tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-367598192024-03-13T21:39:11.369-07:00Eds autism pageI am an autistic adult. I believe that autism can be seen in better ways, respect can encourage potential in everyone, and there are many ways to celebrate diversity.Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.comBlogger154125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-72613892759542724312008-08-16T15:04:00.000-07:002009-01-08T10:54:17.888-08:00This Blog has Moved<span style="font-family:arial;"><span style="font-size:180%;"><span style="font-size:130%;">This blog has moved. Click here for my new site:<span style="text-decoration: underline;"> <a href="http://diversityrules.typepad.com/">The Standard Review</a></span><br /></span><br /><br /><br /></span><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /></span>Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-61537172062351883102008-08-13T08:38:00.000-07:002008-08-13T10:46:54.125-07:00What Can Be Done with WordsSome people seem to work very hard to express themselves. They try to make what they say count for something important and good and they are not frivolous with their speech. Too many others however seem to take for granted that what they say won't matter and that they can always fix any problem their words create with more words.<br /><br />It seems to me that the frivolous attitude of producing and throwing away so many products has led to the many problems in our environment by polluting the air with factories and more powerful and faster means to transport ourselves along with the waste that pollutes our air and our water by throwing away things when we want bigger and better products.<br /><br />Not only do I think we are misguided by thinking this overproducing and over disposing of things will eventually satisfy our insatiable appetites, but also this attitude of viewing what we must have as needing to be the biggest and brightest along with being so careless with all our other resources carries over into our emotional lives as well. This can and does and change how we view people.<br /><br />We decide whether a persons size, lifestyle, race, and abilities are worthy of our attention which ultimately leads to decisions of whether some people are even worthy of life itself.<br /><br />As we attempt to become bigger, stronger, brighter, shinier and more socially acceptable, what we feel we need to fix about ourselves becomes the catalyst for the discomfort we feel when we see some of those traits or aspects of ourselves in others.<br /><br />It's no wonder that we would become clumsy with our words and use them to hurt people rather than use them to empower people if we can't readily see what those people have to offer that will serve us most effectively in the way the newest and best product on the market does.<br /><br />I wish that more people understood that disabled often means differently abled but even more importantly that value can be found in people by a multitude of ways that our current cultural bias often allows and even encourages us to ignore.<br /><br />The word retard has been used to hurt many autistic people as well as many others with a great deal of value that is thereby conveniently ignored by the use of the label. This word is used to marginalize and devalue who people are.<br /><br />Some even use the word to justify how they abuse people by claiming that people being given this label is what provides others with the right to abuse them.<br /><br />One of Hollywood's newest products is the movie called Tropical Thunder and it stars Ben Stiller.<br /><br />In this movie the ugly slur "retard" is carelessly used in a similar way that it has been used to mistreat many people for a long time.<br /><br />The ASAN (Autistic Self Advocacy Network) is working with the greater disability community to send a message to Hollywood that this movie is not fit for public consumption because it sends a wrong and hurtful message. Also we want to send the message that we and all who understand and accept our message will boycott this movie and any other one that is made like it that reflects these inappropriate values. ASAN is working to distribute this video to as many people as possible.<br /><br />Christschool has once again given of his time and talent to make this great video. The video is a reminder to me that we all have the ability and responsibility to influence peoples lives with our words and we need to learn to respect the vulnerable aspects of humanity and act responsibly with how we use words.<br /><br />To anyone who can and will, I would encourage you to promote and distribute this video and encourage others to as well so that our voices my be better heard.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzgQ3LVNhps"><span><span style="font-size:180%;">The video: R word</span></span></a>Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-88370458477783996422008-08-08T12:08:00.000-07:002008-08-08T19:03:16.960-07:00Intellectually Discouraged<span style="font-size:130%;">The ways that I find the word intellect often being used does not describe much more than arbitrary judgments that has more to do with a cultural or societal bias. I see this judgment often leading to inappropriate and wrongful treatment.<br /><br />There are so many attributes to different types and different sources of intelligence that it is completely irresponsible for any person or group that arrogantly claims to be mainstream to define so many potentially alternative resources as inappropriate and/or invalid.<br /><br />This is Wikipedia's definition of intelligence:<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Intelligence (also called intellect) is an umbrella term used to describe a property of the mind that encompasses many related abilities, such as the capacities to reason, to plan, to solve problems, to think abstractly, to comprehend ideas, to use language, and to learn. There are several ways to define intelligence. In some cases, intelligence may include traits such as creativity, personality, character, knowledge, or wisdom. However, some psychologists prefer not to include these traits in the definition of intelligence.</span><br /><br />I think it's fair to say that the broad range of ways this term is used and the amount of all that is included in this umbrella term is an indication of how much potential damage can be done to any person or group being described as unintelligent.<br /><br />Also, regardless of this broad definition there are still many who make many quick, inappropriate wrongful judgments about what they see as intelligence. Attitudes need to change to really allow for broader acceptance of what people already know but often ignore.<br /><br />On that Wikipedia page there is also this:<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Intelligence comes from the Latin verb "intellegere", which means "to understand". By this rationale, intelligence (as understanding) is arguably different from being "smart" (able to adapt to one's environment), or being "clever" (able to creatively adapt).</span><br /><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">At least two major "consensus" definitions of intelligence have been proposed. First, from Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns, a report of a task force convened by the American Psychological Association in 1995:</span> <span style="font-style: italic;">Individuals differ from one another in their ability to understand complex ideas, to adapt effectively to the environment, to learn from experience, to engage in various forms of reasoning, to overcome obstacles by taking thought. Although these individual differences can be substantial, they are never entirely consistent: a given person’s intellectual performance will vary on different occasions, in different domains, as judged by different criteria. Concepts of "intelligence" are attempts to clarify and organize this complex set of phenomena. Although considerable clarity has been achieved in some areas, no such conceptualization has yet answered all the important questions and none commands universal assent. Indeed, when two dozen prominent theorists were recently asked to define intelligence, they gave two dozen somewhat different definitions.[1]</span>[2]<br /><br />This would explain why the term mental retardation is so ill-defined and such an ineffective method of evaluating a person's strength. What someone can or does adapt to includes too many nebulous factors to attach some one with the label to describe their speed and capability for adapting.<br /><br />AND on that page there is also this:<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">A second definition of intelligence comes from "Mainstream Science on Intelligence", which was signed by 52 intelligence researchers in 1994:</span> <span style="font-style: italic;">A very general mental capability that, among other things, involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience. It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic skill, or test-taking smarts. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capability for comprehending our surroundings-"catching on", "making sense" of things, or "figuring out" what to do.[3]</span><br /><br />The number of ways that these abilities can be discouraged is unlimited. Discouraging of a skill is a pattern just as the promotion of an ability is.<br /><br />People get conditioned to believe that bad behavior is expected from them and this can be a very difficult pattern to break. In order to effectively help people to make this alteration to better behavior along with overall better thinking patterns and more adaptability is partly teaching them to see themselves and their interest as valid and maybe even how and what they think is interesting to others.<br /><br />People also get conditioned to believe that what they have to offer is unworthy of others attention because of the standardized tests they fail. The standardized test aren't just academic. The way that academic test are designed and evaluated are both reflective of the ways that society evaluates people as well as being a method by which society learns to make such evaluations.