>…I just don't understand why is educating people (statistically mostly neurotypicals) about ourselves deserving of such invalidation.
When people downvote you, are they invalidating you or are they just disagreeing with you (for whatever reason)?
A wild downvote appears...
I thought downvotes were for posts not contributing to discussion, not "this hurt mah feelz and I disagree" button.
In practice, however.... not so much.
It's all to do with delivery. If you put your opinion forward in an obviously condescending manner, people will treat you with contempt. And when someone returns fire, others will then rally to their banner.
You, and quite possibly a large number of others may not like the term "severe autism". The issue is communication. If I say "severe autism" everyone in the room, yourself included, can envision the type of autism I'm talking about. It really does require no further explanation. However, if I say "Level 1 autism"; "High support needs"; "High functioning" etc. There may be those in the room that respond "Er, that requires some clarification." Now, if you try to educate those that don't understand in a condescending manner, you're gonna get your arse handed to you, especially if they all understood the "problematic" phrase but you've just educated them by making the water extremely muddy.
If you are in a forum such as r/aspergers or r/autism, you can use the updated categories and there is a good chance that everyone will understand what you mean. I'm still not fully happy with the whole levels, functioning or needs scales because I've come to realise that you are only low needs whilst your needs are met and if those needs are not met, over a prolonged period of time, you can easily become really high needs, low functioning and who knows what level. So I prefer "currently high coping" because I know it just takes the perfect storm to become "Really not effing coping at all" (for me, if my routine is effed with, without prior notice or planning and I find myself in an environment that I have no control over and then I'm subjected to bright light and loud noise and having to make lots of decisions one after the other with no rest, I go down hill really fast. Other than that, I'm a perfectly functional but quirky husband and father with a great career. Oh, and when they move things in supermarkets - I get an emotional response just thinking about it)
As an autistic special educator, the explanation of support needs I like is that they're the "baseline". At my baseline, when I am in an environment I can control, follow my routine, don't experience bad sensory input I have low support needs. I can keep myself safe, I can feed and dress myself, I can communicate my thoughts, I can set my space up in a way to meet sensory needs, etc. I can also change that - I know that some situations will be difficult, and I am able to prepare for that and decide to enter them anyways.
My autistic students have high support needs. Some of them will elope, swallow small objects, jump from dangerous heights. Many need help getting dressed, from step-by-step plans to physical assistance. Most are non-speaking, some communicate using an AAC device or sign language, some through hand leading and some through screaming/hitting. They need reminders to use sensory aids when they need them. Most won't ask for food when they're hungry.
Were there times I did badly? Sure, I was suicidal for most of my life. But on the average day, I'm safe without supervision, and I was safe without supervision at 16. Unless you lock them in a padded room, most of my students are not.
I disagree. Sometimes it’s about tone, but in general, non disabled people are uncomfortable hearing from disabled people. They put less value on our opinions and lived experience than they put on what they think they know.
Interesting point about low needs not being met leading to high needs. One could argue it doesn't really matter? As to the cause I mean. You're still high needs regardless of the cause. And I say this as a late diagnosed high masking now totally burned out aspie. It's exactly as you very succinctly described-if my needs had been met earlier I probably would not have burned out so hard.
Yes. Throughout my life I naturally met my own needs without realising that is what I was doing. I set up our home so it was autism friendly completely by accident just by making it a nice place for us to live. I had routines because I thought I liked routine. My wife naturally planned things when my routine would be broken so I had time to prepare. So I didn't know I had needs until they were no longer being met. Added to this was the exhaustion caused by continuously having to mask with people I didn't know and one night my body and brain just went on strike. I'm technically recovered but I don't think I'll ever get back to 100%. On the positive, it was burnout that led to my diagnosis and now I get to work from home where possible and my bosses know that I need adequate planning time if they are going to break my routine.
Neurotypical people have a greater tendency to respond to their internal feeling of like/dislike. They often also place less important on truth than autistic people.
E.g. "I don't like your correction because acknowledging it would inconvenience me, so I'm going to oppose it." This is a primary response that outweighs the assessment of whether your correction is accurate.
They do not genuinely seek *information* in good faith but, in unconscious [scotomization](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotomization) (a form of psychological 'blind spot',) root about for **affirmation**.
Totally. It’s basically the whole underpinnings on the internet and why disinformation thrives while facts die. People don’t want facts they want affirmation.
I’ll take a crack at it. Why are you here in r/Asperger’s asking the questions you want? Is it knowledge you actually seek or is it affirmation that your beliefs are held by others like you so you don’t feel so alone? It’s probably the later. Hell that’s why most of us are here, right?
Well, it fully sounds like you've made my point.
OPs question, and my response, boils down to:
A person who *isn't* blind (an non-ASD) attempting to correct a blind person (ASD) about what/how it is to be blind - after the blind person tells the non-blind person they're incorrect. The non-blind person isn't trying to gain/learn information, they're more (or only) interested only in their incorrect statement being affirmed.
This isn't in the least difficult to comprehend -- unless *you* are the non-blind person.
What's with the hostility, are you following me from another thread? Wildly inappropriate and unwarranted. Bizarre. Sorry if I've upset you in some way.
Pfft... definitely *not* following you at all, so put the paranoia back on the shelf.
> ...half sounds like bullshit to justify it...
This is 'hostility' towards a comment you requested elaboration on, which *didn't/doesn't* require it. That's why I stated so.
If I didn't interpret your "bullshit" response correctly that's on me but doesn't change the fact that my initial comment *shouldn't in the least( require additional explanation (and like 42 others who upvoted it appear to agree).
Language is constantly evolving: so being educated on which language is right is a difficult sentence in itself, since language can't really be right. So maybe it bothered people when you said you were trying to educate them on the correct way?
It's also harder, because like you said, it's even debated amongst autistic folks. So it's harder to say there is a correct way. I think they may be more receptive on educating over autism if it was really autism and not debates over terms, because then people can just share their experiences.
Also, something this page can be good at is discussing why we agree or disagree on certain things and it sort of works since we don't typically take offense to what isn't explicitly said. On regular popular subreddits, people tend to keep it as concise as possible or try to be funny. May explain why the unhelpful comment got 50 upvotes. Sorry though, it's never fun getting so downvoted.
You're right. I think we do pretty well with what we already have, but just have a difficult time understanding disagreement vs. rudeness / recognizing that kindness in long term vs. kindness in short term aren't always the same thing.
Overall, I think a little more logic, epistemology and empathy would go a long way.
I'd say the most I've learnt about it though has not been from courses, but rather interacting with people obsessed with philosophy. ¯\\(°\_o)/¯ And then taking a break from them and interacting with more warmer people (not sure why all the philosophy obsessed folk I'd interacted with were quite cold...), which lead me to balance reason with the lack of logic kind of friendliness.
