I don't want pity or admiration
growi...@hotmail.com
The first is one of pity. This is the one that puts faces of us,
when we are in our must unpleasent moods, on posters which say,
"Don't let more children suffer - cure autism!" The people doing
this genuinely believe that they are doing a wonderful thing, by
helping those of us who are less fortunate.
However, there is a problem. Those that pity us have several
beliefs that they might not speak, but still hold. They believe
that being autistic is worse then being so-called "normal". This
then teaches autistics to hate themselves - to dispise that which
has "ruined" their lives - rather then accepting their unique self
as the wonderful thing it is.
Then there are those who pity us who also believe our lives will
lack this thing they call "quality of life" - of course they can't
really define it, but they claim it is important anyhow. What
this belief leads to is one that accepts the misery of autistics
as a force that cannot be restrained. "Of course he is unhappy -
you would be, too, if you were autistic." But the fact is that
we can, and should, lead lives that are enjoyable and meaningful.
Of course this belief doesn't allow that, though.
When we aren't being pitied, we seem to be being admired. This
is just as awful. While it is hard being an autistic, and
surviving the abuse many of us have survived, that isn't the
reason we should be admired. We don't treat surviving a horrible
car crash as something which "shows the true spirit of humanity"
or any of this similar nonsense - we see it as something terrible
that happened to someone, which they were lucky to survive. Those
of us who have faced prejudice, hatred, and abuse don't need
anyone's admiration - we would much prefer that they recognize the
awful things that happend to us, and are still happening to others
like us. Don't show us how great we are for surviving - see how
awful others can be.
But that isn't the main problem with the admiration for simply
surviving. The big problem is that it carries with it a subtle,
yet powerful message. The message is, "the greatest achievement
an autistic can make is to survive." I know few people who would
feel that simply surviving is their crowning achievement in life.
Autistics want to contribute to the world, to make it a better
place. We want to learn and grow and share ourselves with others
(although maybe in a way differently then other people). We want
to be seen as people of good character, and be admired for these
things - not just the fact our heart still beats.
Now, when I say this, I suspect that someone will read it and say,
"Well, yes, he can say that because he is a lucky autistic who is
high functioning, holds a job, and whatever else..." But they
draw a line where there is none. Instead of seeing what must be
done to allow the "low functioning" autistics to contribute, along
with us "high functioning" autistics (what horrible terms!), they
look at us like exceptions. I guess it is easier to ignore the
real problems then to try to help someone else - truly help them,
not just show pity or admiration.
--
Joel
Boris
tell me about your no line theory.
I'd give my life if it would make my son high functioning.
That's nice that you don't want pity or admiration, I don't either and I
don't believe that my son does, but please realize that there is a line.
<growi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:top.poster.2....@bigsky.antelope.net...
Boris
Sorry about the emotion, I'll try to refrain.
> That's unfortunate; you'd be of more use to him alive, and if he were
> "high-functioning" he'd still need you.
OK, maybe my right arm. And just to let you know, I am worried about what
will happen if I am someday not around for my son, that's where some of the
emotion comes from.
> write a convincing definition of the line -- *exactly* where it lies, and
> who belongs on which side of it -- and maybe more people here will believe
> in it.
You are right there is no definate one "great line" that we can lump people
on either side of but it also isn't a big pool you can throw people in.
sggaB the Slug
>> I'm surprised at the (apparent) emotion in your post.
> Sorry about the emotion, I'll try to refrain.
Ok.
>> That's unfortunate; you'd be of more use to him alive, and if he were
>> "high-functioning" he'd still need you.
> OK, maybe my right arm. And just to let you know, I am worried about what
> will happen if I am someday not around for my son, that's where some of the
> emotion comes from.
Yeah. Those fears are totally natural in most societies right now. I
don't know where you live, but have you thought of joining or supporting
any of the parent movements that push for support of people with
developmental disabilities to live in real homes, with adequate support,
as adults?
It's the results of such movements (combined with the self-advocacy
movement) that mean I'm living where I'm living now -- California has laws
about this because Californians did stuff about this. If I were in some
other locations, or if I were in California before these laws, I might be
in a much less pleasant living situation right now, even if I functioned
*better* than I do. I've met some of the people who fought for this
stuff, and I'm glad they did -- *much* more glad than I would be if they'd
wasted it trying the impossible with my neurology. This ensures that
anyone autistic, no matter how they function, can (at least under law)
have a real, non-institutional place to live for their adult lifetime.
Other Californians will undoubtedly tell you, however, that the law is
not always applied well, and that enforcement needs to be improved by a
*lot*. But it's way better than it once was.
>> write a convincing definition of the line -- *exactly* where it lies, and
>> who belongs on which side of it -- and maybe more people here will believe
>> in it.
> You are right there is no definate one "great line" that we can lump people
> on either side of but it also isn't a big pool you can throw people in.
I find "autism" to be a good enough descriptor, and dislike the LFA/HFA
discrepancy for a variety of reasons. (Not the least of which is that I
and many people I know have been thrown on *different sides of it* for
purely power-related reasons.) I think there are definite distinctions
between autistic people, and between our various abilities -- that cannot
be ignored -- but that LFA/HFA is too simplistic to even begin to describe
them (and that it cuts straight through a lot of the more real and
important distinctions, separating several groups of autistic people who
are more similar than different.)
--
sggaB
Autistic Spectrum Code, v1.0
AA! dpu s-:+ a-- c+(++) p(+) t--- f--- S--(++)@ p?@ e-(+)@ h- r--@ n--
i++ P m--(++)@ M
sggaB the Slug
> You are High functioning? Go have a child that's low functioning and then
> tell me about your no line theory.
Given the amount of people who cross that so-called line in both
directions, or who have extreme traits on both sides of it, the line *is*,
at the very least, fuzzy. I believe Joel himself was nonverbal for many
years as a child, as were several people on this newsgroup. Some of us
started out more able to function than we are now, some of us less able
than we are now, and some roughly the same, and some have fluctuated a
lot over the years.
> I'd give my life if it would make my son high functioning.
That's unfortunate; you'd be of more use to him alive, and if he were
"high-functioning" he'd still need you.
> That's nice that you don't want pity or admiration, I don't either and I
> don't believe that my son does, but please realize that there is a line.
I'm surprised at the (apparent) emotion in your post. However, please
write a convincing definition of the line -- *exactly* where it lies, and
who belongs on which side of it -- and maybe more people here will believe
in it.
--
Lawrence Foard
sggaB the Slug <ama...@autistics.org> wrote:
>
>Yeah. Those fears are totally natural in most societies right now. I
>don't know where you live, but have you thought of joining or supporting
>any of the parent movements that push for support of people with
>developmental disabilities to live in real homes, with adequate support,
>as adults?
>
>It's the results of such movements (combined with the self-advocacy
>movement) that mean I'm living where I'm living now -- California has laws
>about this because Californians did stuff about this. If I were in some
>other locations, or if I were in California before these laws, I might be
>in a much less pleasant living situation right now, even if I functioned
>*better* than I do. I've met some of the people who fought for this
>stuff, and I'm glad they did -- *much* more glad than I would be if they'd
>wasted it trying the impossible with my neurology. This ensures that
>anyone autistic, no matter how they function, can (at least under law)
>have a real, non-institutional place to live for their adult lifetime.
How does that work? The autistic person I know who doesn't work just
gets SSI, is there some other assistance he can get from the state?
--
Be a counter terrorist perpetrate random senseless acts of kindness
Rave: Immanentization of the Eschaton in a Temporary Autonomous Zone.