<br /><br />There is no question that many autistic people as well as many others who are deemed academically, psychologically, and behaviorally unfit are very capable of moving beyond these inappropriate judgments once they understand how unfairly prejudicial they are or they don't hear or listen to them in the first place.<br /><br />However, in order to teach the greater society at large how we who have been unfairly judged as intellectually inferior need to be individually evaluated based for a broader set of standard skills and abilities that may then become what is described as standards. If we the people (rather than just we the government) provide more to people with individual interests and skills that may be unique according to their need that would make us all more independent people with more contributions. We need to stop only promoting what unfair judges see as being our shiniest and best.<br /><br />It's not necessary to conform in ways that prevent others who have traveled along similar paths to be excluded just because our particular abilities and circumstances have allowed us to "pass" as valid rather than invalid. Individual self promoting conformist were who excluded us. Some types of overcoming promote the sale of what no one can afford to give up.<br /><br />From this article<a href="http://http//www.post-gazette.com/lifestyle/20030420dixmont2.asp"> A mental hospital's breakdown</a> I found this paragraph:<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">In the 1940s and 1950s, mental hospitals around the country began using electroshock therapy to dull the intellects of the patients and quiet the wards of mental hospitals. Doctors also began using experimental prefrontal lobotomies, the surgical removal of a frontal lobe of the brain, to try to cure mental illness.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-size:130%;">Is it any wonder that these hospitals would also use what they call chemical restraint in the form of pharmaceutical medicines for doing nothing more than making those whom they already see as weak even weaker and more manageable. They don't need no stinking research to peddle their wares or force consumption of them.</span><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><br />Here is a part of an article called <a href="https://people.creighton.edu/%7Eidc24708/Genes/Eugenics/History%20of%20Eugenics.htm">The History of Eugenics in<br />the United States</a><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Eugenicists believed genetics were the cause of problems for the human gene pool. Eugenics stated that society already had paid enough to support these degenerates and the use of sterilization would save money. The eugenicists used quantitative facts to produce scientific evidence. They believed that charity and welfare only treated the symptoms, eugenic sought to eliminate the disease. The following traits were seen as degenerative to the human gene pool to which the eugenicists were determined to eliminate: poverty, feeble-mindedness-including manic depression, schizophrenia, alcoholism, rebelliousness, criminality, nomadness, prostitution.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;"><br />They believed that charity and welfare only treated the symptoms, eugenic sought to eliminate the disease.</span><br /><br />If the pitiful type of charity and welfare that is most widely used in the U.S. is the only alternative to elimination of all these behaviors/problems through eugenics, I think it's time to start being creative and finding some other alternatives.<br /><br />Poverty stricken nomads??!! If that's how a group of people in another country were seen, some people may feel less empathetic about their lives being lost in a war. If you think such wars that are fought on foreign soil that are promoted with such attitudes won't affect your home, you might want to reconsider how strong you really are.<br /><br />I've heard it said that the average American is three paychecks away from poverty. If government sponsored banks buy enough houses during a mortgage crisis, there may eventually be a larger population of nomads including people that now live in your neighborhood.</span><span style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span><br /><span style="font-size:130%;">If we don't find more neutral ways to define peoples abilities and skills, all skills and abilities that are considered superior or inferior will ultimately be overly scrutinized and unfairly judged.<br /><br />Until society is willing to put into place a system of evaluation that no longer creates the illusion of scarcity of resources and begins to make more of an effort to provide people with equal opportunities by providing each person (that doesn't abuse that privilege) according to their need, I think it's completely impractical to expect anything other than unfair cultural bias (officially enforced or otherwise) toward those who are deemed intellectually unfit.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /></span>Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-76435018846190681692008-08-04T07:40:00.000-07:002008-08-04T14:48:41.115-07:00The Justice of TurnaboutThe job of empowering oppressed groups is too often ignored as a practical goal by claiming that the job is too big or that there are too many pathological issues facing each individual person to help them to understand and be responsible for their liberties once they are granted.<br /><br />In this way the liberties of individuals who are a part of an oppressed category are categorically ignored as victims of too big of a problem to solve. This societal illness doesn't just claim the lives of those who are perceived as weak but it prevents those who are considered strong from realizing the aspects of themselves that are considered weak but are actually strengths that few people ever recognize. Oppression serves no one.<br /><br />With very little equality and fairness, there are very few ways to fairly judge anyone. Still people are judged as if there was. Turnabout can't be considered fair play and people can't be accurately evaluated that way until there is a better way of judging what fairness really is.<br /><br />One of the things that I find often occurs within group dynamics, societal reforms, and governmental justice departments is how people attempt to view things from the standpoint of all things being equal as how things are rather than this being the ideal of how they should be. To me this seems to come from the group of viewers seeking to make the ideal of personal responsibility more important than social responsibility because it serves to maintain a system that benefits them. This can and does create more advantages for those who already have them at the expense of those they (the advantaged) find less favorable being given more of the burden.<br /><br />The ways I see this as being a problem is that social responsibilities are often not met because there is too much focusing on the unrealistic and unattainable goal of creating judgmental divisions based on perceived effort, inborn ability, and severity of symptoms. While each person is an individual, to attempt to overly define that for purposes that determine which so-called liberties should be withdrawn from those who have the fewest creates the opposite of justice. This perpetuates a negative cycle.<br /><br />It would be great if everyone could and did act assertively based on how and when they felt assertively against oppression rather than the needing to be careful of the consequences of challenging those with perceived power but that has never been the case with very many people in any environment where I have been. Those who were challenging were usually punished for doing so if their station in life was known to be less influential or found to be that way.<br /><br />Oppressed populations often act in the very ways they are taught as well as how they are understanding themselves as being viewed. This does not mean that they don't have individual wills or are incapable or unreasonably afraid to assert them. The belief that this is the case is one of the biggest contributors to maintaining an already oppressive situation.<br /><br />Many other countries have very few people asserting themselves against oppression at all. In the United States, some have been granted this privilege of doing so (often from an already favorable position) and claim that others who don't assert what they arrogantly refer to as their "right" are less informed and/or are less courageous.<br /><br />Fortunately, we do have people that are strong and willful and who do fight assertively for what prevents the liberties of themselves and others like them with less means to do so. However, that doesn't mean that those who don't challenge the current oppressive system are weaker.<br /><br />Teaching people to be strong needs to include not only teaching them how they are capable of this strength but also what kinds of stereotypes and misinformation has been spread to the general public (often for generations) about the less than favorable category which they find themselves defined as being in and how this affects how they as a group have learned to behave.<br /><br />To claim that someone who is in a category of already oppressed people is strong and another is weak based on how the one considered strong is personally overcoming their plight may serve to encourage others to do the same, but it can also remind some people to believe that they need that extra something that they have been taught that they don't have. Without learning comprehensive steps for how to assert themselves against oppressive forces, the ideal that they should but aren't assertive enough often serves as a reminder of what they have been taught they can't do and this can prevent them from trying.<br /><br />Maintaining the oppressive governing of people has strong and deep roots in how generations of people have learned about who they are and what their worth to society is in relation to others.