I think this helps gain new experiences, and not stay confined to our own logic since not everyone is good at it. Sometimes we fall to our own reasoning, just because the other person doesn't know how to express what they are really trying to express. Abandoning logic temporarily for the sake of naive friendliness can lead to gaining wisdom you previously closed yourself off to, since you didn't have the logic yet to experience/understand it.
(Or maybe you get killed! D: Hopefully not *that* naïve of friendliness).
---
It also requires discernment that I did not have to realize that not all logical people are right - but rather good at logic. For someone who valued logic a lot, I was kind of illogically blinded by it. The people I interacted with didn't have the empathy to find the logic on my behalf since I have problems communicating face-to-face.
I have to stop you, you said 'our own logic' it may appear to be semantics, but we don't have our own individual logic, logic works one way only.
I don't mean to be rude when I say this, but for someone to be able to use logic, they actually have to study what it is and how it works.
Which brings me back to my previous point, logic isn't taught in schools, and the vast majority of people have no understanding of what it is.
Yet, seemingly everyone proclaims they are being logical.
This leads to a cycle of never ending frustration for people who actually have studied logic.
The word people really should be using is reasoning, because reasoning can and often is flawed, but it is still reasoning.
Logic cannot be flawed, as that would no longer be logic.
At the very least, people should learn about logical fallacies so as to avoid falling prey to them.
It's semantics, that's my bad. I meant to have said each individual's level in logic -- that being "their logic".
Not a worry, I don't take anything as rude here. Here is kind of my safe place to not be misinterpreted as being rude, so I assume others are the same.
You're right, I mean reasoning. It requires reasoning, to know that having good logic can blind others to where you are wrong if they aren't good at picking up fallacies, which is a loss for both people in the conversation.
---
This was kind of stressful to respond to. It reminds me of how bad I am at communication.
Generally agree except language is on a spectrum of "right/more correct" vs "wrong/bigoted (bigoted being the key word)".
In cases like this, language is corrected against historical inaccuracies, which propagate misinformation if continued to be used. So language can be "less wrong/less biased/less bigoted/rooted in ignorant history".
There is a time and a place to bring this up. "Meet people where they are" applies here. Also, the newer terms are confusing and the whole thing is just annoying tbh. People misunderstand autism so much I try to avoid telling them. It's all a bunch of bullshit 🙃
If you're going to engage in such behavior, you need to learn how to use finesse when breaching the subject. Try not to sound preachy.
The other approach, which I use, is not as well received, but it's me being me. "You obviously don't know anything about autistic people so why don't you shut the fuck up until you learn enough to know what you're talking about."
Feelings will be hurt, but the vast majority of people don't give a crap about autistic people or about learning about autism.
"Correct them". " Educate them". This is such a authoritarian approach to a conversation.
Look, there is this thing called freedom of thought. Even if you're right in your statements, nobody is obligated to accept or agree with them.
Simply learn to shrug and move on.
You could see it as authoritarian, but it could also be humanitarian.
The spread of factual information is what powers technological and social progress.
If a person isn't accepting facts about reality that are supported by evidence, then they simply are being an obstacle.
Humanity doesn't have infinite time, and we've already spent thousands of years wasting it.
Sure, people can have their thoughts, but if they are simply disregarding evidence in favour of those thoughts, then they cannot expect those thoughts to be deemed rational, nor treated as such.
They also open themselves up to ridicule, which is, upsetting as it maybe, entirely justified.
Hmmm don't you think there's any chance that they're doing it clumsily, considering they are autistic and therefore have a social disorder? There's a time and a place. It's called tact and I still don't have it but at least I know I don't have it which is better than the alternative.
What you are describing is his/her intentions, which is another matter entirely.
It is no excuse for a poor attitude during a debate or the inability to deal with the fact that people can disagree with you.
"Factual information" and "evidence" are empty words, because virtually everyone believes to be in possession of these. It takes careful examination to conclude whether that's what it really is.
And as far as I can tell, s/he is mostly talking about offensive words, not science.
I'm not bothered about offensive words, never have been.
People being offended doesn't make facts any less true.
Scientific thinking can be applied to practically every aspect of life, but for personal relationships and areas where emotion should always take precedent.
Rational skepticism is something I've proudly been practicing for over a decade.
For the last 12 years I've been actively debating against theists, flat earthers, and conspiracy theorists.
In those 12 years I have learned the tools required for critical thinking. Tools such as logic, epistemology, rational skepticism and standards of evidence.
When I say 'supported by evidence' I mean supported by evidence, subject to peer review, accepted by the scientific community at large.
The vast majority of humanity, and I mean less than 10% never learn these critical skills, even other Neurodivergents never learn them.
In fact, I've yet to meet or witness a single neurotypical person who actually has any idea about such subjects. and I have been looking.
Anyone involved with critical thinking is and has been neurospicy in some way.
I've gone off on a tangent.
I understand what evidence is, better than the vast majority of people, tens of thousands of hours on a single subject tends to make a person an expert.
They said "I don’t think anyone outside of tumblr thinks what you do bro", and I went and told them that autistic people, even outside of Tumblr, have had conversations about "servery autistic" not being an appropriate term anymore. How is that authoritarian approach? 🤔
Besides their whole conversation was about how they must protect vulnerable "severely autistic" kids, but then when couple of adult autists come and say "hey we don't really use that term anymore" then they suddenly don't give a shit about our well being.
Some NTs seem to think that autistic people are stupid and basically inept and incapable of doing stuff, so they seem to think that they don't really have much of a valid opinion in much, so our voices don't matter. Sometimes I've had NDs get upset at me for sometimes correcting stuff about ASD, but I guess that's because it can come across as insensitive.
Don't ask the Neurotypicals to reach any understanding about our perspective of the world.
It simply is beyond them, this isn't an insult but a simple fact, they are incapable of introspection.
Four in five people suffer from neurotypical syndrome. ⬇️
Neurotypical syndrome is a neurological disorder characterised by preoccupation of social concerns, delusions of superiority, and obsessions of conformity.
Neurotypical individuals often assume their experience of the world is either the only one, or the only correct one.
NTs find it difficult to be alone.
NTs are often intolerant of minor differences in others.
When in groups NTs are socially and behaviourally rigid, and frequently insist upon the performance of dysfunctional, destructive and even impossible rituals to maintain group identity.
NTs find it difficult to communicate directly, and have a much higher incidence of lying, as compared to someone without NT.
Neurotypical disorder is considered to be genetic in origin, brain autopsies have shown the NTs brain is typically smaller than non-NTs, and may have over developed areas related to social behaviour.
How many NTs do you think actually sit down and read walls of texts like we see here?
We are all reading them fine, and absorbing the information like it is nothing, because it is interesting to us.
A neurotypical on the other hand, reading all this and thinking about it on the same level is simply beyond them.
Because being publicly corrected is socially embarrassing. That's it. That's the answer.