The psychotic friends network! Talk to your own personal psychotic, only
$2/minute. Aliens, black helicopters, and HAARP, all related find out how!
sggaB the Slug
> How does that work? The autistic person I know who doesn't work just
> gets SSI, is there some other assistance he can get from the state?
I don't know how it works in other states. I know that in California, you
go to the Regional Center, hope they accept you, read up on the laws, and
insist on getting proper services from them. (Some are better than
others.) I'm on SSI, but the Regional Center is a separate thing;
provides funding for different kinds of services ranging from skills
training to roommates and a lot of other stuff. I'm pretty sure it does
so even if you have a job.
Hylander
> But that isn't the main problem with the admiration for simply
> surviving. The big problem is that it carries with it a subtle, yet
> powerful message. The message is, "the greatest achievement an autistic
> can make is to survive."
People who state that really have no clue what is possible or even that
their planet will soon be assimilated ;o>
Seriously, I feel it is fine to admire autistics. It is an emotion. Not
for surviving but for
a) speaking out
b) taking time to explain often to deaf ears
c) nature finally creating a
condition that undermines rampant socialization.
d) for daring to find solutions to complex problems. e) for being unique
when the social forces say otherwise.
(no, I won't say the rote answer "for just being who they are"...but it is
basically true)
Sometimes, I feel I do not admire and wish more courage/understanding
for those who have seek cures or to emulate society their whole life
instead of accepting who they are...this applies to myself...I wish I
could be more accepting of myself. (I try to be modest and sometimes it is
graceful socially and sometimes it is not and I should just accept who I
am)
I also don't admire those that go to the extremes of finding pity or
excesive excuses. But I certainly tolerate/understand it since psychologically,
it *is* a struggle sometimes to survive. And I don't feel bad giving them
the pity they desire. Big difference here though is that they *want* it.
In sum, I think pity in and of itself is just not useful or wanted and
admiration for "surviving" or with a tone of superiority in it is really
gratuitous arrogance. People never say what they mean....there is always
a motive of self-gratification in these two things. That is what I can't
tolerate.
john.
Hylander
> What if you can type up plays equal to Shakespeare but I depend on
> someone to walk me across the street / can't work cause I am overloaded
> by cars
REVISION
> What if *I* can type up plays equal to Shakespeare but I depend on
> someone to walk me across the street / can't work cause I am overloaded
> by cars
Hylander
> You are right there is no definate one "great line" that we can lump
> people on either side of but it also isn't a big pool you can throw
> people in.
Here is how I look at it. I'm going to compare the neurological side of it
to kidneys. We all come with two kidneys. Lets take some samplings of
people.
a) 2 healthy kidneys.
b) 1 healthy kidney...strong because it overcompensates for the other.
c) half a healthy kidney
d) no kidneys...or fully deteriorated.
Those who have 2 kidneys might have no neurological "problems"
Those who have 1 kidney are like those who have some strong traits and can
do just fine.
Those who have half a kidney need a lot but not complete assistance
Those who have no kidneys will need dialysis support for life.
Where is the line between say b and c? or any other group? At any time,
the percentage in nephrons active may differ in a kidney....
Okay, this is a HORRIBLE example...I would say it SUCKS....why? The brain
is the most complex organ in the body and the kidney one of the simplest
(it just filters plasma). It is *not* a kidney (but like a kidney, a
percentage of its cellular components either "work" or "don't work" for a
particular function). People are more complex than their brains because
they take in a life time of experiences and environments and mirror it,
meta-describe it, abstract and analyse it, recompose it etc.. Also, the
brain specializes in different things...It is the brain that primarily
differs in autistics. Now draw the lines.
For this same reason, I detest the words High functioning and Low
functioning and even "spectrum" (personally). Although I tolerate the
slang "HFA/LFA" when people are too lazy to get into specifics (very
unautistic of some autistics at times) What is "low" functioning? A
dependancy on others? Tested retardation? (how can you test someone if you
can't get their attention?)...Some other test of character/personality,
social merits/demerits?
What if you can type up plays equal to Shakespeare but I depend on someone
to walk me across the street / can't work cause I am overloaded by cars
and traffic and stim 1000x a day? Could you tell by just reading what I
type? But what if I was independant but so completely unable to talk that
I could only get a low paying job in an assembly line worker (job obtained
through a social worker). Which is low functioning? There are many other
cases inbetween these two... Where is anything close to a line? Some
people may be even appear "successful" (so we assume successful in every
way) but seldom do we know what pain brought them there.
Just some thoughts. I'm autistic and from what I can tell, each autistic
is so unique that it is impossible to divide them. I hope this isn't seen
as a personal attack or emotional response. I just have to throw in my
opinions/ideas since I've had to deal with this issue a lot lately
although it may disagree with you.
john
autistic and aspiring to be even more so ;o>.
sggaB the Slug
wrote:
> What if I can type up plays equal to Shakespeare but I depend on someone
> to walk me across the street / can't work cause I am overloaded by cars
> and traffic and stim 1000x a day? Could you tell by just reading what I
> type?
That's pretty similar to what I'm like (only I *wish* I could write like
Shakespeare <grin> -- it would make things a lot easier; I'm told I'm a
decent writer though). An inane response I get repeatedly is, "But you
type so well!" My response is often, "Yeah, but that's almost *all* I can
do." They usually think I'm joking or "putting myself down". I'm not --
it's not a value statement of me being worse or better than anyone else;
it's just a fact about my life: I type. I read. Those are the only
things I'm consistently and commonly likely to not need direct assistance
with (and there are times when I do). I stim a lot. I'm working on not
SIBbing all the time.
I'm often afraid to even mention it because people either don't believe me
or think I have some weird motive for saying it, and there are aspects of
it I'm still embarrassed by even though I shouldn't be. (One staff I had
didn't believe it, up until she spent a few weeks around me, and suddenly
she said, "I figured out what you're like, you're almost like a fully
mobile quad.") My motive for saying it is usually because someone's given
some idea of what's "high-functioning" and what's "low-functioning", and I
think I defy the definitions of both categories pretty thoroughly. I
think it's important to be honest about this stuff where possible and
preferred (in anyone) because there are a lot of aspects to the reality of
being autistic that are not visible on a computer screen, and not always
talked about in favor of the overgeneralized stereotypes (and the
not-talked-about allows the stereotypes to persist).
(I know others who defy these categories, but I haven't asked their
permission to discuss them publicly and specifically. There are
undoubtedly other people on this newsgroup besides me and Hylander who
likewise defy the categories.)
Maybe I ought to post a linguistically-cleaned-up version of *this* to the
information website. I wrote something else on this subject a long time
ago, but I don't know what I did with it and it could probably use
revision anyway.
sggaB the Slug
> I'm often afraid to even mention it because people either don't believe me
> or think I have some weird motive for saying it, and there are aspects of
Oh yeah, I remembered -- they often think (in line with the topic of this
thread) that I want pity, or that I want to be told, "That's so horrible
for you," when that's not *at all* what my intent was, and detracts from
the actual message I'm giving (which is the range and nature of possible
abilities in autistic people). I hate pity, and go to great lengths to
avoid it; even all the political implications aside, it makes some part
of my stomach feel really gross.
Larry
I've broken evry rule thats ever been made,
Called a shovel a shovel and a spade a spade
So don't piss about with my grand design
But deal me fair, and it will be fine
Then I'll treat with you as you want me too
And self narrate in your autistic zoo.