<br /><br />Turning that around has to involve the ways that society changes their system of justice and their societal norms. Attempting to create equality based solely on individualism can be used to create strife within one oppressed group or between one oppressed group and another oppressed group.<br /><br />Instead these groups need to support each other in ways that create more equality and less strife for everyone. This can't be done at too much abrupt risk to those who are favored without also causing misappropriations of privileges for all.... Instead favoritism for groups and classifications of people need to be better understood for what they have to offer so individuals within those classifications can be evaluated more appropriately.<br /><br />A group that has been oppressed needs to have some solidarity of purpose and learn to work with others who are in the same or similar situations, and we need to stop oppressing our own in the way the favored within our society do. This only perpetuates the oppression and creates a victory for those who oppose us.<br /><br />Every form of government has been infected with the corruption of power. To claim that capitalism has not fallen prey to the same type of corruption as communism is to ignore the so many who are suffering due to how this system is abused. Individual rights and responsibilities can be achieved but not as long as oppressive officials, oppressive laws, and oppressive forms of government are supported.<br /><br />One example that shows me the way those who govern the experiment known as the United States respond to their public in ways that are contrary to equal rights and equal responsibilities are the ways that we maintain our system of warehousing people.<br /><br />In the State within the United States where a large percentage of people were found to be innocent of their crime after they were executed for that crime has also provided the nation with their governor. Now that he is president, I have watched him act in the same corrupt manner.<br /><br />The are an alarming percentage of wrongful executions in the U.S. that are the result of the accused being unable to secure what is considered adequate counsel. What is considered adequate council has been completely misrepresented to the public in similar ways that the nation has also been taught to believe in a nonexistent middle class. The poverty line is drawn to include the majority of residents in this nation of wealth. If adequate counsel can't be secured by the majority of people how can we say that our council does anything other than provide us with the privilege of buying our way out of unfair treatment.<br /><br />How can our justice system evaluate individuals and individual situations when our very laws and justice system are some of the biggest contributors to that nations lack of justice? How can societal norms not also be affected by this level of official miscarriage of justice?<br /><br />The US is reported to warehouse a larger percentage of people than any other nation. Because so many in the United States are not factored into any statistic we also have a lot of people who are in extremely bad situations that may be placed in one of these human warehouses if their conditions become no longer tolerable and they seek better provisions.<br /><br />The freedoms that people within the United States claim to have can only be seen as bought privileges by those who can't afford them.<br /><br />Not affording these so-called rights financially is very similar to not being able to afford them with the freedom to act, speak, and assert oneself in the ways that those who are more favored do.<br /><br />As an autistic person, I have been in many situations where autistic people are not only given less opportunities to assert themselves due to the differences in the ways that we communicate and how that can be misunderstood, but we are also stereotyped as being aggressive and/or violent when we are not at all that way as a group. This mischaracterization often conveniently can and does lead to some of the worst types of unfair judgements.<br /><br />The warehouses that have been defined by the U.S. justice system as correctional institutions have become an extension of how minority races are housed in the worst part of cities and talked about as this being their "place". Autistics along with those who have many neurological disorders, psychiatric and psychological diagnosis's, learning disabilities, and people who are homeless and considered to be unable to care for themselves (which includes people who have never been taught differently or are seen as being unworthy of such teaching) are all being warehoused in mental institutions and the like that have worse conditions than jails.<br /><br />These institutions are considered correctional facilities for many who have committed no crime and pose no threat. These institutions are in no way hospitals other than the fact that they can collect money from Medicare and Medicaid, and they may be required to employ more medical staff. Our nations luxurious conveniences won't stay hidden.<br /><br />My personal philosophy includes seeing turnabout as an unethical means of governing individuals or groups. I also don't think that the phrase "Turnabout is fair play" can be practically used as a method of creating justice with individuals until there is a lot more fairness for how groups or categories of people are treated.<br /><br />Revised and edited at 5:45 P.M. Eastern Standard U.S. time Monday 8/7/'08Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-31647580537187497012008-07-31T13:11:00.000-07:002008-07-31T13:37:13.987-07:00The Sweet Smell of Creativity<span style="font-size:130%;">All that is considered organic can and does emit gases. :] Some of those gases are more pleasant smelling than others but they all provide proof of activity. Even what begins to die, in some ways, creates new activity that we can recognize by it's scent.<br /><br />The thing is that we all must contend with the activity in our environment. The activity that gives us the most joy as well as most aggravation can come from the other humans in our environment. No matter how much we may try to avoid certain people or certain aspects of how some people behave, our attempts at trying to escape the patterns that make us uncomfortable often carve a path directly to what we were hoping it was possible to ignore. This can create a new beginning for those who are in search of one.<br /><br />The efforts made to protect a piece of wood with paint or stain is similar to the glazing and preservation of a piece of clay. This application does not protect the life of these things but rather it stops their life and becomes a representation of a life that once was. This memorable representation may last longer but it is no longer pliable to the elements of its environment.<br /><br />People on the other hand are not only meant to be the representation of a memory that we want to keep alive but we are meant to act independently as well as respond to our environment. Doing nothing more with how we treat a living person than attempting to preserve their memory of what we wish them to be is not only futile but it creates fragile situations with breakage that can cause terrible consequences.<br /><br />I think it's natural for someone whose life is chaotic (no matter how it got that way) to attempt to create structure where ever they can. If this structure can create a path of allowing for more encouraging and more creativity then I think that it is a very useful tool. Even requesting and encouraging people to respond in predictable ways with you specifically that provide boundaries for everyone involved can be a very productive and useful tool for encouraging opportunity and growth.<br /><br />If instead this attempt at predictability is used to stifle or prevent growth by someone who has perceived power or a stifling method of oppression over someone else, then this will do nothing more than create rigidity and frustration for everyone involved.<br /><br />Not many autistics (anymore than anyone else) probably want or need to be seen as weak or immature based on the environment we do best in. The structure in our lives can define the best ways that we can do things without needing to have some arbitrary and demeaning adjective that defines who we are as people.<br /><br />Stifling growth is the opposite of providing structure. Instead, it makes sense to define the boundaries that will encourage creativity, responsibility, and the kind of maturity that allows for autistics and everyone else to provide for others in the best way we can.<br /><br />When other people whose lives are more chaotic (which may include inner turmoil from undefined sources) attempt to create what they see as structure, they may have a confused view of what real structure (or the kind of structure that promotes creativity and growth) looks like. When people are feeling unnecessarily and overwhelmingly controlled by their circumstances they may focus their dissatisfaction and the disillusionment that accompanies it toward the entity they have chosen to view as the source of happiness or lack of it.<br /><br />Goals then get set in rigid ways and the people who set them as well as the people expected to reach them can break under the pressure.<br /><br />Everyone needs to be provided with ways to experience the fresh renewing scents that accompany structured and supported growth. Sometimes children are born without the attributes we may have hoped for or they don't achieve the goals we set for them in the way or the time that we had hoped. People come into <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">everyones</span> life like that at all ages. When this happens, it may be time to redefine the sweet smell of success as being more about being satisfied and happy with the achievements that we and others actually can and do make toward what we ourselves think is important instead of just depending on the attainment and achievement of unrealistic and unnecessary goals that society defines for us as our primary source of all that we call good and pleasant.