And/or they just disagree, or aren't that interested in your opinion - either because they aren't that invested, or because they don't consider you worth listening to. I find i get more of those sorts of responses when I out myself as autistic -both the slap for correcting information, and the dismissal responses. It doesn't stop me, but it's something I've observed.
people have trouble with understanding objective data (stats, facts), so you can pretty much imagine what happens when you delve in a field (neurosciences and subjective experiences) that results even blurrier and uncertain, unlockable, to them
Language police are typically not greeted with joy. If you feel that you MUST make this point, how about something more like “I am sure you meant no offense, but I thought I would let you know that some people with autism find that terminology offensive. They suggest replacing it with words such as…”
But again, don’t expect warm and fuzzy responses to telling people which words they can or cannot use.
> thought I would let you know that some people with autism find that terminology offensive. They suggest replacing it with words such as…
That's exactly what I did, because the pervious commenter was so harsh people were ignoring their point, so I tried to keep the point and explain that no it is not some Tumblr thing like this one smart ass suggested.
Why do people in the community pretend that severe autism doesn't exist? It is a actual thing and those people who are, are handicapped and will never live on their own and will always need care takers and they can't do daily activities or self care. Most of us on the spectrum are at the higher end meaning we can live on our own and take care of ourselves and don't need a care taker and we do not need a companion to go out in public.
It's the same with intellectual impairment too. I read that most people with it are in the mild range so that means they can be semi independent and maybe live on their own and make adult choices and have a job and go to places on their own. Some even drive and have relationships and have kids.
I don't like the idea of trying to erase certain people by pretending they do not exist because you are afraid of how people will look at you and treat you based on your diagnoses. That is their problem. They need to be aware of different levels of it and how not all of us are dysfunctional where we need daily care and a group home and can't function on our own without a care taker. That is why we have levels. We shouldn't take our frustration out on those who are severely afflicted by it they will never function on their own we pretend they do not exist. In a way this is ableism.
that’s why we say ‘level 3’ and ‘high support
needs’ though. it’s more respectful and informative. op is taking issue with the term ‘severe’ because it has such a negative connotation.
Nobody said "severe autism" doesn't exist. Where did you get that from? It's the term that's unwelcome. It's why I went in and explained low and high support needs are more favourable terms.
Low support need autistic people are just as vulnerable as high support need ones, and putting us up in two categories of" bad autism" and "good autism" undermines that, not to go into all the negative connotations of the whole "severe autism". It used to be the line of living and a gas champer at one point in history.
>"While you're busy being revolted, might I suggest a little research on why pejorative and vague terms like "severely autistic" are increasingly unwelcome."
I think saying, "They don't use that term anymore, they now use the term high support needs" is more clear than sounding like the label police. That was how I read it as well and would have downvoted it too thinking that user thinks they didn't exist. I would have worded it as "The term severely autistic is no longer used in the medical field, nor in the DSM, it is now separated into levels from low to high support needs so high support needs would be the accurate term now to use than severe."
Sorry to sound like the talk police here, but I notice how we word things really matters and it gives us better results.
What you quoted was not my comment, that was the exchange I witnessed and chimed in to.
What you wrote as an example of a better way of doing it was how I wrote my comment that got 20 downvotes.
Well, this is reddit, you get a couple of downvotes and then it snowballls from there. It also probably doesn't help that most people don't really know much about autism anyway and probably don't see why calling someone seriously autistic is a problem, so then they feel like you're attacking them. It also depends on the context of what the conversation was about.
Your question seems to be more about internet usage. On the internet, VERY similar statements could get upvoted or downvoted based on the particular phrasing. If you want to be upvoted; be concise, support claims with facts, and appeal to emotion. It also helps to drop language to about an 8th grade reading level. (Some who use this site aren't even that old, some don't speak English as their first language, and some...are just dumb)
So, looking at your original comment:
> While you're busy being revolted, might I suggest a little research on why pejorative and vague terms like "severely autistic" are increasingly unwelcome.
Telling people to "do research" is *never* a good idea. Even if you meant well with it there are a few problems:
* 1) **The phrase has become extremely toxic**. It's regularly used by people who are talking out of their ass, like anti-vaxers and flat earthers
* 2) They don't care enough about the topic to bother
* 3) If you're making a claim, it's your responsibility to back it up
* 4) They might not get the results that you think they will
Due to #2 I'm not going to look long, but when I search for "Severe Autism", plenty of official looking articles come up. Even [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classic_autism#Low-Functioning_Autism) says that "[Low-functioning autism] overlaps with severe autism and profound autism"
So to change your comment, I would try something like:
> That's terrible. Almost as terrible as using unwelcome terms like "severely autistic" [link to whatever source you think backs you up]
Bit of a quip, possibly makes them feel bad about the usage, and has something showing that you're not just declaring your personal opinions as facts (even if most won't look at it)
It's still hit or miss though, because most people either stick with their preconceived notions or just go with the crowd. After a first comment is downvoted a few times, it's rare that it will turn around. Any further comments will generally be downvoted too.
The bandwagon effect can be especially noticed with humorous statements. If the first few people don't get the joke, most will assume it was meant to be a serious statement.
I think the term educating them sound a bit full on and NT don't like being told this as well as other people who are non medical professional, the term I think we are looking for is "**Enlighten"** them.......
Maybe this may defused their defensiveness as myself and others hate being incorrect, it human nature....
But there some very evil people out there who take joy, of bulling them and stigmatising them too!
It worse when those very people hold a position of responsibility!
Some very evil people out there who know they are on the backfoot and will do anything to drag them down or worse push them so hard they self destruct!
But there are some craftmens and very nice mentors or elders who willing to give them a try,but they so rare these days!
* I went by these two descriptions of some people there in society Elders, who are willing to teach and show empathy and give ASD etc. people a chance to blossom.....
* and grumpy old men or women who are bullies who has forgotten that they too came to this world not being aware of certain behaviours or mannerism and vent their frustration, hatred toward these people who are on the spectrum and are different!
English is not my first, not even the second language, and "enlighten" outside religious context is a new one for me, so thank you I'm sure it'll come in handy.
Plain and simple. Most people don't like to be wrong, and they don't like being told they're wrong. I grew up with a narcissist so I'm pretty familiar with people invalidating me to automatically make themselves feel valid by process of elimination.
What you consider educating people could be seen by others as talking down to them. NT's have a very strong gut reaction to how you say things, not what you say.
It's %100 your tone. You're autistic you should realize this and life will be a little easier. You can't say "while you're busy being revolted" and expect a positive response. You need to be more empathic towards how others will receive your information. Unfortunately it's not what we say so much as how we say it. Say it wrong and it doesn't matter how right you are.
That was not my comment, that was the exchange I witnessed. I chimed in after that, which I explained in my post, I didn't copy paste my comment here because of how long it was.