--
Larry
"The weight of this sad time we must obey;
Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say"
Shakespeare King Lear (or was it Larry from Laurentius Rex?)
"sggaB the Slug" <ama...@autistics.org> wrote in message
news:slrnas2hnr...@localhost.localdomain...
sggaB the Slug
> I can out spear the shake any day :)
> I've broken evry rule thats ever been made,
> Called a shovel a shovel and a spade a spade
> So don't piss about with my grand design
> But deal me fair, and it will be fine
> Then I'll treat with you as you want me too
> And self narrate in your autistic zoo.
<grin>
Terry Jones
>> or think I have some weird motive for saying it, and there are aspects of
>
>Oh yeah, I remembered -- they often think (in line with the topic of this
>thread) that I want pity, or that I want to be told, "That's so horrible
>for you," when that's not *at all* what my intent was, and detracts from
>the actual message I'm giving (which is the range and nature of possible
>abilities in autistic people).
It's odd that *we* are the ones who are supposed to have communication
problems, but (by my experience) the bulk of NTs often seem incapable
of receiving certain types of "straight" information *as* information
- they have to "interpret" it, "read between the lines", etc., loosing
accuracy and loosing content along the way.
Perhaps they *need* this non-verbal communication stuff because they
are so poor at verbal communication? :\
Terry
sggaB the Slug
>>> I'm often afraid to even mention it because people either don't believe me
>>> or think I have some weird motive for saying it, and there are aspects of
>>Oh yeah, I remembered -- they often think (in line with the topic of this
>>thread) that I want pity, or that I want to be told, "That's so horrible
>>for you," when that's not *at all* what my intent was, and detracts from
>>the actual message I'm giving (which is the range and nature of possible
>>abilities in autistic people).
> It's odd that *we* are the ones who are supposed to have communication
> problems, but (by my experience) the bulk of NTs often seem incapable
> of receiving certain types of "straight" information *as* information
> - they have to "interpret" it, "read between the lines", etc., loosing
> accuracy and loosing content along the way.
I suspect that different people (autistic and not) have different *kinds*
of communication problems, but that the kinds more common among NTs are
underrecognized.
> Perhaps they *need* this non-verbal communication stuff because they
> are so poor at verbal communication? :\
The same could be said of me in realspace -- I need a certain amount of
time off from linguistic communication. However, I suspect that again
it's which *kinds* of verbal and non-verbal communication are involved
that are different.
Hylander
>
> It's odd that *we* are the ones who are supposed to have communication
> problems, but (by my experience) the bulk of NTs often seem incapable of
> receiving certain types of "straight" information *as* information -
> they have to "interpret" it, "read between the lines", etc., loosing
> accuracy and loosing content along the way.
>
> Perhaps they *need* this non-verbal communication stuff because they are
> so poor at verbal communication? :\
Remarkable insight Terry.
John
neral
news:top.poster.2....@bigsky.antelope.net...
> It seems there are two common, but wrong, opinions about autistics.
>
I agree with you,Joel.
My best friend found a good metaphor the other day. It's perhaps
somewhat exaggerated, but I thought it was well said and proved he
really understands me. He used the phrase, used by Armstrong when he
walked on the moon for the first time. My friend said :
Well, Sometimes,
When something is a small step for us,
It's a big leap to make for you,
But eventually you are capable of the same result.
--
neral | Dx'ed ASD
http://www.alt-support-autism.tk/
booster
"Boris" <Bo...@Boris.Bor> wrote in message
news:3dbefe73$0$82433$8f4e...@newsreader.goldengate.net...
> You are High functioning? Go have a child that's low functioning and then
> tell me about your no line theory.
> I'd give my life if it would make my son high functioning.
>
> That's nice that you don't want pity or admiration, I don't either and I
> don't believe that my son does, but please realize that there is a line.
>
prevent other children from being born with very severe autism. I hope that
you and your son both have the very best of luck. You deserve it.
booster
> In article <3dbefe73$0$82433$8f4e...@newsreader.goldengate.net>, Boris
wrote:
> > You are High functioning? Go have a child that's low functioning and
then
> > tell me about your no line theory.
>
>
> That's unfortunate; you'd be of more use to him alive, and if he were
> "high-functioning" he'd still need you.
>
> > That's nice that you don't want pity or admiration, I don't either and
I
> > don't believe that my son does, but please realize that there is a
line.
>
> I'm surprised at the (apparent) emotion in your post. However, please
> write a convincing definition of the line -- *exactly* where it lies, and
> who belongs on which side of it -- and maybe more people here will believe
in it.
I'm astonished at the (apparent) cruelty in your post. This man has a
child with severe autism. He has enough problems coping with that. To ask
him to write a convincing definition of the line, much less EXACTLY where it
lies, in order to convince anyone that severe autism isn't a terrible burden
to those who have it and those who support them is extremely presumptuous.
You know, admiration isn't something that is vital, but I believe that a
little pity is vital for everyone, and something that each of us should
expect from one another.
sggaB the Slug
booster wrote:
>> I'm surprised at the (apparent) emotion in your post. However, please
>> write a convincing definition of the line -- *exactly* where it lies, and
>> who belongs on which side of it -- and maybe more people here will believe
> in it.
> I'm astonished at the (apparent) cruelty in your post. This man has a
> child with severe autism. He has enough problems coping with that. To ask
> him to write a convincing definition of the line, much less EXACTLY where it
> lies, in order to convince anyone that severe autism isn't a terrible burden
> to those who have it and those who support them is extremely presumptuous.
I don't think I was being cruel, but I also don't write to save the
feelings of people who believe certain things about autism. If I wrote to
save everyone's feelings, I wouldn't have any opinions. I've seen people
do that, and I'm not that much of a fan of spinelessness.
The fact remains that a lot of us here don't believe in the line, for a
lot of reasons, most of which do really have to do with reality, and
which have been enumerated in a variety of other posts. Asking someone to
define the line is not unreasonable, when they are making assertions based
on the existence of the line.
He did give a reasonable response about the line. I don't agree with him,
but the response was honest.
> You know, admiration isn't something that is vital, but I believe that a
> little pity is vital for everyone, and something that each of us should
> expect from one another.
I don't like receiving pity, so I don't like to give it out either. I
believe in a line from a book I read by Dave Hingsburger: "Pity is
prejudice masked as sympathy." A little simplified, maybe, but definitely
in the right direction. (And as I look down, I realize I'm wearing a
shirt that says "Piss On Pity" in big bright letters.)
growi...@hotmail.com
> I hope that a cure for your son is found, or at least one that will
> prevent other children from being born with very severe autism. I hope that
> you and your son both have the very best of luck. You deserve it.
Would you tell someone "And I hope that no more people are born who are
like you?" Isn't that rude? Apparently it isn't, though, if the person
has any sort of mental differences. Ugh. Even though I really hate
statements like yours, I hardly wish that people like you aren't born!
I hope that his son is provided with a good education and the therapy
that would help him enjoy his life as an autistic. But I don't wish
him cured, besides for it being a false hope right now anyhow.
And, the reason we asked "what is severe" is that, yesterday, I did some
things that were hardly good examples of competence. Someone who saw me
might very well have thought I needed to be locked up. After all, I
would have screamed if someone talked to me, not that I would have been
able to understand a word. I couldn't physically WALK, much less
anything else. Do I have severe autism? Or does having a job make it
only minor? There is no line.
