• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Why do so many people define Asperger Syndrome as a mental health condition?

I have two adult children with comparable limitations.

That is not more autism. That is a complication on top of autism that we seem to be more susceptible to, neonatally. Base autism is more like Aspergers, having only a deficiency of NT social instincts. (We have always been present in society.)

LFA, with its cognitive deficits (beyond that of just NT social instinct), is injured Aspergers. (It is those numbers that are inexplicably on the rise, and has brought our whole spectrum into the medical spotlight.) Restated, it is only the low-functioning component/modifier that is the learning disability.

Thanks for your reply. That's is a very interesting way of looking at it that I've never actually thought of before and you could be right. I will also add that my 2 severely autistic brothers and myself all had epileptic fits when we were very young children that we seemed to grow out of, adding to the possibility that there could had been something else wrong too. I was also born with a slight back defect where a small part is actually paralyzed, it's not a massive deal, although I'm more prone to back ache and if I tried to touch my toes I can't get much further than my waist (even when I was young and fit). It was also mentioned that I had mild "Spasticity".

This is slightly off subject, but my mother had/has asthma and all 3 of us also needed oxygen at birth, my brother who is most severe of all also needed to be resuscitated after birth, I'm wondering if this had any link to the learning disability component, perhaps it actually even caused brain damage (I could be totally wrong, but I've always wondered this). Also note that I was born in 1969 and my brothers in the early 1970s, so the technology available during childbirth would had been primitive compared to today.
 
Last edited:
Sandy Hook mass murderer Adam Lanza didn't help matters. :(
Obviously Adam Lanza had a mental illness along with being on the Spectrum; sadly the general public just ran with the term Aspergers. If they were really familiar with the term they would know that being on the Spectrum doesn't make one a mass murderer. Quite the contrary, we are generally peaceful people who when we are angry take it out on ourselves rather than others.
 
Obviously Adam Lanza had a mental illness along with being on the Spectrum; sadly the general public just ran with the term Aspergers. If they were really familiar with the term they would know that being on the Spectrum doesn't make one a mass murderer. Quite the contrary, we are generally peaceful people who when we are angry take it out on ourselves rather than others.
Even if Adam Lanza had Aspergers and nothing else (though he was diagnosed with several conditions for which his mother refused to get proper treatment), in his home life, he was surrounded by guns from an early age, and his "thing" was to exchange emails with other people interested in mass murder. It's almost surprising that the tragedy didn't happen a long time before. All the signs were there, and his mother was offered help, but she refused, and then, once he reached adult age, he disputed his diagnosis of Aspergers and also refused help.

But instead of the media saying that the tragedy happened perhaps because he was surrounded by guns, communciated regularly about the best way to commit mass murder, and also played violent video games, they focus in on a condition (ASD) that has non-violence as one of its usual traits, and that he himself didn't even think that he had. They do that to sensationalize these atrocities and get higher ratings from them. If they had said it happened because of the guns, they would have opened themselves up to criticism from proponents of whatever amendment allows people to own guns. It was so much easier for them to simply pick on people who are picked on by the rest of society as a general rule.
 
There is no debate here. My statement does not reflect any pro- or anti-gun sentiment, but rather the behaviour of the media and the way they scapegoated all of us to avoid trouble for themselves.
I can't tell which country you are in, but your phrasing, "whatever amendment allows people to own guns" suggest that you are an American who doesn't know the Bill of Rights* or you are not, consequently, devaluing that freedom.

*Even its opponents know that it is the second amendment.
 
I can't tell which country you are in, but your phrasing, "whatever amendment allows people to own guns" suggest that you are an American who doesn't know the Bill of Rights* or you are not, consequently, devaluing that freedom.

*Even its opponents know that it is the second amendment.
I'm actually Canadian, and also a UK citizen, though I lived in the States for a few years. I thought it was the second amendment and I couldn't be bothered to look it up. What does it matter? It wasn't really a big part of the point I was trying to make. I was not arguing for or against the second amendment, just reflecting on how the media reported it.

I'm not sure what you mean about "devaluing that freedom". I think you actually wanted to say that you felt I was devaluing that freedom, not that I was not doing so. Otherwise, I'm sorry but I don't really know what you mean.

Whatever you or anyone else might feel about the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights, or the second amendment, surely you must agree that someone with so many mental health issues (I do not include Aspergers in that list - he had plenty of other conditions) should not have had easy access to so many firearms. I actually used to know someone who lost his daughter that day, and I bet his family agrees.
 
Whatever you or anyone else might feel about the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights, or the second amendment, surely you must agree that someone with so many mental health issues (I do not include Aspergers in that list - he had plenty of other conditions) should not have had easy access to so many firearms. I actually used to know someone who lost his daughter that day, and I bet his family agrees.
I do agree with your point, but any real dialogue on this subject is best suited for the Politics sub-forum (if anything new can be said). I am skeptical that that animal exists.
 
I like to think of us as more evolved on the evolutionary scale.
Some of us even have super powers, i have super hearing and super smell powers :)

Because there is more NTs than NDs, they just dont understand us so they throw us in a stereotypical category for their own benefit.