<br /><br /></span>Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-80077560189217398412008-07-23T10:30:00.000-07:002008-07-23T11:07:39.652-07:00ShockingAs I have learned about the recent statements made by<a href="http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/895549/michael_savages_autism_remarks_.html"> shock jock Michael Savage about autism</a>, I have been thinking about how shock jocks have evolved over the past 30 years and what their appeal has been with their audience.<br /><br />Growing up near Washington DC and having my first FM radio station choices as being WASH and DC 101, I must admit that DC 101 had more appeal to most teenagers I knew at the time because WASH was pretty boring (soft rock just isn't rock....it just isn't).<br /><br />Howard Stern gained notoriety as the morning DJ at DC 101 during the mid-to late 1970s. The station was also home to Don Imus at around the same time. Howard Stern left his post and made room for The Grease Man who was every bit as shocking as Howard though his humor added a touch of subtlety to his crudeness.<br /><br />All three of these men have been fired from jobs for going too far with who they insulted and how. I don't think any of them were what most would consider tame 30 years ago, but certainly today the tolerance level described as "too far" is higher than it was then and more gets tolerated.<br /><br />In order to maintain their audience, I think it was necessary to continually strive to go a little further with their insults of any and all types of people they saw as vulnerable easy targets.<br /><br />I just learned about who Michael Savage was this past week when he made his outrageous insulting comments about autistics, their parents, and several other groups.<br /><br />My best guess is that Michael felt that his audience may originally feel some discomfort about his statements but agreed that there was enough validity in what he was saying to be accepting of his typically rude and crude nature.<br /><br />After all, his audience expects to be shocked by what he says. Too often I hear people's comments about such speech sounding like, "I agree he went too far and how he said it was wrong, but you have to admit that what he says is all too true." That attitude is all too prevalent in today's society, and I find it very upsetting.<br /><br />I see Rush Limbaugh as having the same hold on his audience as Savage does on his. It seems to me to be a type of guilty pleasure that accompanies an all too cavalier attitude toward very serious issues that are seen as "all too true" when really they are seen this way only because of the spin that they are described with.<br /><br />This is my message to Savage about his comments concerning autism:<br /><br />Mr. Savage,<br /><br />Your insensitive, outrageous, and absurd insults about autistics and our families have angered many in the autistic community.<br /><br />You're speech has been amplified, and you're right to it has been protected by the public who have chosen to listen to your show. What you may not have thought of is how many autistics and our friends and family are part of the public that purchases what your sponsor's offer.<br /><br />While you may feel that it is your responsibility as a shock jock to continually find newer and more offensive ways to insult those whom you feel are inferior, you may have underestimated the resilience, strength, and influence these people have.<br /><br />Choosing to find ways to validate your exclusionary, survivalist methods of self gratification and the ways by which you intimidate your listeners into emulating your behavior with attacks on those whom you choose to see as inferior targets before you all get attacked by those you define as superior will never elevate your status on the imaginary ladder that you all have been disillusioned by.<br /><br />While you may see yourself as a defender and promoter of goodwill, I hope you will reflect on the ways you have been disrespectful to the autistic community and find better ways to express yourself in the future.<br /><br />If the sponsors of your show and the public who are consumers of their products and services are not able to discourage you from making further insults, I hope you will at least remember that even you will eventually reach a point where you are unable to meet the unreasonably exclusive standards you attempt to set for others.Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-74206260544748914822008-07-19T14:13:00.000-07:002008-07-19T15:18:00.488-07:00Honorable Mention<span style="font-size:130%;">The methods that are used to categorize people can sometimes be very useful. It can give people a sense of belonging and provide the comfort of knowing that they're not alone. What isn't necessary and what creates problems is when a population of people has their category devalued in ways that can often just as easily be described as different. If different people make typical people uncomfortable, change is less likely.<br /><br />Valuing difference threatens some people because what they themselves do and who they are that is more typical would also then have to be seen by them and others to be less valuable. This difference that threatens them is often really their own and they are caught up in a value system that is (at least for the moment) providing them with confidence and reassurance (however false it may be).<br /><br />This unnecessary method of exclusion and oppression is very much a method that affects autistics. We are not uniquely excluded from a system that judges others fairly. In fact quite the contrary is true. I don't think any human who is in some way different than what is considered typical is not marginalized in some ways by our differences.<br /><br />When the aspects of our difference gets targeted as what can and must be eliminated these unrealistic value judgments serve as justification for punishment. All human traits are present in every person, or they are potentially present. Therefore, trying to eliminate or fix what you can't completely define puts everyone at risk of being unfairly judged.<br /><br />Sometimes I hear people who are advocating for autistic people describing our place in society as what I would call that of being worthy of honorable mention. I hear this being said in ways that to me sound like saying something that gives the impression that low functioning autistics can be pitied and made to be tolerable and high functioning people need to be responsible for how they act in ways that society sees as inappropriate (no matter how inappropriate this judgment is).<br /><br />This is not reserved for autistics at all but this screwed up value system often gets amplified when it comes to how autistics get treated.<br /><br />I have worked at jobs that paid one dollar a day or even worse. I have been shown a statement of my earnings that said my wages went entirely for my "care" while I was at work. That is not at all like going for on-the-job training. Working at such jobs is what they are training people to remain doing.<br /><br />I've also been taken out of such programs when it was seen that my appearance and social skills didn't accurately describe my competency level (for people who view things in this way) and placed in another program that I couldn't even be trained for because of abilities I don't have. This amplifies their objective to me. Training and accommodations for certain types of people is often rejected because of "the gate" that it is said to open for others with similar difficulties being seen as expensive.<br /><br />Of course the problem is that these people who make such exclusionary judgments waste their resources. The biggest resource they waste is the people they exclude.<br /><br />Another example of wasteful exclusions based on societies wrongful methods of determining value are how the owners of companies collect cooperate welfare (often with very little of their profits that filtering down to their employees) without being shamed by the public while those who often work harder against greater difficulties are provided handouts and shamed by the public by being defined as lazy beggars.<br /><br />Value judgments that determine status can also determine a lot of inappropriate punishments that are considered lawful but are quite unjust. Once a person establishes themselves in society their behavior is often seen quite differently.<br /><br />A cashier at Exxon that skims money from their bank roll may be doing this to feed their family and been convicted without an opportunity to acquire the adequate counsel so that they even have a chance at defending themselves based on their financial means. On the other hand a banker who does something similar for much less honorable reasons may be excused based on their ability to acquire a defense and even if convicted only get sent to a white collar prison/resort.<br /><br />I can't imagine anyone believing that there are many real "entry level jobs" or shoe string business's that provide a real hand-up as I've heard it referred to by many people. Believing in such things is silly. If more such things were available more people would eventually be employed at better jobs after using such jobs as stepping stones. These "opportunities" are designed with an entirely different purpose in mind.<br /><br />If reading this seems depressing, it's not intended that way. My point is that our class system is made up of ridiculous and often harmful judgments that create the marginalization of many minorities and persons with disabilities. This is what I see as the basis for the marginalization of autistics. This can be more easily turned around than many other obstacles.<br /><br />I don't think that it's helpful or wise to tell an autistic person that they can be protected by the law only if they are also seen as deserving pity. It doesn't make much sense either to provide them with a goal of attaining the opposite status of a "normal" acting person that is capable of being taught to behave in socially acceptable and clearly understandable ways either. That doesn't inspire me. Who are we really being asked to protect and who gets hurt as a result of our efforts? What types of values are we being asked to justify and who's benefiting?