Removing my autism - even if it removed all the bad things, like my
overloads, would kill the Joel that I am now and create a new one. The
new one probably wouldn't be any better or worse then Joel is now, but
I see no reason to do that. Joel has a right to live.
--
Joel
booster
> > I hope that a cure for your son is found, or at least one that will
> > prevent other children from being born with very severe autism. I hope
that
> > you and your son both have the very best of luck. You deserve it.
>
> Would you tell someone "And I hope that no more people are born who are
> like you?" Isn't that rude? Apparently it isn't, though, if the person
> has any sort of mental differences. Ugh. Even though I really hate
> statements like yours, I hardly wish that people like you aren't born!
>
> I hope that his son is provided with a good education and the therapy
> that would help him enjoy his life as an autistic. But I don't wish
> him cured, besides for it being a false hope right now anyhow.
>
in this group. Wouldn't it just be terrible if Boris' son had been born
without autism? Wouldn't it have been terrible if you had been born without
autism? Ugh. Reminds me of people who can't hear and feel that medical
research to help or even cure them would insult their pride at overcoming a
difficulty they have. If they found out that they were going blind, or that
their child was going to be born blind would they be as worried that medical
science might find treatments or a cure for that? Or would they be proud
that they would have something else that would make them "special"?
I find that often those who say that they don't want to be either
admired or pitied don't really mean that. Usually they are exactly the type
of people who want to be admired because they "don't want to be pitied", and
pitied because they aren't admired more. If autism were eliminated, it
would be a boon to mankind. If it had been before I was born, I would have
still been born. I would have been a different person, all right. I would
have been born HEALTHIER, with a far greater chance to lead a life that was
HAPPIER. Any lamers out there who can't bother to see that, don't bother to
try to tell me otherwise. I am tired of hearing just how very, very special
you are. I don't think you've you've expended far too much energy mimicking
normal, I think you've wasted it mimicking abnormal. God forbid that you be
happy, healthy, and normal. Little chance of that happening, though, you
lucky people. Go, autism! Yay, yay!
Doug Wedel
> believe in a line from a book I read by Dave Hingsburger: "Pity is
> prejudice masked as sympathy." A little simplified, maybe, but definitely
> in the right direction. (And as I look down, I realize I'm wearing a
> shirt that says "Piss On Pity" in big bright letters.)
Something in your (colorful) words disturbed me--something in that
definition. I looked up pity in my American Heritage: "Sympathy and sorrow
aroused by the misfortune or suffering of another." I can see how prejudice
and a sense of one's innate superiority could be masked as pity, but at the
same time I would hold out hope that there can be *authentic* pity. I
suppose thought that pity is one of those feelings reserved largely for the
NTs among us, since one of the most salient features of autism (but, oddly,
one that very few in here seem to discuss much) is lack of empathy.
For example, I rarely feel pity for another human being myself, but reading
one of your posts just today in another thread I honestly felt *something*
like pity for the suffering that a person with such a refined mind has to go
through. Nevertheless, I like your attitude;-)
Doug Wedel
> would be a boon to mankind.
This you do not know, because neither you nor I nor anyone else truly
understands autism. However, if we may suppose that someone like Hans
Asperger understands autism better than either you or I, then his own
writings directly refute your statement, since he indcates that many of our
top scientists and engineers and mathematicians and artists and musicians
are autistic, and that there are some challenging and important jobs that
seem to be made for autistic people that NTs could scarcely perform at all.
sggaB the Slug
booster wrote:
> I am going to be rude now. I have heard a lot of crap from some people
> in this group.
At least you're finally being direct about your opinions. It's actually
easier to deal with them this way.
> Wouldn't it just be terrible if Boris' son had been born
> without autism?
If he was supposed to be born without autism, he would've been.
> Wouldn't it have been terrible if you had been born without
> autism?
Yeah, because then I wouldn't exist. I don't have a death wish. I am
what I am, "warts" and all.
> Ugh. Reminds me of people who can't hear and feel that medical
> research to help or even cure them would insult their pride at overcoming a
> difficulty they have.
That is *not* what Deaf culture is about. You appear to be the sort of
person who can only see things within a construct of "overcoming
disability" and the like, which makes it hard to even hold a conversation
with you. We're not working from within anything near the same mental
framework. It's like I'm consistently pointing at purple and you're
insisting it's red because there's no word for purple.
> If they found out that they were going blind, or that
> their child was going to be born blind would they be as worried that medical
> science might find treatments or a cure for that? Or would they be proud
> that they would have something else that would make them "special"?
I know someone who was born blind. It doesn't bother him that much.
> I find that often those who say that they don't want to be either
> admired or pitied don't really mean that. Usually they are exactly the type
> of people who want to be admired because they "don't want to be pitied", and
> pitied because they aren't admired more.
Nope. Not at all. It's just that we're thinking within a framework that
you apparently can't see. Nothing wrong with that, except that you're
going to be completely wrong about any guesses about our motivations.
> If autism were eliminated, it
> would be a boon to mankind. If it had been before I was born, I would have
> still been born. I would have been a different person, all right. I would
> have been born HEALTHIER, with a far greater chance to lead a life that was
> HAPPIER. Any lamers out there who can't bother to see that, don't bother to
> try to tell me otherwise.
Ok. But *I* wouldn't be happier not being me. Your wishes are very
similar to wishes I've had at certain points in my life -- points when I
was also suicidal.
> I am tired of hearing just how very, very special you are.
If you're hearing that, then you're missing the point of what people are
saying. "Very, very special" is one of the most annoying things to be
considered.
> I don't think you've you've expended far too much energy mimicking
> normal, I think you've wasted it mimicking abnormal.
Then you're wrong. I don't mimic anything anymore, except what works.
Like standing behind someone to know how to walk or something through
echopraxia works, but I certainly don't waste energy mimicking *anything*
non-functional for me, normal or abnormal.
As I said, I appear to be operating from within a framework that you can't
see. Which is fine, but don't expect me to conform to ideas within your
framework (not that I can stop you -- you seem to be doing a great job of
twisting several people's existence to fit a model of reality that just
isn't real -- the one where you know our motivations for things better
than we do, or something, and where you think that we want pity or
admiration and stuff, and where you appear to think we're only working for
personal gain, when we're not. I go to sleep every night *terrified* of
what's happening to other people (no, not autism, but the things people
do to autistic people) and of my inability to stop it. I know full well
that I'm not operating out of some sort of self-aggrandizing agenda.)
> God forbid that you be happy, healthy, and normal.
A lot of us are happy, healthy, and not normal. (And a few have thrown
the whole question of "normal" out the window, although that's not my
tactic.)
Any of my health problems have nothing to do with autism though.
I would expect a normal person to want to be happy, healthy, and normal,
but I would not expect an intrinsically not-normal person to be normal in
order to be happy. I don't think normality and happiness go hand in hand.
I don't think abnormality and happiness go hand in hand either. I think
*being what you are* and happiness go hand in hand, and what a lot of us
are ain't normal. Big deal (sarcasm).
> Little chance of that happening, though, you lucky people.
I think we stand a good chance of being happy and healthy. It's kinda
hard for an autistic person to be normal, but that's not a good goal.
Functioning optimally *as the sort of person you are*, whether that person
is normal or abnormal (and everyone is some mix of both), is a good goal.
(Although even the concept of "goal" isn't within my normal framework, so
again we're operating on completely different modes of thinking.)
> Go, autism! Yay, yay!
You've really missed the point, haven't you?
growi...@hotmail.com
> I
> suppose thought that pity is one of those feelings reserved largely for the
> NTs among us, since one of the most salient features of autism (but, oddly,
> one that very few in here seem to discuss much) is lack of empathy.