We are growing in numbers so one day we shall take over and hopefully the world will be a better place :)
Hey, I understand you want to think of us as a sort of next human and I did too at one point. But technically any mutation is evolution. The person in your school with Down syndrome is more evolved by your standard of more genetic difference. I assume you meant better adapted. If so then yeah maybe but please remember that all species are transitional and environments change.
 
Last edited:
Hey, I understand you want to think of us as a sort of next human and I did too at one point. But technically any mutation is evolution. The person in your school with Down syndrome is more evolved by your standard of more genetic difference. I assume you meant better adapted. If so then yeah maybe but please remember that all species are transitional and environments change.
I see that you are 15, wait until you have lived in this world for at least double that and see how untransitional alot of NTs can be.
 
Our brains just work different. Aspergers it is a label, nothing else. It becomes a disorder because average people think differently and have different personalities, which maked it a lot more challenging for us more rational beings to develop in an almost entirely social world.

I honestly think people are subconsciously afraid of us. Afraid of our independence, afraid of us breaking the norm and not being rule followers, afraid of us changing the world. Afraid that their emotional tricks wont work with us. We wont follow the massrs, we cannot be controlled. We are free.

I am on the light side of aspergers, and I think thay gives me the advantage to see both sides, and honestly I think Aspergers is the future of humanity and there is absolutly nothing to fix. Today we are outliers, but tomorrow we will rule the world.
 
I see that you are 15, wait until you have lived in this world for at least double that and see how untransitional alot of NTs can be.

I see that you are 30, wait another fifteen years and see how gross generalizations about humanity and people younger than yourself don't really increase your understanding of reality.
 
I see that you are 30, wait another fifteen years and see how gross generalizations about humanity and people younger than yourself don't really increase your understanding of reality.
omg.. Whats with the arrogance?.. Not really contributing to the thread subject. Im being a realist from my own reality not yours.... Geeez lighten up.
 
omg.. Whats with the arrogance?.. Not really contributing to the thread subject. Im being a realist from my own reality not yours.... Geeez lighten up.
Noted... I was using an ironic statement to suggest that an ad hominem faulty argument is inappropriate for the aspie forum. Attack the argument not the individual (or their age).

I am perhaps biased of course. I'm basing my statements on personal experience. When I was much younger I had a tendency to interact with other people though argumentation. Argument follows certain rules. I can follow rules. This made social interaction much easier. As I developed emotional intelligence through time of course I began to understand what I was doing was counterproductive in many ways. For example, researching people to try and understand their weaknesses would be something I would have done if I continued to follow this line of reasoning in a forum. As I grew older I began to understand that all I was doing was isolating myself from others. Of course this probably isn't something you'd do so I apologize for droning on. It's what us old men do sometimes though.
 
I see that you are 30, wait another fifteen years and see how gross generalizations about humanity and people younger than yourself don't really increase your understanding of reality.
I see you are 47; wait another 15 years and you'll let things just roll off your back. I do agree with Jennacide regarding a lot of NT's being untransitional. Always has been and always will be. No disrespect intended, John M.
 
I see you are 47; wait another 15 years and you'll let things just roll off your back. I do agree with Jennacide regarding a lot of NT's being untransitional. Always has been and always will be. No disrespect intended, John M.
Cany you all stop bragging about your age guys? You sound like 2nd graders trying to figure out who's the oldest!
 
I see that you are 15, wait until you have lived in this world for at least double that and see how untransitional alot of NTs can be.
Oh my goodness!!!!!!! I see you didn't get my point. I mean that it doesn't matter how well adapted you are in your CURRENT environment. Technically speaking every organism is between two generations of organisms, therefore it is transitional. Theres almost always a change if not always. Even if there isn't a change for 3 generations it's still transitional, just over more generations. It's evolution. Also, you say you're being a realist from your own reality? I assume by your own reality you mean fantasy. So you are living in fantasy. This is the exact opposite of realism. Look, I'm a cynic and I don't care what you say about that. I find if you're as cold and emotionless as possible then you can be as much of a realist as possible. I know I was wrong for you to understand transitional spiecies and variation, because you're human and you make mistakes like all of us. You probably specialize in emotional areas like most people. Even if you are emotional don't take it personally. I would agree that I am better adapted for my current environment than most, however, I don't believe I am more evolved because environments CAN change. If by more evolved you mean more generations behind you then I would say that yeast has more generations behind it so yeast is more evolved. Look, I jump through weeks worth of calculus in days and I do theoretical physics in my spare time so am I more evolved than you? Oh wait!!! You're 30 years old, man, I guess this mentally disabled 30 year old is better than a 15 year old mathematical prod. Well, what do you know? Anyways, try not to take it personally. Like I said, I'm a cynic, a dark person, and I don't know you so I'm just measuring the position of electrons. Just a shot in the dark. So just don't worry about age, IQ, or anything like that. Life experience is what matters
 
Blah blah and more blah..
Not contributing to the actual thread topic.
Just attacking the jenna...Seems like NT arrogance or trolling to me so pffft whatevers...
existence no longer aknowledged.
 

New Threads

Top Bottom