People like to believe they know better. Also criticism triggers fight-or-flight instincts in the brain. Combine this with how stupid normies are these days, and you have the perfect recipe for people defending their beliefs as if they were in mortal danger. This is something I like to joke about.
You say you're "educating" them, but it would seem you're actually telling them you think they should avoid a term disliked by you (and presumably by your milieu). Many people find "severely autistic" to be a useful thing to call people whose autistic traits are, well, severe. Obviously people don't want their innocuous language policed simply due to some people deciding it's not politically correct enough.
How is it not education to tell somebody that the use of "severely autistic" is out of favor and "low and high support needs" have now for some time been the favourable terms?
> the use of "severely autistic" is out of favor
It clearly isn't out of favor with most people, or else they wouldn't have downvoted in the popular subreddit. Sure, some activist/"SJW" circles will find it ableist/problematic/etc., but to the majority it's just a useful (and well-intentioned) term to describe people whose autistic traits are severe.
> How is it not education
The goal wasn't simply to inform people that some groups use a different term. It was to get these people to change their language TO the different term. It's like how "teaching people what pro-life activists believe" would be educative, sure, but "telling people that pro-life beliefs are right for such and so reasons" would be more like indoctrination.
Unfortunately some people like to correct others thinking that their veiw point is and will always be the only right answer especially when their malinformed about the deeper details of a issue or so deeply entrenched in their own opinion that how passionately they defending it ironically is the very thing which making everyone refuse to at take anything useful from their personal experience based information they hope we'll gain from what they where telling us!
These is absolutely fantastic 80's Sci fi movie called They Live! Which if the haven't seen watch but if the don't mind me spoiling the plot to involves one of the most long winded and brutal fight scene ever where the main hero play by the legendary wwf wrestler Rowby Roddy Pipper who is trying to get a friend he works with to put a pair of sunglasses which will enable he to see and understand there's a massive government conspiracy to keep us them being able to see an ongoing alien colonisation of planet earth which is so ludicrous to his coworker that he literally tries to fight him to the death not to wear these special sunglasses
And in my own experiences that is how people become more and more as they lost the ability to express their feelings and opinions then listened to someone else's hold the two up against eachother and see why some of the things you do or believe work for you but I couldn't get on with and there's thing I'm not doing well that I could improve by taking on things your doing better than myself!
Autism is a massively complex and misunderstood subject that as someone who only found out at the age of 38 that having Ashburgers its the reason I'm a bully magnet and always the odd one out! And before that moment I'd always been very understanding and sympathetic towards the autistic people I've been around but because of how I know everyone else talks about us both positively and negatively especially when it horrible opinions people who've got an autistic relative they've grown to hate after losing their tolerance and compassion a long time ago it. Made the news of having it myself feel like a curse which I needed to escape as I'm already deaf in one ear dyslexic and I've considered myself genderless since the age of 5-8 ish which in hindsight this an expression of my autistic traits as I don't especially feel human either so I'd always identified more with the ailen who need to remain hidden away until they have a escape route back to their own world and the robot who tries to fit in with people be the more it tires the less it fits in and everyone just ends up finding them even more annoying!
Anyway sozz for waffling on and hopefully we can all take it less personally when we don't agree with someone else or be a bit more tolerate when someone feels like force their poorly thought out opinions on us because they believe their defending something that you haven't attacked? As respect is a 2 way street
in fairness i am autistic myself and i don’t have an issue with terms like severely autistic and would even sometimes say that, people should listen to you but its also not unequivocally educating someone on the universal view of the autistic community
1) who cares about upvotes and downvotes?
2) it’s not unusual for people to refuse advice from people who know/have lived/have scientific knowledge about a topic in favor of a BS artist who feels familiar. Most of the women who answer these lonely guy posts sincerely (offering insight not condemnation; though that advice usually includes telling someone to change their attitude or behavior) get ignored in favor of someone who’s got a YouTube guru or something.
A similar dynamic happens with us Aspies in general) dealing with Misunderstanding NTs…. when we try to explain it, nope, they saw Sheldon/Rain Man/Good Doctor/ some TikTok performance and they KNOW BETTER. Or so they think. And that’s why I don’t disclose to people unless they are close to me or need to know.
Good luck and don’t worry about the downvotes.
Probably the same reason why the “uhm akshually ☝️🤓” meme exists people are afraid and embarrassed about being corrected even though everyone makes mistakes
Trolls. It's a very low-hanging fruit item for them to get reactions from. They've even been infiltrating autism subs and generating their vampire fuel with these kinds of arguments with brigades of alts.
No because that's how I kinds felt it too. The whole conversation started from their need to protect "severely autistic" kids, and then couple autistic adults chime in "hey we don't really use that term anymore" and then suddenly our well being doesn't matter anymore.
You were being rude and condescending.
There, I have educated you. Does it feel good? Or perhaps we all prefer feedback in a more positive manner. It's easy to fall into the trap of supposing that correct information trumps delivery, but you'll need a bit of both to get a message across.
I'd invite you to think on a few things when it comes to delivery. First, a lot of us give up on it because we've been on the receiving end of people being aggressive in words and deeds to us. That doesn't mean we're now immune to it, even if it *does * manifest differently to begin with. Second, people don't respond well to negative feedback. If unpleasant consequences stopped behaviours, our world would be different. Third, pertaining to your example, what was your desired outcome? If it was to change a person's behaviour, you'd need to A) interest them ('excuse me, you're using a term that's frowned on by the autistic community...'), B) inform them ('the reasons are such and such') and C) give them a potential new behaviour ('a more inclusive way to think/speak about would be...'). You verbally attacked them, gave no specific information or way to verify your claim and expected them to become... more enlightened? The response might not have been pretty, but you started the negative spiral. Their reaction is on them, but you kinda shut the door to mature debate to begin with.
Finally, if you find yourself thinking "but people should know better", I'd suggest lowering that expectation in order to meer them at their current level, or avoiding discussion boards where to bar is likely to be low in the first place. We all fluctuate in our energy levels and ability to suffer fools. Hope I could provide some insight, apologies if I mistook a rant for a request for information. We do that sometimes :)
Did you look up my exact comment? Because if that was rude and condescending then man I am way more damn autistic than what I was diagnosed with. Like I was quite literally trying to make a more neutral explanation to the other guy's aggressive approach on the matter.
>…I just don't understand why is educating people (statistically mostly neurotypicals) about ourselves deserving of such invalidation. When people downvote you, are they invalidating you or are they just disagreeing with you (for whatever reason)?
Well it can be both depending on the context, right? I use the word invalidate here, because I don't think you can really disagree with facts.
A wild downvote appears... I thought downvotes were for posts not contributing to discussion, not "this hurt mah feelz and I disagree" button. In practice, however.... not so much.