Empathy and pity are different. And autistics have empathy, just
not always for the same things NTs do. Most NTs lack true empathy
for people imprisoned in mental institutions and facing constant
bullying - if there was true empathy, by a majority of NTs (some do
understand these things), then something would have been done about
both long ago - the attitudes which create the problems would not
exist as they do now.
Most autistics have tremendous empathy for those who faced the
problems they do. I suspect this isn't that different from NTs,
who relate best to people who are similar to themselves. We just
happen to be in the minority...
--
Joel
Paul Mitchum
[..]
> I find that often those who say that they don't want to be either
> admired or pitied don't really mean that. Usually they are exactly the
> type of people who want to be admired because they "don't want to be
> pitied", and pitied because they aren't admired more. If autism were
> eliminated, it would be a boon to mankind. If it had been before I was
> born, I would have still been born. I would have been a different person,
> all right. I would have been born HEALTHIER, with a far greater chance to
> lead a life that was HAPPIER. Any lamers out there who can't bother to
> see that, don't bother to try to tell me otherwise. [..]
OK. I won't, even though I'm tempted to try. :-)
So what now?
growi...@hotmail.com
> I am going to be rude now. I have heard a lot of crap from some people
> in this group. Wouldn't it just be terrible if Boris' son had been born
> without autism? Wouldn't it have been terrible if you had been born without
> autism? Ugh. Reminds me of people who can't hear and feel that medical
> research to help or even cure them would insult their pride at overcoming a
> difficulty they have.
I feel pride in some things, such as my work, but I do not feel pride
over "overcoming a difficulty I have" if that difficulty you are
referring to is autism. I did feel pride the first time I ran a mile
in under 6 minutes, which was quite an achievement for me, and an area
of great difficulty. But if you said, "Joel, we are going to cure the
thing that caused your knees to be shaped wrong," it would not bother
me in the least. I hope they do cure it, provided it isn't through
eugenics or abortion. If the cure would work on an adult, I would
submit if the side-effects were minor. I would love to be able to run
normally! That's a medical conditon, and curing it wouldn't hurt my
pride - I'd STILL be proud I achieved my goal. But when you talk about
curing autism, you talk about changing my personality. I'm not
convinced autism is a horrible thing - just that it is a DIFFERENT
thing. My difficulties are different then most people's, but most
people have areas of difficulty!
Would have it been terrible if I was born "without" autism? Well, it
would and it wouldn't. First, I would never have existed as I am today,
so, I wouldn't have much to say. But, I also wouldn't have been the
same person - I would have had different things to give to others, which
are equally valuable, but not more valuable as you suggest. And maybe
the things I have - due in part to my autism - are important.
> If they found out that they were going blind, or that
> their child was going to be born blind would they be as worried that medical
> science might find treatments or a cure for that? Or would they be proud
> that they would have something else that would make them "special"?
I believe every human is "special", not just autistics. Each human
exists for a reason, even when it is hard for society to see the reason.
So I hardly think someone cured of anything is less special.
> I find that often those who say that they don't want to be either
> admired or pitied don't really mean that. Usually they are exactly the type
> of people who want to be admired because they "don't want to be pitied", and
> pitied because they aren't admired more.
I don't think I'm a valid sample member for your group. Perhaps others
you met are, but I truly don't want your pity or anyone else's. As for
admiration, I do hope that people admire me, but not for being autistic.
I hope they admire my character, not the "struggle" against my autism.
> If autism were eliminated, it
> would be a boon to mankind. If it had been before I was born, I would have
> still been born. I would have been a different person, all right. I would
> have been born HEALTHIER, with a far greater chance to lead a life that was
> HAPPIER.
I see that you feel very bitter about your autism, but I suggest that it
is not the cause of your problems. I don't know what is - maybe your
attitude, maybe other people's attitudes, maybe something entirely
different. But plenty of autistics provide the counterpoint to your
statement that autistics can't be happy. I generally am, dispite some
of the "difficulties" I face.
> Any lamers out there who can't bother to see that, don't bother to
> try to tell me otherwise.
I'm sorry you feel that way.
> I am tired of hearing just how very, very special
> you are. I don't think you've you've expended far too much energy mimicking
> normal, I think you've wasted it mimicking abnormal. God forbid that you be
> happy, healthy, and normal. Little chance of that happening, though, you
> lucky people. Go, autism! Yay, yay!
Mimicing anything, normal, or abnormal, is bad for you. Period. It
sounds like it has affected you, since you associate "normal" with
"happy," which is hardly a valid correlation.
As for happy and healthy, I am both. My major heallth problems are my
back (but who nowadays doesn't have back problems), my heart (but I
won't die from this problem), and my knees. Everything else is "fully
functional" and works fine. That's not really too bad. Would I like
these health problems fixed? Surely. But I am much more healthy then
most of the "normal" people I work with. I'd be glad to climb a
mountain with you if you doubt my health!
As for my happiness, I enjoy life. I love the mountains and pursuing
my perseverations. I like my friends. I have a wonderful support
structure - something everyone, AC or NT, needs. I have mements of
stress and pain, but, overall, I think I'm happer then the majority
of people, AC or NT.
As for "normal", I am normal. I am a normal autistic. I am normal
for Joel. This "Normal" includes things like spending quiet time by
myself, using a checklist to remind me how to bathe, and sometimes
remaining silent when others are talking. But other people's "normal"
looks different than this, and I respect that. Some people's "normal"
hate the countryside and love the city. That doesn't make them
broken, dispite it disagreeing with my sensitivities!
I'm sorry you see autism only as a horrible thing. I hope that one
day you can accept all of who you are.
--
Joel
sggaB the Slug
wrote:
>> I find that often those who say that they don't want to be either
>> admired or pitied don't really mean that. Usually they are exactly the type
>> of people who want to be admired because they "don't want to be pitied", and
>> pitied because they aren't admired more.
Ok, here's the reasons I don't like pity. Take them or leave them:
Pity is like when someone looks at you and says, "Oh, how glad I am that
I'm not you." Which isn't a really pleasant thing for them to do. It
sort of distances them from you. It makes it hard to connect. It makes
it hard to have any kind of equal relationship with them, because it puts
them on higher ground than you (metaphorically) in some obnoxious social
code. It's painful. It's like being stabbed. It's like being called a
lesser human being. It's misunderstanding packaged up to look like
understanding and compassion. It's tricky and subtle and insidious. I
hate it.
Admiration, in the context it's being brought up, is equally annoying.
It's when people gush over achievements that mean nothing to you. Or when
they seem to admire you for being alive, when they don't even know you. I
don't mind when people admire real accomplishments I've made, but people
*have to get to know me* before they find out what constitutes an
accomplishment. It's insulting for people to admire me simply because I'm
autistic, and it's something I encounter frequently in certain
situations, which detracts from any real communication that I'm trying to
make happen. I'd far rather have meaningful communication with someone
than have them gushing over what an inspiration I am. There are people
who *repeatedly* fail to understand this, no matter how much I explain it.
Things I don't mind people admiring are like when people on this group
congratulate other people for getting through something that the other
people *know* was hard. That's harmless and good admiration. Like when
various people lately have told their friends about autism, getting
through that is obviously a feat and deserves congratulations.
*Existing*, when you don't even know the person's background, does not
deserve congratulations.
Real incident:
Someone else said, "You're autistic?" I said, "Yeah." Other person said,
"Wow, I admire you, I wanna shake your hand." I thought, "WTF?"