<br /><br />All such thinking protects is a protection system that is too wrapped up in a warped set of values to see real justice as it ought to be and too irresponsible to change.<br /><br />Teaching people inappropriate values does not prepare them for the "real" world. Too often those who teach such values are simply preparing autistic people to live in a world that "they" have decided is real in order to protect their own (the teacher's) image and status. You can't expect people to accept the "real" image that you define for them if your number one priority isn't building their confidence and self respect. I also believe your respect for them is shown by the respect you show for other autistics.<br /><br />Autistics just like everyone else can and do abuse the privilege of being treated respectfully but also like everyone else we deserve to have the right to ruin our lives without the aid of others.<br /><br />Mentioning people as valid vs. invalid based on how they are configured honors no one.<br /><br />I also don't think that anyone benefits from dividing people of any configuration by seeing part of that population as being in need of pity and reform. Most people who receive more essential things like respect and encouragement never need these things. What support we do need is a natural extension of the respect and encouragement we are shown.</span>Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-62399246586918353972008-07-14T10:26:00.000-07:002008-07-14T11:00:22.276-07:00Human DignityI don't believe that anyone is born without a healthy way of seeing ourselves and all others as having intrinsic worthiness. Hanging upside down and nude in a room full of people and getting smacked on your rear may not be the best way to start things off. For those of us who were circumcised, I'm thinking that wasn't a real confidence builder either.<br /><br />Throughout our lives, how we are treated and how we are taught to view ourselves and others in terms of many unnecessary and unreasonable comparisons of worth shapes our self image. How what we are provided with by nature in the beginning of our lives is nurtured will make a dramatic impact on our abilities and equally or more important our self image by which we express those abilities.<br /><br />Wikipedia defines human dignity as it relates to human rights (which is how I'm referring to it in this post) this way:<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">When this concept is associated with the adjective "human", it is used to signify that all human beings possess intrinsic worthiness and deserve unconditional respect, regardless of age, sex, health status, social or ethnic origin, political ideas, religion, or criminal history. If violated, this can be considered discrimination. In other words, this respect is owed to every individual by the mere fact that he or she is a "member of the human family" (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, Preamble). This intrinsic worthiness is widely recognized by international law as the source of all human rights. In this respect, both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) of 1966 affirm that human rights “derive from the inherent dignity of the human person”.</span><br /><br />There are few things that I believe more strongly than the human rights that “derive from the inherent dignity of the human person” of everyone (and especially autistic people) is too often discouraged and that there is a fundamental and very needed change for how all (and especially autistic people) are seen that will best create and provide for the respect of our human rights.<br /><br />I have not seen or experienced autistic people being mistreated in less than extreme ways and extreme changes are needed. Watered down neutral views toward extreme violations of human rights is a sharp sword that people too often fall on.<br /><br />I believe that many societal views of human worth are too often based on what someone can provide in the way of financial support, by way of social and networking skills, and by way of breeding stock. When someone is thought of as not being a good provider in these areas or not likely to be able to gain a lot of ability in these areas, they are more likely to be provided with fewer human rights.<br /><br />If autistics fall into any or all of these categories (as some of us do) the view of our value is lessened and how we are then treated follows. First of all, fewer people need to be seen this way because too much of too many peoples potential is being wasted. Also, this system that devalues the view of peoples worth needs to change for every ones sake. We all deserve better.<br /><br />When people are placed in poor housing and human warehouses, human dignity is the most valuable resource and the most difficult to attain. Financial means, education, and training can have a big effect on turning this problem around but not until people change their attitudes about people who are caught up in the cycle.<br /><br />It seems to me that sometimes people look at others with what are considered the fewest tangible resources as victims of their own ignorance. It's too often thought that such people have so many personal issues that they can't be accessed on a personal level by others.<br /><br />I'm not saying that such a view is not based in any kind of reality . I think that the number of relationship dynamics that divide people that have resources from others who don't would naturally seem overwhelming to both groups. What I am saying is that there is a cyclic dynamic involved that isn't necessary. Whatever combination of struggles someone has had relating to both internal conflict and unreasonable circumstances has a multitude of layers of what they have become that makes the judgment by others as to why someone is where they are to be impractical, silly, and often mean.<br /><br />When society starts seeing populations of people as lacking intrinsic value and being disposable, every human trait is devalued and all humans with more resources along with others with less are devalued.<br /><br />I think the view that resources of caring and providing human dignity for others being limited is the most limiting view of all. Re-creating self respect, providing, and securing more people with human dignity can solve many problems associated with all people lacking many other resources.Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-54813595207444128532008-07-10T11:37:00.000-07:002008-07-10T12:25:21.290-07:00Behavioral Standards and MysteriesSometimes what or who I see is no more mysterious than the mysteriously based way I choose how to look at it or them.<br /><br />If I need my what to be a piece of furniture like a couch or a chair I don't want it to move. When I go to sit down, I want things to be just the way I have known them to be. I don't want to take a lot of time to research all the aspects of a chair and how it can be creatively influenced. I want it to be a functional staple in my environment that I can depend on.<br /><br />My particular sensory issues that contribute to my directional deficits often have me reverting back to something or somewhere that I know very well. As far as locations, I can get lost very easily even in places that are familiar to me. I can become easily distracted by subtle changes to my environment and then get lost.<br /><br />When I visit the neurologist and am tested for knowing which is my right hand and which is my left, if I'm stressed I sometimes have to look. (My wife and I have matching wedding ring tattoos on our left hand so that's how I check).<br /><br />While it may seem to the casual observer that I am obsessive about predictability, it's actually knowing where to find things that allows me to be creative. When I misplace my structural cues or others move them, I'm less likely to find a creative means for defining and therefore influencing my circumstances.<br /><br />While I leave the critical evaluation of the specific formal use of ABA treatments to those who have studied all the facts about such programs, I am in a position to critique how autistic behaviors are generally misinterpreted and how that leads to mistreatment in formal as well as informal settings.<br /><br />The ways that I have seen and experienced this in more formal settings has been worse than many of the informal settings because in formal settings behavior adjusters are given a license to abuse and even kill. The lack of formality and the license that it provides can at least provide the opportunity for such things to be seen as illegal.<br /><br />My experience with this license has shown itself to not have many limitations and I have seen the extremes of its uses. It's not difficult for me to imagine the kinds of abuses that are reported about the practitioners of what is specifically called ABA therapy.<br /><br />Sometimes I find the ways that people judge the methods an autistic person uses to determine or seek more structure in their environment as being manipulative, demanding, or selfish when it's not factored in why that person may need the structure they seek more than someone else that is more suited to what is typical.<br /><br />If autistic people weren't individuals with individual circumstances that (like everyone) made inappropriate and unjust choices, then we wouldn't be human.<br /><br />My point is that the key to working to be more inclusive of people who may choose different and sometimes even inappropriate ways to get their environmental needs met needs to start with understanding what their needs are and then finding out if there can be accommodations or exchanges made to provide for those needs. Trying to change reactions (no matter how amplified) to unnecessary stimulus is disruptive at best.<br /><br />I think it's also important to remember that once someone who has different needs does have them provided for they may and often are very motivated to provide more of what they have to offer to others. Especially, when this is a very new and liberating experience for them. When motivation is judged prematurely and in overly strict ways, many possibilities for positive change are stifled.