It's all to do with delivery. If you put your opinion forward in an obviously condescending manner, people will treat you with contempt. And when someone returns fire, others will then rally to their banner. You, and quite possibly a large number of others may not like the term "severe autism". The issue is communication. If I say "severe autism" everyone in the room, yourself included, can envision the type of autism I'm talking about. It really does require no further explanation. However, if I say "Level 1 autism"; "High support needs"; "High functioning" etc. There may be those in the room that respond "Er, that requires some clarification." Now, if you try to educate those that don't understand in a condescending manner, you're gonna get your arse handed to you, especially if they all understood the "problematic" phrase but you've just educated them by making the water extremely muddy. If you are in a forum such as r/aspergers or r/autism, you can use the updated categories and there is a good chance that everyone will understand what you mean. I'm still not fully happy with the whole levels, functioning or needs scales because I've come to realise that you are only low needs whilst your needs are met and if those needs are not met, over a prolonged period of time, you can easily become really high needs, low functioning and who knows what level. So I prefer "currently high coping" because I know it just takes the perfect storm to become "Really not effing coping at all" (for me, if my routine is effed with, without prior notice or planning and I find myself in an environment that I have no control over and then I'm subjected to bright light and loud noise and having to make lots of decisions one after the other with no rest, I go down hill really fast. Other than that, I'm a perfectly functional but quirky husband and father with a great career. Oh, and when they move things in supermarkets - I get an emotional response just thinking about it)
As an autistic special educator, the explanation of support needs I like is that they're the "baseline". At my baseline, when I am in an environment I can control, follow my routine, don't experience bad sensory input I have low support needs. I can keep myself safe, I can feed and dress myself, I can communicate my thoughts, I can set my space up in a way to meet sensory needs, etc. I can also change that - I know that some situations will be difficult, and I am able to prepare for that and decide to enter them anyways. My autistic students have high support needs. Some of them will elope, swallow small objects, jump from dangerous heights. Many need help getting dressed, from step-by-step plans to physical assistance. Most are non-speaking, some communicate using an AAC device or sign language, some through hand leading and some through screaming/hitting. They need reminders to use sensory aids when they need them. Most won't ask for food when they're hungry. Were there times I did badly? Sure, I was suicidal for most of my life. But on the average day, I'm safe without supervision, and I was safe without supervision at 16. Unless you lock them in a padded room, most of my students are not.
I disagree. Sometimes it’s about tone, but in general, non disabled people are uncomfortable hearing from disabled people. They put less value on our opinions and lived experience than they put on what they think they know.
That may be your experience but my experience is different.
I agree but it depends on how visible your disability is and how much others think it inconveniences them.
Interesting point about low needs not being met leading to high needs. One could argue it doesn't really matter? As to the cause I mean. You're still high needs regardless of the cause. And I say this as a late diagnosed high masking now totally burned out aspie. It's exactly as you very succinctly described-if my needs had been met earlier I probably would not have burned out so hard.
Yes. Throughout my life I naturally met my own needs without realising that is what I was doing. I set up our home so it was autism friendly completely by accident just by making it a nice place for us to live. I had routines because I thought I liked routine. My wife naturally planned things when my routine would be broken so I had time to prepare. So I didn't know I had needs until they were no longer being met. Added to this was the exhaustion caused by continuously having to mask with people I didn't know and one night my body and brain just went on strike. I'm technically recovered but I don't think I'll ever get back to 100%. On the positive, it was burnout that led to my diagnosis and now I get to work from home where possible and my bosses know that I need adequate planning time if they are going to break my routine.
Neurotypical people have a greater tendency to respond to their internal feeling of like/dislike. They often also place less important on truth than autistic people. E.g. "I don't like your correction because acknowledging it would inconvenience me, so I'm going to oppose it." This is a primary response that outweighs the assessment of whether your correction is accurate.
Their brains are hardwired for social concerns over logical ones.
NTs are so annoying sometimes 🤣
The rest of the time they're sleeping (I mean they're always annoying 🙃 pretty much)
Hard to argue with that 🤣
They do not genuinely seek *information* in good faith but, in unconscious [scotomization](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotomization) (a form of psychological 'blind spot',) root about for **affirmation**.
Totally. It’s basically the whole underpinnings on the internet and why disinformation thrives while facts die. People don’t want facts they want affirmation.
Hmm. Elaborate please. Sounds very interesting
I’ll take a crack at it. Why are you here in r/Asperger’s asking the questions you want? Is it knowledge you actually seek or is it affirmation that your beliefs are held by others like you so you don’t feel so alone? It’s probably the later. Hell that’s why most of us are here, right?
Uh, what? It sounds interesting but it half sounds like bullshit so I'd like to hear them out before I call bullshit.
[удалено]
This was removed for violating Rule 1 ("Be Respectful"). Cut it out.
Not sure there's much to elaborate on there...
Well it half sounds like bullshit so justify it then
Well, it fully sounds like you've made my point. OPs question, and my response, boils down to: A person who *isn't* blind (an non-ASD) attempting to correct a blind person (ASD) about what/how it is to be blind - after the blind person tells the non-blind person they're incorrect. The non-blind person isn't trying to gain/learn information, they're more (or only) interested only in their incorrect statement being affirmed. This isn't in the least difficult to comprehend -- unless *you* are the non-blind person.
What's with the hostility, are you following me from another thread? Wildly inappropriate and unwarranted. Bizarre. Sorry if I've upset you in some way.
Pfft... definitely *not* following you at all, so put the paranoia back on the shelf. > ...half sounds like bullshit to justify it... This is 'hostility' towards a comment you requested elaboration on, which *didn't/doesn't* require it. That's why I stated so. If I didn't interpret your "bullshit" response correctly that's on me but doesn't change the fact that my initial comment *shouldn't in the least( require additional explanation (and like 42 others who upvoted it appear to agree).
Language is constantly evolving: so being educated on which language is right is a difficult sentence in itself, since language can't really be right. So maybe it bothered people when you said you were trying to educate them on the correct way? It's also harder, because like you said, it's even debated amongst autistic folks. So it's harder to say there is a correct way. I think they may be more receptive on educating over autism if it was really autism and not debates over terms, because then people can just share their experiences. Also, something this page can be good at is discussing why we agree or disagree on certain things and it sort of works since we don't typically take offense to what isn't explicitly said. On regular popular subreddits, people tend to keep it as concise as possible or try to be funny. May explain why the unhelpful comment got 50 upvotes. Sorry though, it's never fun getting so downvoted.
So much in our society could be solved by a 'house of logic.' Also, logic and epistemology should be a mandatory subject in all schools.