This is *not* welcome attention. This is *not* the sort of interaction I
like to perpetuate. The sort of interaction I like is when people meet me
as an equal, not a strange hybrid of superior and inferior. Where we just
talk about whatever, and the other person doesn't rush to have some
reaction to me (be it pity, admiration, or a very weird thing where they
think that getting pissed off at me makes them better than other people
who interact with me, even though their motivations are the same as the
pity/admiration folks). Where the fact that I'm autistic is seamlessly
incorporated into the interaction instead of becoming a symbol of
overcoming tragedy or some bullshit like that. People have to acknowledge
*all* of me, so that includes autism, but it doesn't have to include all
the annoying opinions people have of autistic people.
There are people out there like that. People who don't do that sort of
crap. Those are the ones I choose to spend most of my time with. They
know I'm autistic and they would never trivialize it or make it seem like
it was a peripheral feature of my personality, but they also don't inflate
it to the point of seeing me as a collection of symptoms.
Those people I can just relax with? Most of them, for some reason, are
autistic. Not because I hate NTs, but because that's how it worked out.
I can only sustain a certain amount of friendships anyway.
Of course, since this is an autism support group, we're gonna talk about
autism, and it's not gonna be for pity or admiration. It's gonna be for
support, and a lot of us do get that here. (And if you look around,
you'll notice that all of us talk about the less pleasant sides a lot, we
just don't distort everything around them. So if you think we're talking
about how wonderful every aspect of autism is, you're attacking a straw
man.)
People who do the admiration and pity things are people I purposely avoid
unless I have to deal with them. Not the sort of act you'd expect from
someone who was out looking for those reactions. Talking about not liking
those reactions is just talking about not liking those reactions -- mainly
because they're one of the most *annoying* aspects of mainstream attitudes
toward disability out there (and you'll find that people with a variety of
impairments will gripe about these things on a continual basis -- because
it's *ANNOYING*.)
David Gardner
>>I don't like receiving pity, so I don't like to give it out either. I
>>believe in a line from a book I read by Dave Hingsburger: "Pity is
>>prejudice masked as sympathy." A little simplified, maybe, but definitely
>>in the right direction. (And as I look down, I realize I'm wearing a
>>shirt that says "Piss On Pity" in big bright letters.)
>
>
> Something in your (colorful) words disturbed me--something in that
> definition. I looked up pity in my American Heritage: "Sympathy and sorrow
> aroused by the misfortune or suffering of another."
It can also be coloured with shame ("What a pity!") and contempt ("It
was pitiful.")
> I can see how prejudice
> and a sense of one's innate superiority could be masked as pity,
Yes, that might be how the word acquired the connotations above.
> but at the
> same time I would hold out hope that there can be *authentic* pity. I
> suppose thought that pity is one of those feelings reserved largely for the
> NTs among us, since one of the most salient features of autism (but, oddly,
> one that very few in here seem to discuss much) is lack of empathy.
Lack of *displayed* empathy, as according to an NT observer. That's my
opinion anyway. My experience is that some autistics aren't empathetic
(or is it empathic?), some are empathetic, some are very empathetic,
some are empathetic about certain things but not others, etc. etc. My
experience of NTs is similar - the difference is that they also have
this ability to display more empathy than they actually feel, so that
those with little actual empathy can make up for it. Often I have gone
to people who displayed a great deal of empathy for me, only to find
that in reality they didn't have any genuine empathy underneath the
surface, and I discovered (painfully) just how uncaring they really were
- a pretense of empathy can only hold up for so long before it is
exposed as a pretense with nothing underneath, a bit like some of us
here experience with pretending to be normal.
On the other hand, an autistic might be feeling empathetic, but not be
able to display it or communicate it in an effective way. That kind of
happened to me when I saw Vicky's post.... I just couldn't write
anything... I still can't. I just mention it to illustrate the point.
>
> For example, I rarely feel pity for another human being myself, but reading
> one of your posts just today in another thread I honestly felt *something*
> like pity for the suffering that a person with such a refined mind has to go
> through. Nevertheless, I like your attitude;-)
Hey, maybe that feeling was empathy :-)
Dave
sggaB the Slug
>> I can see how prejudice
>> and a sense of one's innate superiority could be masked as pity,
> Yes, that might be how the word acquired the connotations above.
If I look at somewhat archaic usages of the word, they are much less
disturbing than modern usages.
Doug Wedel
> problems they do. I suspect this isn't that different from NTs,
> who relate best to people who are similar to themselves. We just
> happen to be in the minority...
I have to say, I agree with you. You're saying, I think, that just as NTs
don't have "empathy" for ACs, so just because maybe ACs don't have "empathy"
for NTs doesn't mean we don't have "empathy", whatever the word means?
Terry Jones
>suppose thought that pity is one of those feelings reserved largely for the
>NTs among us, since one of the most salient features of autism (but, oddly,
>one that very few in here seem to discuss much) is lack of empathy.
Actually if you look back though the archives you'll find that we've
had considerable discussions on empathy & sympathy.
The basic misunderstanding seems to be that in the context of autism,
the psychologists use the term "empathy" in a very narrow and
specialised way, which does not reflect the common understanding / use
of the term.
My "take" on the consensus is that while we have difficulties in
"reading" others / accurately "putting ourselves in their place", many
(especially older) autistics have a significant sense of "sympathy" /
feeling for another person in distress (once they are aware of the
situation).
There is also the point that, although we may have difficulties in
offering *emotional* comfort - knowing what to say / do which will
produce a positive emotional response in another - it is not uncommon
for an AC to try to think of / do *practical* things which will help
to alleviate / resolve the problem. - Unfortunately to the general
population trying to do something *useful* is not seen as being as
"supportive" as offering sympathetic words.
One could say that, following a bereavement for example - at the time
you need the support of NT friends, but for making the practical
arrangements and getting on with your life afterwards, AC friends are
probably more use.
Terry
Doug Wedel
> "reading" others / accurately "putting ourselves in their place", many
> (especially older) autistics have a significant sense of "sympathy" /
> feeling for another person in distress (once they are aware of the
> situation).
> There is also the point that, although we may have difficulties in
> offering *emotional* comfort - knowing what to say / do which will
> produce a positive emotional response in another - it is not uncommon
> for an AC to try to think of / do *practical* things which will help
> to alleviate / resolve the problem. - Unfortunately to the general
> population trying to do something *useful* is not seen as being as
> "supportive" as offering sympathetic words.
> One could say that, following a bereavement for example - at the time
> you need the support of NT friends, but for making the practical
> arrangements and getting on with your life afterwards, AC friends are
> probably more use.
Very interesting distinctions--as long as you're not implying that ACs make
good undertakers ;-)
Alun Jones
> I am going to be rude now. I have heard a lot of crap from some people
>in this group. Wouldn't it just be terrible if Boris' son had been born
>without autism? Wouldn't it have been terrible if you had been born without
>autism? Ugh.
While we're rewriting each other's words, how about I rewrite your two
questions:
Wouldn't it just be terrible if someone else had been born to Boris, instead
of his son?
Wouldn't it just be terrible if someone else had been born in your place?
I agonised for weeks before even starting to take a vitamin supplement that
was supposed to offer some help to autistics, because I didn't want to lose
much of that which makes me, me. When you advocate curing autism, you see it
as the relief of suffering - and in many ways, it would be. However, if
applied to people living with autism today, what would it do to them?