<br /><br />Behavior analysts (professional or otherwise) need to look at more than someones reaction to any given set of circumstances that actually could just be illiminated. They need to look at what may be accomplished by removing the stimulus. Otherwise, they are likely to contribute to (or even set off) a reactionary cycle that they are the ones that need to be responsible for preventing.<br /><br />Anyone claiming to be using one particular set of standardized tests to judge behavior must be very careful to also consider how the negative influences they have been exposed to of cultural bias can negatively influence their judgment.<br /><br />If behavior is automatically seen as aberrant and defiant without further consideration, the analyzer and the analyzed are given few ways to creatively move forward.<br /><br />In this case I'm saying with much power comes much responsibility. Therefore, if someone's status in life has been elevated to the position of setting standard rules for what behavior "should" be, judging peoples behavior based on those standards, and they are then given the license to influence the behavior of those they evaluate, their views and methods must be critiqued and challenged to prevent them from abusing their authority.<br /><br />As society becomes more sophisticated with how weapons and the people who use them are designed, I think it becomes even more important to find the most peaceful and humane means of teaching and influencing people who will ultimately determine our future.Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-86652307838122142612008-07-08T06:40:00.000-07:002008-07-08T12:33:13.616-07:00Interactive LearningAs a person develops, the need to be open and aware of our surroundings never lessens. Awareness is expressed in many ways by many different people. The awareness of interactive learning can and should be exciting in a positive way.<br /><br />Sometimes I hear people speak about growing up in what I see are terribly overly strict terms. Even more so than when they speak of growing scholastically, the growth in terms of social skills is expected by a certain date and time. Maturing physically and based on the number of years that someone is alive, we decide what that person should know and therefore how they should act. This experience can be counterproductive to the teacher of these skills as well as the student when the goal becomes more important than the means.<br /><br />Autistic people are highly prone to being victims of abuse.<br /><br />Sometimes I hear the reason for these regulations and strict methods of teaching people to develop what they consider civilized behaviors justified by lack of time and or money that is required to provide for each grower/learner in a way that is directly according to his or her need. So they need to be uncivilized in how they teach it for expediency sake???? twisted....<br /><br />This becomes a mind numbing growth retarding cycle when life is seen and taught as a cruel, dog eat dog, social Darwinist, demand for attitudes that offend in order to defend ones self. This stifles everyone's awareness and demands that we always be on stage (so to speak) and never vulnerable enough to understand what we see.<br /><br />While there are many factors to consider with each person due to heredity, altering experiences and injuries, and the aspects of someone's psychosocial development, how we view learners, treat them, and allow them to learn about us and their other surroundings will make a difference in how their awareness develops. A teacher's ego can only be displayed for so long until they have to recharge. In other words, when your shields are up you may be protected from others, but you're also protected from what you need....which includes being aware of how your abuse of others hurts them as well as yourself.<br /><br />Maybe the fluttering of butterfly wings changing the atmosphere on the other side of the globe is somewhat of an extreme example of how we all interact with our environment in ways that affect it. However, too often we choose combative reactionary modes of defense toward otherwise ethically neutral behaviors that we just don't understand. Mis characterizing behaviors as bad won't make them better.<br /><br />Can a learners behavior indicate they are asking to get attention? I would say so. If they are starved for attention, I would ask myself why. Sometimes older teaching people and people who are considered more mature are just more skillful in their methods of manipulation. What confuses me though is if someone is attempting to gain something by manipulative methods, wouldn't being more skillful at that make them actually less mature?<br /><br />What people want when they abuse someone who is more vulnerable is something they can't have because they can't see the person they're abusing. Not really. They're not aware of their victim's feelings in ways that can benefit them. This shields them from seeing what is good about themselves too. Basically what I'm saying is they can't receive what they are trying to steal. It's an illusion.<br /><br />You can't teach appropriate behavior by behaving inappropriately. You can't bring about awareness in others without being aware. They may be able to see what you're doing but a teachers abuse is always a part of the process of shutting down and aggravating everyone's emotions.<br /><br />There is no lack of resources when it comes to the awareness that can create positive change. When people use and abuse others to temporarily and conveniently hide what they themselves are not willing to learn....we all pay for their convenience.Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-1825302430430338442008-07-04T08:26:00.000-07:002008-07-05T06:30:52.750-07:00Ethical GoverningI have said before and still believe that challenging policy and social rules is a way that Democratic citizenship can best be expressed. At the very least I would say that the United States as it is seen as the most powerful nation on earth must be much more responsible as the one who holds that position than it is. Whether it has done better than other nations with similar responsibility is not so much a factor to consider for me as the fact that aspects of how things are done in the United States need to be continually inspected, investigated, and challenged if necessary.<br /><br />As a part of the autistic online community, I feel some obligation to others within the community to share some personal aspects about myself as to what qualifies me and my judgment as something that others need to listen to as valid. I may however be less forthcoming about such things.<br /><br />Sometimes I should my way out of doing that. What I mean by that is that I don't think that I or anyone should have to adhere to all the unnecessary and sometimes ridiculous social mores that afford us the privilege of having our expressions validated. Without an expression being acknowledged or recognized as valid it makes no impact on anyone else's situation. Being constantly reminded that your expressions aren't valid often discourages people from exploring the impact they can have. This is a waste that no society can afford.<br /><br />I know there may be some rules of convention that everyone must adhere to in order to be entitled to have their voice heard and I know I also don't believe that anyone who achieves this status that provides them a better platform from which to speak should be deprived of what anyone else with less unfairly judged characteristics is afforded. However, I am mainly an advocate for learning from what is expressed by anyone no matter the typical methods that are more traditionally used to evaluate whether any person is seen as worthy of having their expressions recognized as valuable.<br /><br />As I hope I have made it clear in my blog posts, I have no formal education, specialized knowledge, nor do I hold any position that would typically afford me the privilege of having what I say seen as valid. I maintain the position that there are many valid expressions that are not regarded as such because of typical standards. I would like to see that change.<br /><br />I do not believe that any government is rightfully in the position of issuing human rights and then deciding weather those rights will be denied by them. Instead I believe that those who were appointed or elected to positions of government are there to protect the rights of its citizens based on what they (the citizens) see is ethical. The US government contradicts the very documents they claim are the foundations for how they are to govern when they deny citizens ethical treatment and force unethical treatment upon their own people as well as people in other countries.<br /><br />Beyond human rights of basic survival, the efforts that are made to discourage people from our right to earn more rights based on the responsibility we take is a way to suppress our voice and therefore our rights as people. Too many provisions for people in need can't accurately be described as the biggest part of the problem until people with less means can see their opportunities coming from responsible parties that truly want to see them succeed more than they wish to maintain and protect their bigoted view that oppressed populations choose their fate and aren't capable and/or worthy of success. At least it would be helpful if people didn't see their own government working to show our failures as what defines us as people.<br /><br />I see the demand for having our severity of symptoms and hardship described constantly as a badge of being in the most need and being the most deserving of aid used as a tool to keep oppressed people from desiring to succeed or expressing their ability and talent. That is really twisted. (twisted....that's my new word. :) )<br /><br />This also turns us against others who are in similar need of provisions as we are. Division can be a powerful means of oppression.<br /><br />One of the rights that I feel is a human right that is protected within the Constitution of the United States is the right to free speech. A closer adherence to enforcing laws that protect that right would in turn bring about many other ethical changes that are needed as well. I don't believe anyone has that right until everyone does. Otherwise it's not a right but a privilege that is royally protected by and for royals. There are certain social standards of hierarchy that would at this point only allow for the votes of our nation's most prominent citizens.