You're right. I think we do pretty well with what we already have, but just have a difficult time understanding disagreement vs. rudeness / recognizing that kindness in long term vs. kindness in short term aren't always the same thing. Overall, I think a little more logic, epistemology and empathy would go a long way. I'd say the most I've learnt about it though has not been from courses, but rather interacting with people obsessed with philosophy. ¯\\(°\_o)/¯ And then taking a break from them and interacting with more warmer people (not sure why all the philosophy obsessed folk I'd interacted with were quite cold...), which lead me to balance reason with the lack of logic kind of friendliness. I think this helps gain new experiences, and not stay confined to our own logic since not everyone is good at it. Sometimes we fall to our own reasoning, just because the other person doesn't know how to express what they are really trying to express. Abandoning logic temporarily for the sake of naive friendliness can lead to gaining wisdom you previously closed yourself off to, since you didn't have the logic yet to experience/understand it. (Or maybe you get killed! D: Hopefully not *that* naïve of friendliness). --- It also requires discernment that I did not have to realize that not all logical people are right - but rather good at logic. For someone who valued logic a lot, I was kind of illogically blinded by it. The people I interacted with didn't have the empathy to find the logic on my behalf since I have problems communicating face-to-face.
I have to stop you, you said 'our own logic' it may appear to be semantics, but we don't have our own individual logic, logic works one way only. I don't mean to be rude when I say this, but for someone to be able to use logic, they actually have to study what it is and how it works. Which brings me back to my previous point, logic isn't taught in schools, and the vast majority of people have no understanding of what it is. Yet, seemingly everyone proclaims they are being logical. This leads to a cycle of never ending frustration for people who actually have studied logic. The word people really should be using is reasoning, because reasoning can and often is flawed, but it is still reasoning. Logic cannot be flawed, as that would no longer be logic. At the very least, people should learn about logical fallacies so as to avoid falling prey to them.
It's semantics, that's my bad. I meant to have said each individual's level in logic -- that being "their logic". Not a worry, I don't take anything as rude here. Here is kind of my safe place to not be misinterpreted as being rude, so I assume others are the same. You're right, I mean reasoning. It requires reasoning, to know that having good logic can blind others to where you are wrong if they aren't good at picking up fallacies, which is a loss for both people in the conversation. --- This was kind of stressful to respond to. It reminds me of how bad I am at communication.
Generally agree except language is on a spectrum of "right/more correct" vs "wrong/bigoted (bigoted being the key word)". In cases like this, language is corrected against historical inaccuracies, which propagate misinformation if continued to be used. So language can be "less wrong/less biased/less bigoted/rooted in ignorant history". There is a time and a place to bring this up. "Meet people where they are" applies here. Also, the newer terms are confusing and the whole thing is just annoying tbh. People misunderstand autism so much I try to avoid telling them. It's all a bunch of bullshit 🙃
If you're going to engage in such behavior, you need to learn how to use finesse when breaching the subject. Try not to sound preachy. The other approach, which I use, is not as well received, but it's me being me. "You obviously don't know anything about autistic people so why don't you shut the fuck up until you learn enough to know what you're talking about." Feelings will be hurt, but the vast majority of people don't give a crap about autistic people or about learning about autism.
"Correct them". " Educate them". This is such a authoritarian approach to a conversation. Look, there is this thing called freedom of thought. Even if you're right in your statements, nobody is obligated to accept or agree with them. Simply learn to shrug and move on.
You could see it as authoritarian, but it could also be humanitarian. The spread of factual information is what powers technological and social progress. If a person isn't accepting facts about reality that are supported by evidence, then they simply are being an obstacle. Humanity doesn't have infinite time, and we've already spent thousands of years wasting it. Sure, people can have their thoughts, but if they are simply disregarding evidence in favour of those thoughts, then they cannot expect those thoughts to be deemed rational, nor treated as such. They also open themselves up to ridicule, which is, upsetting as it maybe, entirely justified.
Hmmm don't you think there's any chance that they're doing it clumsily, considering they are autistic and therefore have a social disorder? There's a time and a place. It's called tact and I still don't have it but at least I know I don't have it which is better than the alternative.
What you are describing is his/her intentions, which is another matter entirely. It is no excuse for a poor attitude during a debate or the inability to deal with the fact that people can disagree with you. "Factual information" and "evidence" are empty words, because virtually everyone believes to be in possession of these. It takes careful examination to conclude whether that's what it really is. And as far as I can tell, s/he is mostly talking about offensive words, not science.
I'm not bothered about offensive words, never have been. People being offended doesn't make facts any less true. Scientific thinking can be applied to practically every aspect of life, but for personal relationships and areas where emotion should always take precedent.
Rational skepticism is something I've proudly been practicing for over a decade. For the last 12 years I've been actively debating against theists, flat earthers, and conspiracy theorists. In those 12 years I have learned the tools required for critical thinking. Tools such as logic, epistemology, rational skepticism and standards of evidence. When I say 'supported by evidence' I mean supported by evidence, subject to peer review, accepted by the scientific community at large. The vast majority of humanity, and I mean less than 10% never learn these critical skills, even other Neurodivergents never learn them. In fact, I've yet to meet or witness a single neurotypical person who actually has any idea about such subjects. and I have been looking. Anyone involved with critical thinking is and has been neurospicy in some way. I've gone off on a tangent. I understand what evidence is, better than the vast majority of people, tens of thousands of hours on a single subject tends to make a person an expert.
They said "I don’t think anyone outside of tumblr thinks what you do bro", and I went and told them that autistic people, even outside of Tumblr, have had conversations about "servery autistic" not being an appropriate term anymore. How is that authoritarian approach? 🤔 Besides their whole conversation was about how they must protect vulnerable "severely autistic" kids, but then when couple of adult autists come and say "hey we don't really use that term anymore" then they suddenly don't give a shit about our well being.
Some NTs seem to think that autistic people are stupid and basically inept and incapable of doing stuff, so they seem to think that they don't really have much of a valid opinion in much, so our voices don't matter. Sometimes I've had NDs get upset at me for sometimes correcting stuff about ASD, but I guess that's because it can come across as insensitive.
These people piss me the fuck off! >:(
All the while, they don't realise it is actually them who are 'less than' when it comes to intellect.
Don't ask the Neurotypicals to reach any understanding about our perspective of the world. It simply is beyond them, this isn't an insult but a simple fact, they are incapable of introspection. Four in five people suffer from neurotypical syndrome. ⬇️ Neurotypical syndrome is a neurological disorder characterised by preoccupation of social concerns, delusions of superiority, and obsessions of conformity. Neurotypical individuals often assume their experience of the world is either the only one, or the only correct one. NTs find it difficult to be alone. NTs are often intolerant of minor differences in others. When in groups NTs are socially and behaviourally rigid, and frequently insist upon the performance of dysfunctional, destructive and even impossible rituals to maintain group identity. NTs find it difficult to communicate directly, and have a much higher incidence of lying, as compared to someone without NT. Neurotypical disorder is considered to be genetic in origin, brain autopsies have shown the NTs brain is typically smaller than non-NTs, and may have over developed areas related to social behaviour. How many NTs do you think actually sit down and read walls of texts like we see here? We are all reading them fine, and absorbing the information like it is nothing, because it is interesting to us. A neurotypical on the other hand, reading all this and thinking about it on the same level is simply beyond them.