There's a Star Trek episode I remember, that curiously touched on this sort of
issue (though it also wove them in with homosexuality) - the Enterprise was
visiting a planet where the occupants were hermaphroditic / asexual. Even
here, Ryker managed to find a woman interested in having sex with him. The
woman, of course, was considered by her species to be 'disabled', because she
had a definite gender - they took it so far as to consider her a criminal who
needed restorative 'therapy' to turn her into a 'normal' citizen.
Prior to her arrest, of course, the woman expressed how much of herself she
feared losing; after her arrest and conversion, of course, she was happy with
who she was now, comfortably asexual, and not troubled by any of the
gender-based disturbances that had previously plagued her life (but which she
had previously expressed interest in).
Even if there is a cure for autism, it will not merely cure autism and leave
everything else in place. It will remove a way of thinking that some of us
prize dearly - one or two of us even use it to advance over NTs in our work.
It will remove a way of looking at things that gives us a unique sense of
humour, one that is often appreciated by NTs, yet not achieved so easily by
them. There are many valuable traits that come along with the bad traits of
autism; cure autism, and you dismiss the good along with the bad.
>Reminds me of people who can't hear and feel that medical
>research to help or even cure them would insult their pride at overcoming a
>difficulty they have. If they found out that they were going blind, or that
>their child was going to be born blind would they be as worried that medical
>science might find treatments or a cure for that? Or would they be proud
>that they would have something else that would make them "special"?
Do you believe that these people are wrong to want to stay as they are? What
about a Jehovah's Witness who refuses a blood transfusion? Do we not have the
right to say "your suggested cure is, to me, a removal of some part of who I
am - it proposes killing a part of my identity and replacing it with something
new"?
If a cure for autism were announced tomorrow, I can't say that I wouldn't take
it; but I also can't say that I would. A hypothetical "just the bad stuff"
cure might be nice to think about, but a real cure for autism would winkle out
the good that comes with the disorder. Now, of course, I can speak about this
comfortably because I'm seriously highly-functioning. But others, with lower
levels of function, are here in this newsgroup saying the same thing.
If you have a small child diagnosed with autism, I'm not going to tell you you
don't have the right to seek and institute a cure - but if you open up your
"cure autism" hospital, don't necessarily expect that everyone with autism
wants to beat on your door.
>If autism were eliminated, it
>would be a boon to mankind. If it had been before I was born, I would have
>still been born. I would have been a different person, all right.
Then you wouldn't have been born. Someone else would have. Maybe someone
else with better manners, who didn't call those who disagree with him "you
lamers".
Alun.
~~~~
sggaB the Slug
wrote:
> the good that comes with the disorder. Now, of course, I can speak about this
> comfortably because I'm seriously highly-functioning. But others, with lower
> levels of function, are here in this newsgroup saying the same thing.
Indeed, I've seen both curebie and "don't cure me" views espoused by
people of all so-called levels of functioning. The difference seems to be
attitude, not ability. (And I've rarely seen anyone who wouldn't want
certain difficulties alleviated, but I've seen some who acknowledge that
alleviating difficulties is not as straightforward as it sounds.)
sggaB the Slug
wrote:
> I agonised for weeks before even starting to take a vitamin supplement that
> was supposed to offer some help to autistics, because I didn't want to lose
> much of that which makes me, me. When you advocate curing autism, you see it
> as the relief of suffering - and in many ways, it would be. However, if
> applied to people living with autism today, what would it do to them?
By the way, with things like supplements and diet changes, when they do
work, what they seem to do is make it easier for an autistic person to do
certain things, not to cure autism.
But there are balances, of course. If I wear glasses that improve my
visual perception, it *does* affect my ability to think, and not always in
a positive way.
> There's a Star Trek episode I remember, that curiously touched on this sort
> of
> issue (though it also wove them in with homosexuality) - the Enterprise was
> visiting a planet where the occupants were hermaphroditic / asexual. Even
> here, Ryker managed to find a woman interested in having sex with him. The
> woman, of course, was considered by her species to be 'disabled', because she
> had a definite gender - they took it so far as to consider her a criminal who
> needed restorative 'therapy' to turn her into a 'normal' citizen.
I remember that episode. She was not only considered 'disabled', but
'defective'. And after she was 'cured', she sounded brainwashed, not
happy. (She sounded much like I did after 6 months with a psychologist
who convinced me to not only state that I had been 'schizophrenic', but
that he had helped me 'recover', and that he (and Clozaril) was the only
reason I wasn't in an institution.)
Hylander
> admired or pitied don't really mean that. Usually they are exactly the type
> of people who want to be admired because they "don't want to be pitied", and
> pitied because they aren't admired more. If autism were eliminated, it
> would be a boon to mankind. If it had been before I was born, I would have
> still been born. I would have been a different person, all right. I would
> have been born HEALTHIER, with a far greater chance to lead a life that was
> HAPPIER. Any lamers out there who can't bother to see that, don't bother to
> try to tell me otherwise. I am tired of hearing just how very, very special
> you are. I don't think you've you've expended far too much energy mimicking
> normal, I think you've wasted it mimicking abnormal. God forbid that you be
> happy, healthy, and normal. Little chance of that happening, though, you
> lucky people. Go, autism! Yay, yay!
I do wish that I could do certain things better, be more
accepted...but I only want acceptance for who I am, not what someone
else thinks I should have been. The problem is that "this is what I
got", if there is a cure for some aspect and I feel I really need it,
then I would surely take it. If there was something to give me more
motor coordination for example. I just don't want anyone to take away
my personality or "gifts" either. If I didn't have these gifts though,
I wouldn't fret that either. Life can change. I know someone very
"normal" who got a bullet lodged in an odd spot in the brain (via
riccochet through an entry wound somewhere totally different),
survived and now has a very different mind and became a totally
different person. My happiness is based on that simple concept "change
what you can", "capitalize on what you can't and everybody else leave
me be unless I come to you with my problem and I think you have the
answer I'm looking for."
I find it a bit illogical for you to get emotional over something you
can't change.
Sue Neale
"Doug Wedel" <doug...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fAfC9.13603$vM1.9...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > I don't like receiving pity, so I don't like to give it out either. I
> > believe in a line from a book I read by Dave Hingsburger: "Pity is
> > prejudice masked as sympathy." A little simplified, maybe, but
definitely
> > in the right direction. (And as I look down, I realize I'm wearing a
> > shirt that says "Piss On Pity" in big bright letters.)
>
> Something in your (colorful) words disturbed me--something in that
> definition. I looked up pity in my American Heritage: "Sympathy and
sorrow
> aroused by the misfortune or suffering of another."
Personaly I find the word pity condescending, I prefer empathy or
compassion. Pity invokes a feeling of "how sad but I am so glad it is not
me" empathy and compassion is more "I can see how hard/difficult it must be"
type words, more of an acknowledgement of the situation and showing you
care.
this could be cultural though,
sue
Sue Neale
he is and who I know and love dearly.
Thank you for articulating it so beautifully
sue
<growi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:top.poster.2....@bigsky.antelope.net...
sggaB the Slug
> Personaly I find the word pity condescending, I prefer empathy or
> compassion. Pity invokes a feeling of "how sad but I am so glad it is not
> me" empathy and compassion is more "I can see how hard/difficult it must be"
> type words, more of an acknowledgement of the situation and showing you
> care.
> this could be cultural though,
I don't know if it's cultural or not, but those are definitely the way I
see the words. Also pity reminds me of someone seeing me as pitiful.