<br /><br />I don't see a very broad group of people being asked to express how they feel about the policies in the United States that govern how they live, what is expected of them, and what if anything they can expect in terms of preventing their own government from violating their basic human rights. When too many people who really do care about the welfare of all others and are afforded the privilege of making decisions about the welfare of everyone are also under the mistaken impression that most peoples views actually are being expressed and factored into the decisions that govern their lives, dangerous exclusive decision making habits are formed. Just as fewer voices can take a negative path, encouraging more can have a positive one.<br /><br /><br />I don't see the provision of civil liberties as a type of treatment that is needing to begin at home (home being defined as the U.S.). If people don't stay at home then they don't really have one do they? While agencies like the United Nations have often not acted in ethical ways, neither have many governments who had the power to change things and didn't. World agencies don't need to dissolve borders in order to make and enforce policies that protect human rights and no nation or agency should enforce policies on others who just think differently. How overly idealistic civil liberties may seem can't be seen as a way to discard our need to try and change things for the better in the ways that we actually can.<br /><br />Few are regarded as a contributing members of American society. How could a nation rise to this level of power and not regard the majority of its citizens as contributing to its success? I would say that this rise to power has often been rather ruthless and that needs to change for the very survival of our nation.<br /><br />The only people who truly have rights to the land we live on are Native Americans or Indians. Stealing something doesn't make it yours. It just makes it something you have temporary control of. Many nationalities of people have come to the United States and contributed with little or no regard for their human rights. Many were forcibly brought here. Their lack of being acknowledged as valued members of this society has often afforded them little or no voice. No one in positions of power and governmental authority has been provided their position by any type of fair means that affords them the right to deny these people that voice.<br /><br />I think it's clear to most people by now that our method of financial exchange does not allow for financial means to trickle down to the masses. What too often does trickle down are the attitudes of our most powerful and influential leaders that don't serve us but instead serve those leaders.<br /><br />I believe that the laws that are written in the Constitution of the United States of America do provide for the ethical treatment of all people in this country. I believe in the people that are here. I believe that if the masses of people are allowed to vote on policies that there will be a positive change that allows for and encourages the responsibility that provides for all peoples well being.<br /><br />Of course those who are defined as having superior intelligence and are seen as being more valuable contributing members of society do not validate the right for us all to be treated in more ethically and humane ways. The questions I have are: Why would anyone or any attribute that anyone has be needed to validate anyones ethical treatment. Why must ethical treatment be designated to any person or group of people?<br /><br />I advocate for anyone who is fighting for better and more ethical and humane treatment of all people to be allowed to express this view and for it to be recognized.<br /><br />I am expressing my own personal views here and they are not meant to reflect the views of anyone else.<br /><br />I advocate for the rights of unfairly oppressed populations to be allowed a voice that provides for not only our human rights and our ethical treatment but also for our opportunity to be responsible for our own lives so that we can succeed or fail based on merit and our willingness rather than unclear and unfair judgments that describe our worth as people.Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-20759511979486486472008-07-02T11:11:00.000-07:002008-07-02T12:56:29.200-07:00Crazy ConsumptionSometimes when I want to get my point across really bad I try to consider what it must be like to say something without who I am getting in the way. Maybe that's not very realistic. There aren't many ways that who anyone is won't speak louder than what they say based on most hierarchical methods people use to evaluate what someone has to offer. Few people seem to feel that there is time to look past their swift and often superficial evaluation of anyone.<br /><br />It often seems that many people choose their sources of information similar to the ways they choose their clothes and the other outward symbols they use to define who they are. Whatever we see or hear that doesn't serve what we can foresee to be our immediate future is often seen as a bad investment.<br /><br />We invest our time and our money in what we see as valuable. When our values get twisted it can prompt us to view some people as being not much more than a product to buy, sell, or trade and too much of how those people ARE valuable can gets lost in how they may translate their thoughts in less typical ways. It seems to me that too much of what we all can learn from gets contained within the minds and thoughts of those people whom too many people never listen to. The unique expression of those thoughts and the development of the thoughts, expressions, and people who have them are too often discouraged.<br /><br />No one is without having original ideas and creative thoughts at any age or in any other ways people are categorized. The belief to the contrary makes a consumer driven society impractical and wasteful of many expressions, and ultimately it makes every evaluating member of that society a disposable product.<br /><br />If all we see ourselves as being nothing more than what we can commercially and politically acquire or manipulate, it can make others with less means of this acquisition or manipulative ability seem less valuable as being someone worthy of us knowing.<br /><br />While 100 years ago there was less congestion and less sophisticated forms of weaponry, I really don't believe that people were any less crazy (as in people choosing inappropriate pathological means for solving problems) or were any less impaired in cognitive ways.<br /><br />In whatever ways technology or sophisticated speech has aided our impaired abilities in these areas, I believe we have also done as much harm with them as well.<br /><br />What seems to be our insatiable appetite for the best of products and services has also made all services of all people a product that can then be what I see as a tool to create wide division between what is worshiped and what is disposable. Following the path of wanting to become someone that is commercially and politically worshiped can also lead people to offering themselves as sacrifices to the development of an unworthy hierarchical view of these gods.<br /><br />When the lights go out a person who's blind may be the most valuable resource to site oriented people because they have had to use resources that we haven't and that are now needed.<br /><br />The senses that some people with these restrictions have developed from having lived life in a very different way is sometimes a valuable resource that others can learn from. The ways that they have had to adapt to a world that was less designed for their capabilities can also aid them in developing other senses that teach them valuable life lessons that they would likely not learn otherwise.<br /><br />These lessons won't have an immediate commercial price tag for those who want to learn them. Instead it can only be valued by the worth that each person places on their own time and efforts, and what they really wish to gain from how they spend those resources.<br /><br />I wish this were the way that all such people with what are described as impairments were initially considered to be useful or that it was at least considered that this may at least be something uniquely valuable about them and what they may have to offer.<br /><br />Unfortunately, I don't believe that's the case often enough. This is not so these people would be classified as more worthy of understanding and respect than average but at this point I see the scales dramatically tilted in the other direction.<br /><br />Angels and receptacles of pity aren't respected either. That's just another method people use to avoid the entire configuration of who people are and what they have to offer without having to confront their maladjusted prejudices of the so-called defects that people have that make them (the viewer/evaluator) uncomfortable.<br /><br />What people experience based on sensing life in different ways can be a valuable resource for the development of everyone's senses that can make us all more sensitive and caring for all life. These views that some so-called impaired people have developed are too often not explored and this can encourage all such others with these impairments to be seen as disposable people.<br /><br />If craziness as it is seen as an impairment is more prevalent today I believe that it has more to do with the campaigns to market crazy healing and promote the careers of crazy healers. This hardly stimulates the economy when so many are left in the path of it's destruction because the ideal is used to make too many harsh and critical judgments that devalue and exclude them.