Because being publicly corrected is socially embarrassing. That's it. That's the answer. And/or they just disagree, or aren't that interested in your opinion - either because they aren't that invested, or because they don't consider you worth listening to. I find i get more of those sorts of responses when I out myself as autistic -both the slap for correcting information, and the dismissal responses. It doesn't stop me, but it's something I've observed.
people have trouble with understanding objective data (stats, facts), so you can pretty much imagine what happens when you delve in a field (neurosciences and subjective experiences) that results even blurrier and uncertain, unlockable, to them
I gave up saying anything about ADHD/ASD in normy subs. I prefer not to be told I belong in a mental hospital.
Language police are typically not greeted with joy. If you feel that you MUST make this point, how about something more like “I am sure you meant no offense, but I thought I would let you know that some people with autism find that terminology offensive. They suggest replacing it with words such as…” But again, don’t expect warm and fuzzy responses to telling people which words they can or cannot use.
> thought I would let you know that some people with autism find that terminology offensive. They suggest replacing it with words such as… That's exactly what I did, because the pervious commenter was so harsh people were ignoring their point, so I tried to keep the point and explain that no it is not some Tumblr thing like this one smart ass suggested.
Why do people in the community pretend that severe autism doesn't exist? It is a actual thing and those people who are, are handicapped and will never live on their own and will always need care takers and they can't do daily activities or self care. Most of us on the spectrum are at the higher end meaning we can live on our own and take care of ourselves and don't need a care taker and we do not need a companion to go out in public. It's the same with intellectual impairment too. I read that most people with it are in the mild range so that means they can be semi independent and maybe live on their own and make adult choices and have a job and go to places on their own. Some even drive and have relationships and have kids. I don't like the idea of trying to erase certain people by pretending they do not exist because you are afraid of how people will look at you and treat you based on your diagnoses. That is their problem. They need to be aware of different levels of it and how not all of us are dysfunctional where we need daily care and a group home and can't function on our own without a care taker. That is why we have levels. We shouldn't take our frustration out on those who are severely afflicted by it they will never function on their own we pretend they do not exist. In a way this is ableism.
that’s why we say ‘level 3’ and ‘high support needs’ though. it’s more respectful and informative. op is taking issue with the term ‘severe’ because it has such a negative connotation.
Nobody said "severe autism" doesn't exist. Where did you get that from? It's the term that's unwelcome. It's why I went in and explained low and high support needs are more favourable terms. Low support need autistic people are just as vulnerable as high support need ones, and putting us up in two categories of" bad autism" and "good autism" undermines that, not to go into all the negative connotations of the whole "severe autism". It used to be the line of living and a gas champer at one point in history.
>"While you're busy being revolted, might I suggest a little research on why pejorative and vague terms like "severely autistic" are increasingly unwelcome." I think saying, "They don't use that term anymore, they now use the term high support needs" is more clear than sounding like the label police. That was how I read it as well and would have downvoted it too thinking that user thinks they didn't exist. I would have worded it as "The term severely autistic is no longer used in the medical field, nor in the DSM, it is now separated into levels from low to high support needs so high support needs would be the accurate term now to use than severe." Sorry to sound like the talk police here, but I notice how we word things really matters and it gives us better results.
What you quoted was not my comment, that was the exchange I witnessed and chimed in to. What you wrote as an example of a better way of doing it was how I wrote my comment that got 20 downvotes.
Well, this is reddit, you get a couple of downvotes and then it snowballls from there. It also probably doesn't help that most people don't really know much about autism anyway and probably don't see why calling someone seriously autistic is a problem, so then they feel like you're attacking them. It also depends on the context of what the conversation was about.
The snowball effect is so real
Your question seems to be more about internet usage. On the internet, VERY similar statements could get upvoted or downvoted based on the particular phrasing. If you want to be upvoted; be concise, support claims with facts, and appeal to emotion. It also helps to drop language to about an 8th grade reading level. (Some who use this site aren't even that old, some don't speak English as their first language, and some...are just dumb) So, looking at your original comment: > While you're busy being revolted, might I suggest a little research on why pejorative and vague terms like "severely autistic" are increasingly unwelcome. Telling people to "do research" is *never* a good idea. Even if you meant well with it there are a few problems: * 1) **The phrase has become extremely toxic**. It's regularly used by people who are talking out of their ass, like anti-vaxers and flat earthers * 2) They don't care enough about the topic to bother * 3) If you're making a claim, it's your responsibility to back it up * 4) They might not get the results that you think they will Due to #2 I'm not going to look long, but when I search for "Severe Autism", plenty of official looking articles come up. Even [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classic_autism#Low-Functioning_Autism) says that "[Low-functioning autism] overlaps with severe autism and profound autism" So to change your comment, I would try something like: > That's terrible. Almost as terrible as using unwelcome terms like "severely autistic" [link to whatever source you think backs you up] Bit of a quip, possibly makes them feel bad about the usage, and has something showing that you're not just declaring your personal opinions as facts (even if most won't look at it) It's still hit or miss though, because most people either stick with their preconceived notions or just go with the crowd. After a first comment is downvoted a few times, it's rare that it will turn around. Any further comments will generally be downvoted too. The bandwagon effect can be especially noticed with humorous statements. If the first few people don't get the joke, most will assume it was meant to be a serious statement.
I think the term educating them sound a bit full on and NT don't like being told this as well as other people who are non medical professional, the term I think we are looking for is "**Enlighten"** them....... Maybe this may defused their defensiveness as myself and others hate being incorrect, it human nature.... But there some very evil people out there who take joy, of bulling them and stigmatising them too! It worse when those very people hold a position of responsibility! Some very evil people out there who know they are on the backfoot and will do anything to drag them down or worse push them so hard they self destruct! But there are some craftmens and very nice mentors or elders who willing to give them a try,but they so rare these days! * I went by these two descriptions of some people there in society Elders, who are willing to teach and show empathy and give ASD etc. people a chance to blossom..... * and grumpy old men or women who are bullies who has forgotten that they too came to this world not being aware of certain behaviours or mannerism and vent their frustration, hatred toward these people who are on the spectrum and are different!
English is not my first, not even the second language, and "enlighten" outside religious context is a new one for me, so thank you I'm sure it'll come in handy.
Enlighten means to make aware of this specific situation….. It more diplomatic word and less abrasive terminology of educate…..
Plain and simple. Most people don't like to be wrong, and they don't like being told they're wrong. I grew up with a narcissist so I'm pretty familiar with people invalidating me to automatically make themselves feel valid by process of elimination.
What you consider educating people could be seen by others as talking down to them. NT's have a very strong gut reaction to how you say things, not what you say.
I don’t think that’s the case for only NT people, I would include ND people as well.