Which is not a complimentary adjective. Pity reminds me of a strange
closed-mouthed smile-and-tilt-the-head thing that people do on Disney
programs when there's a "pitiful" character they have to be charitable to,
and also when they seem to think that it's really sadly beautiful that a
disabled person is out *going to the grocery store* or something.
Reminds me of another article where the author saw some guy having a lot
of fun, and thought of the guy as having a lot of fun, but since the guy
was disabled, another person came by and got that look (I can't describe
it but I've seen a lot of it), and said "You gotta feel sorry for the
guy." Yuck.
Hence the colorful-languaged shirt, which causes more people to go "Hey
that's cool!" than to give me that look (which I see less than other
people do, since I'm not always looking at people's faces, but I do get it
now and then and it's infuriating).
sggaB the Slug
> Personaly I find the word pity condescending, I prefer empathy or
> compassion. Pity invokes a feeling of "how sad but I am so glad it is not
> me" empathy and compassion is more "I can see how hard/difficult it must be"
> type words, more of an acknowledgement of the situation and showing you
> care.
In other words, when applied to certain situations,
Pity = "Oh, you poor, poor, thing. Let me feel sorry for you for awhile,
it must be so awful to be you."
Compassion = "That sucks, I hope things get better." or "Yeah, I've been
there, that's not good." or (in some forms, at least) "That's terrible."
or "Yuck."
(Different words can be used, but there's a definite difference.)
Pity always makes me feel like a baby or an inferior.
Compassion/empathy/whatever makes me feel like an equal.
Sue Neale
"sggaB the Slug" <ama...@autistics.org> wrote in message
> Also pity reminds me of someone seeing me as pitiful.
> Which is not a complimentary adjective. Pity reminds me of a strange
> closed-mouthed smile-and-tilt-the-head thing that people do on Disney
> programs when there's a "pitiful" character they have to be charitable to,
> and also when they seem to think that it's really sadly beautiful that a
> disabled person is out *going to the grocery store* or something.
Agree wholeheartedly.
> Reminds me of another article where the author saw some guy having a lot
> of fun, and thought of the guy as having a lot of fun, but since the guy
> was disabled, another person came by and got that look (I can't describe
> it but I've seen a lot of it), and said "You gotta feel sorry for the
> guy." Yuck.
I know the "look" you mean :-(
>
> Hence the colorful-languaged shirt, which causes more people to go "Hey
> that's cool!" than to give me that look (which I see less than other
> people do, since I'm not always looking at people's faces, but I do get it
> now and then and it's infuriating).
;-)
& don't you love it when people are in a wheelchair and you see someone rush
up and grab the chair to start manuevering them through a doorway without
even asking if they wanted to go inside let alone do they need assistance?
Same thing really isn't it but in a different angle.
Sue
growi...@hotmail.com
> & don't you love it when people are in a wheelchair and you see someone rush
> up and grab the chair to start manuevering them through a doorway without
> even asking if they wanted to go inside let alone do they need assistance?
> Same thing really isn't it but in a different angle.
That was a pet peave of a former friend of mine (we've not kept in
touch since I moved from my hometown) who used a wheelchair. If
someone grabbed his chair, he let you know what he thought of it!
He had no problem if someone ASKED if he wanted help, but he did
not like people to assume they knew what he wanted. I don't blame
him one bit.
--
Joel
sggaB the Slug
> & don't you love it when people are in a wheelchair and you see someone rush
> up and grab the chair to start manuevering them through a doorway without
> even asking if they wanted to go inside let alone do they need assistance?
> Same thing really isn't it but in a different angle.
My "favorite" was when a man who'd just matter-of-factly told someone else
he had about 6 months left to live, gushed at my mother about how terrible
it must be to be me (I don't know if it was the walker or the keyboard,
but I certainly wasn't dying anytime soon), and then acted like everything
I did was very cute. (I was 20, and some combination of bewildered and
annoyed.)
Paul Mitchum
[..]
> That was a pet peave of a former friend of mine (we've not kept in touch
> since I moved from my hometown) who used a wheelchair. If someone grabbed
> his chair, he let you know what he thought of it! He had no problem if
> someone ASKED if he wanted help, but he did not like people to assume they
> knew what he wanted. I don't blame him one bit.
I know someone who uses an electric wheelchair. All she has to do to
move around is push a joystick. It's incredibly obvious that the chair
is motorized. Nevertheless, she tells tales of people getting behind her
and trying to push the wheelchair without asking.
What is this strange behavior about? Why do people lose their mind when
confronted with the fact of someone in a wheelchair?
sggaB the Slug
> What is this strange behavior about? Why do people lose their mind when
> confronted with the fact of someone in a wheelchair?
A friend (who uses a wheelchair) calls it Boy Scout Syndrome.
Horsesenseinc
On a board I frequent, the parents suffer from this. I think alot of parents
actually enjoy the little *pityfests* they have with each other. Have you
ever noticed that pity for parents can become a *disabler* instead of an
*enabler*.
Donna
sggaB the Slug
Catriona R
wrote:
>In article <HwvC9.61$Vb6.61...@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>, Alun Jones
>wrote:
>> There's a Star Trek episode I remember, that curiously touched on this sort
>> of
>> issue (though it also wove them in with homosexuality) - the Enterprise was
>> visiting a planet where the occupants were hermaphroditic / asexual. Even
>> here, Ryker managed to find a woman interested in having sex with him. The
>> woman, of course, was considered by her species to be 'disabled', because she
>> had a definite gender - they took it so far as to consider her a criminal who
>> needed restorative 'therapy' to turn her into a 'normal' citizen.
>
>I remember that episode. She was not only considered 'disabled', but
>'defective'. And after she was 'cured', she sounded brainwashed, not
>happy. (She sounded much like I did after 6 months with a psychologist
>who convinced me to not only state that I had been 'schizophrenic', but
>that he had helped me 'recover', and that he (and Clozaril) was the only
>reason I wasn't in an institution.)
Yeah, that's a perfect example of why I'd never be interested in any
so-called cure for autism.... I'm happy the way I am! OK, I had a bad
time of things a few years back, but the last couple of years have
been really good for me, and I can't see anything about me that would
be better without the autism, really. It'd be nice not to be so
nervous of talking to people any way other than through the internet,
but that's more a confidence thing, and I'm getting much better with
that already.....
--
Catriona (19, AS)
Remove obvious spamblock to reply
Robin May
> I am tired of hearing just how very, very special
> you are. I don't think you've you've expended far too much energy mimicking
> normal, I think you've wasted it mimicking abnormal. God forbid that you be
> happy, healthy, and normal. Little chance of that happening, though, you
> lucky people. Go, autism! Yay, yay!
Cunt.
--
message by Robin May, living the life of an international loverman
My previous .sig died quickly of natural causes.
The sinister truth: I killed it with a frying pan handle.
neral
news:slrnatl27d...@localhost.localdomain...
> I remember that episode. She was not only considered 'disabled', but
> 'defective'. And after she was 'cured', she sounded brainwashed, not
> happy. (She sounded much like I did after 6 months with a psychologist
> who convinced me to not only state that I had been 'schizophrenic', but
> that he had helped me 'recover', and that he (and Clozaril) was the only
> reason I wasn't in an institution.)
FYI, this was Star Trek : The Next Generation episode 5.17 , The Outcast.
The species who erased gender in an artificial way are called the J'naii and
the one who fell for Riker was named Soren.
I felt bad about that episode, because I recognised the refusal of society
that not everyone is like that society wishes how someone should be.