicted about retiring Asperger's as a diagnosis; I've always gravitated toward identifying as an Aspie for a number of reasons. The overwhelming majority of the neurotypical public still pictures an autistic person (regardless of how they actually stand on the arbitrary, "functioning" spectrum - more on this later) as profoundly low-functioning or a clueless adult baby, but those with Asperger syndrome get a slightly better image. This distinction is important from an optics point-of-view, but it also means that individuals can access the services most appropriate to their own situation. I want life skills training and talk therapy, not to be incarcerated in a kindergarten-ass group home for the rest of my days.

Whether you like it or not, the notion of "curing" autism means eradicating it from the gene pool, and with it any positive traits or nuances associated with the condition. Auti$m Speaks is in favor of this, naturally, and Aktion T4 would concur with them. Even if possible, I would never trade my Aspie-ness for the world; I accept the challenges that come with it and most any measure to make them easier. We should always be improving the lives of autistic people and helping them reach their fullest potential, as they define it. But I find it alarming and frankly disheartening how many of you would euthanize an integral part of your identities if given the chance.

"High-" versus "low-functioning" is exploitative tripe. What is really meant by this paradigm is how much an autistic person can be exploited by capitalism or not; corresponding to high and low, respectively. The reality is that level of functioning is fluid; it depends on environment, and whatever's going on in the person's life at the moment. I'm sure there've been days when Temple Grandin has felt utterly in shambles and unable to get outta bed. Conversely, if you went back in time and asked an elementary teacher who had to put up with yours truly if I'd ever make it to college, much less graduate cum laude, they'd say it's a nice thought but highly unlikely. I guess what I'm trying to say is - you can't just cram everyone into a neat, simple label and just call it a day, assuming it's set in stone for life. People can grow, people can regress, and life is not a straight, upward line toward having it all. But we all should be striving toward achieving our ideal selves regardless, and no one can tell you what that looks like other than you.

And finally... any "parent" who pumps their kid's bowels full of bleach or drags them to a shrink to put them on "aNTi-pSyChoTiCs" in hopes of shutting them up is gullible, clueless, patronizing, and smothering, and realistically, sadistic, irredeemable and has voided their right to have children. These are cases where an unambiguous label is absolutely necessary - that of abuser. Their kids need to be re-homed posthaste, and social services organizations must recognize this in keeping with their supposed mission.

My thoughts exactly but you put it into words. My hat is off and l bow to your ability to say this. But sadly l could never depend on social agencies as having my daughter's interest at heart. These agencies simply feed the corporate structure of foster homes, psychiatrists and courts to keep young minds locked down. Remember that the young stand up and say the emperor has no clothes on, hence the dumbing down of the educational institutions. Corporate cannibalism at it's finest. Truthfully corporate interests who represent this forum only wish to silence us. As ND, we are feared. Because we don't buy consumerism as our philosophy.☺ Yes, your thinking can scare others. But l am a good sheeple. l don't buck the system. Because being a radical thinker is never aknowledged or comes with accolades. It only comes with scrutiny.