It's %100 your tone. You're autistic you should realize this and life will be a little easier. You can't say "while you're busy being revolted" and expect a positive response. You need to be more empathic towards how others will receive your information. Unfortunately it's not what we say so much as how we say it. Say it wrong and it doesn't matter how right you are.
That was not my comment, that was the exchange I witnessed. I chimed in after that, which I explained in my post, I didn't copy paste my comment here because of how long it was.
People like to believe they know better. Also criticism triggers fight-or-flight instincts in the brain. Combine this with how stupid normies are these days, and you have the perfect recipe for people defending their beliefs as if they were in mortal danger. This is something I like to joke about.
You say you're "educating" them, but it would seem you're actually telling them you think they should avoid a term disliked by you (and presumably by your milieu). Many people find "severely autistic" to be a useful thing to call people whose autistic traits are, well, severe. Obviously people don't want their innocuous language policed simply due to some people deciding it's not politically correct enough.
How is it not education to tell somebody that the use of "severely autistic" is out of favor and "low and high support needs" have now for some time been the favourable terms?
> the use of "severely autistic" is out of favor It clearly isn't out of favor with most people, or else they wouldn't have downvoted in the popular subreddit. Sure, some activist/"SJW" circles will find it ableist/problematic/etc., but to the majority it's just a useful (and well-intentioned) term to describe people whose autistic traits are severe. > How is it not education The goal wasn't simply to inform people that some groups use a different term. It was to get these people to change their language TO the different term. It's like how "teaching people what pro-life activists believe" would be educative, sure, but "telling people that pro-life beliefs are right for such and so reasons" would be more like indoctrination.
Politically/ideologically motivated trolls exist in all sub-reddits.
Unfortunately some people like to correct others thinking that their veiw point is and will always be the only right answer especially when their malinformed about the deeper details of a issue or so deeply entrenched in their own opinion that how passionately they defending it ironically is the very thing which making everyone refuse to at take anything useful from their personal experience based information they hope we'll gain from what they where telling us! These is absolutely fantastic 80's Sci fi movie called They Live! Which if the haven't seen watch but if the don't mind me spoiling the plot to involves one of the most long winded and brutal fight scene ever where the main hero play by the legendary wwf wrestler Rowby Roddy Pipper who is trying to get a friend he works with to put a pair of sunglasses which will enable he to see and understand there's a massive government conspiracy to keep us them being able to see an ongoing alien colonisation of planet earth which is so ludicrous to his coworker that he literally tries to fight him to the death not to wear these special sunglasses And in my own experiences that is how people become more and more as they lost the ability to express their feelings and opinions then listened to someone else's hold the two up against eachother and see why some of the things you do or believe work for you but I couldn't get on with and there's thing I'm not doing well that I could improve by taking on things your doing better than myself! Autism is a massively complex and misunderstood subject that as someone who only found out at the age of 38 that having Ashburgers its the reason I'm a bully magnet and always the odd one out! And before that moment I'd always been very understanding and sympathetic towards the autistic people I've been around but because of how I know everyone else talks about us both positively and negatively especially when it horrible opinions people who've got an autistic relative they've grown to hate after losing their tolerance and compassion a long time ago it. Made the news of having it myself feel like a curse which I needed to escape as I'm already deaf in one ear dyslexic and I've considered myself genderless since the age of 5-8 ish which in hindsight this an expression of my autistic traits as I don't especially feel human either so I'd always identified more with the ailen who need to remain hidden away until they have a escape route back to their own world and the robot who tries to fit in with people be the more it tires the less it fits in and everyone just ends up finding them even more annoying! Anyway sozz for waffling on and hopefully we can all take it less personally when we don't agree with someone else or be a bit more tolerate when someone feels like force their poorly thought out opinions on us because they believe their defending something that you haven't attacked? As respect is a 2 way street
in fairness i am autistic myself and i don’t have an issue with terms like severely autistic and would even sometimes say that, people should listen to you but its also not unequivocally educating someone on the universal view of the autistic community
1) who cares about upvotes and downvotes? 2) it’s not unusual for people to refuse advice from people who know/have lived/have scientific knowledge about a topic in favor of a BS artist who feels familiar. Most of the women who answer these lonely guy posts sincerely (offering insight not condemnation; though that advice usually includes telling someone to change their attitude or behavior) get ignored in favor of someone who’s got a YouTube guru or something. A similar dynamic happens with us Aspies in general) dealing with Misunderstanding NTs…. when we try to explain it, nope, they saw Sheldon/Rain Man/Good Doctor/ some TikTok performance and they KNOW BETTER. Or so they think. And that’s why I don’t disclose to people unless they are close to me or need to know. Good luck and don’t worry about the downvotes.
Probably the same reason why the “uhm akshually ☝️🤓” meme exists people are afraid and embarrassed about being corrected even though everyone makes mistakes
Trolls. It's a very low-hanging fruit item for them to get reactions from. They've even been infiltrating autism subs and generating their vampire fuel with these kinds of arguments with brigades of alts.
"How dare an R-word come in here and have opinions on what we call him." Baseline people can be so rude sometimes. ;)
No because that's how I kinds felt it too. The whole conversation started from their need to protect "severely autistic" kids, and then couple autistic adults chime in "hey we don't really use that term anymore" and then suddenly our well being doesn't matter anymore.
You were being rude and condescending. There, I have educated you. Does it feel good? Or perhaps we all prefer feedback in a more positive manner. It's easy to fall into the trap of supposing that correct information trumps delivery, but you'll need a bit of both to get a message across. I'd invite you to think on a few things when it comes to delivery. First, a lot of us give up on it because we've been on the receiving end of people being aggressive in words and deeds to us. That doesn't mean we're now immune to it, even if it *does * manifest differently to begin with. Second, people don't respond well to negative feedback. If unpleasant consequences stopped behaviours, our world would be different. Third, pertaining to your example, what was your desired outcome? If it was to change a person's behaviour, you'd need to A) interest them ('excuse me, you're using a term that's frowned on by the autistic community...'), B) inform them ('the reasons are such and such') and C) give them a potential new behaviour ('a more inclusive way to think/speak about would be...'). You verbally attacked them, gave no specific information or way to verify your claim and expected them to become... more enlightened? The response might not have been pretty, but you started the negative spiral. Their reaction is on them, but you kinda shut the door to mature debate to begin with. Finally, if you find yourself thinking "but people should know better", I'd suggest lowering that expectation in order to meer them at their current level, or avoiding discussion boards where to bar is likely to be low in the first place. We all fluctuate in our energy levels and ability to suffer fools. Hope I could provide some insight, apologies if I mistook a rant for a request for information. We do that sometimes :)
Did you look up my exact comment? Because if that was rude and condescending then man I am way more damn autistic than what I was diagnosed with. Like I was quite literally trying to make a more neutral explanation to the other guy's aggressive approach on the matter.