<br /><br />What I see as being the best way to produce better humans is to encourage more humanity within ourselves as that relates to caring about others and to learn to delay our initial commercial and political evaluation of their worth. Our sophistication can best be evaluated based on how we develop the aspects of who we are that are really important. The means we use to encourage better relationship skills and more socially acceptable behaviors (that are often nothing more than how they are defined at any given time and place) need a lot further evaluation as to what our priorities really are. This is a key ingredient to our sanity and our preservation.Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-45077879028236069292008-06-26T12:59:00.000-07:002008-06-26T13:23:24.801-07:00Another View of Behavior ManagementAlthough I am aware that my dissatisfaction with how a computer works is my own personal issue, I sometimes have to remind myself that the computer doesn't have the ability to do something other than what I tell it. I really wish that it could be blamed for being abhorrent, deceptive, and manipulative but of course these behaviors are human.<br /><br />People are always much more complex than computers. We act and think in totally random ways, have a multitude of inconsistencies, and often insist on including others to help with punishing ourselves in whatever ways we ourselves feel we need to be punished. All people are that way to some degree even if they reason in a different way than is considered typical such as may be the case with an autistic person.<br /><br />I don't think that humans are ever more complex than when we choose to hurt others within our own species. Although I don't completely understand it, it seems to have something to do with someone's internal process of protection that gets acted out in a twisted way against those who were more convenient, vulnerable, and accessible rather than against their true enemy. Sometimes it even seems that their enemy is revered in a way that promotes their repeating of that person's behavior.<br /><br />The need to do this seems like the most complicated and detrimental aspect of our humanness.<br /><br />I guess no one who is involved in interpersonal relationships can completely avoid that kind of communal grooming but when it turns into a pattern with harmful and even destructive consequences, I think people need to discourage it (even go so far as to write a blog post about it).<br /><br />If autistic people really were less than human and soulless shells (as it seems we are too often described), I don't believe that we would really bring out strong emotions in others at all. I think it would be quite easy to ignore us and exterminate us.... and I don't see that as being an easy task at all. : )<br /><br />I don't know what it would look like for the majority of people in charge of promoting the best behavior for autistic people if they primarily had our best interests at heart because that isn't what I have seen and experienced.<br /><br />My best way of understanding why someone wants my behavior to change is by looking at which behaviors they choose as the ones they feel need to be changed, what their motivation seems to be when they attempt this, but mainly what seems to me to be what really aggravates them about what I'm doing and why they believe that anyone else would be aggravated by this.<br /><br />The majority of behaviors that people seem to want to change in autistic people are not what is best for us but what makes the people we are directly involved with uncomfortable and maybe even what they are convinced that others will be uncomfortable with. This lack of their comfort is puzzling. : )<br /><br />How ever it may seem that we are not understanding situations that involve other people does not mean that we don't understand the world. Sometimes it means to me that someone's actions are completely contradictory to what I feel would be practical and effective behavior. Not understanding something also does not mean that the responsibility to learn to interact with others needs to be completely ours anymore than it is with anyone else.<br /><br />I don't see how anyone who wants to interact with another person can place the entire responsibility on the person they want interact with and not be willing to have some introspection about how they themselves may be acting that may seem to that person to be impractical, indirect, or contradictory to what they claim is their purpose. To punish someone for what is seen to simply be "their" lack of understanding crosses some serious boundaries for me.<br /><br />So, why do people take such extreme measures to get rid of behaviors that don't look good or are uncomfortable to those around us? What values is this kind of treatment encouraging in anyone? Are those who are receiving this treatment really being spared the kind of pruning and exclusion that the rest of society will ultimately subject us to otherwise or has the means of the objective of this treatment been lost within an unreasonable amount of effort being used to eliminate a problem in a convenient way? Are people choosing that convenience rather than taking the extra time and effort to evaluate their own emotions and objectives to see if they are really doing what is best for everyone?<br /><br />I think some people who take unfair advantage of others can only learn if they are being aided in punishing themselves. Sometimes it seems like this is the only language they understand. Their understanding of life often seems to me to be very shallow and their means for dealing with life seems very temporary and convenient. Their lack of understanding what they see seems to be more of a deficit of compassion rather than of intellect.<br /><br />The shame that results from their cycle of abuse seems to be the primary motivating force for their lives. The only lasting change comes when they are able to look past the flat-isms of their unrealistic beliefs and overly strict performance evaluations that obstruct their view and limit their understanding of the real world.<br /><br />I believe that those of us who are most directly affected by the maladjusted views of these people who have been infected by their personal and often unbearable emotional turmoil need to closely examine the effect their misbehavior has on us as well as on themselves. If they cannot be saved from themselves, we cannot allow them to infect the rest of us.<br /><br />If those who abuse others can't adjust to healthier ways of expressing themselves, and we don't find a way to adjust their behaviors or avoid them, we may all be subjected to the designs of their prisons.Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-91163039511080331622008-06-23T09:08:00.000-07:002008-06-23T12:46:43.317-07:00How Good We Ought to BeAs the organization Autism Speaks continues to use their political and financial muscle to silence the voices of autistic people (as seen <a href="http://autisticbfh.blogspot.com/2008/06/autism-speaks-you-cant-shut-us-up.html">here)</a>, I am reminded of just how misleading their claims to serve autistic people really are.<br /><br />While many people who are seen as having different types of mental impairments are often lumped into the same group for many purposes, at times I've seen people who are primarily diagnosed as having mental illness or learning disabilities being more likely to have their mistreatment justified as punishment for their behavior that is described more in pathological terms as bad or wrong and sometimes those with disorders that are seen to be more neurological in origin will be more pitied for what is seen as their misbehavior.<br /><br />However, once anyone shows themself to be overly able to interact personally with those who need to convieniently keep anyone with substandard behavior at arms length, their behavior automatically gets described in pathological ways and therefore punished accordingly. Some people don't want us to get too close for fear they will see in us too many aspects of themselves.<br /><br />When so many children were seen as having ADD beginning a few decades ago, it was decided that amphetamines and dietary changes would aid in their learning and behavioral problems. In many ways I see this as a gateway to how so many autistics are seen and treated now.<br /><br />Also, in a similar way to those drug and dietary treatments, behaviorism isn't a new way to treat autistics at all. It's now just more isolated, defined, and marketed as being a more humane form of treatment than it was previously.<br /><br />Punishment therapy however has been the primary means of dealing with the entire population of people who are considered mentally impaired (in whatever ways) for a long time. However it sometimes gets sugarcoated, behavioral treatments begin with the negative aspects of what others see in someone rather than who any person really is which one can only see by looking beyond how they are responding to their environment at any given time.<br /><br />Contrary to some popular beliefs, we don't become people only after we have had our behaviors evaluated and adjusted. It seems like some people tend to forget that all people really start out being people when we are born. There aren't any standard methods of any behavior that a child can exhibit that make them more that way.<br /><br />Whatever goals may be achieved by working backwards from the outside in (so to speak) I think we need to discourage any means of attaining behavioral changes that can be terribly abused and justified by defining it as a means of some sort of treatment.<br /><br />Whenever I hear the story of Helen Keller it is usually described in a couple of ways. One way that it is described is by emphasizing what a triumphant and overcoming hero Helen was. The other is by emphasizing what a patient and diligent therapist she had. While both of these women are due this respect, I think they miss the boat entirely when they confine what is important about her story to either one of these descriptions of these people. To me the most important thing about Helen's story that should be emphasized is that people who are seen to have impairments have so much to offer that is often not accepted or understood.<br /><br />The key to understanding people is to keep our humanness first and foremost as the priority for how we should be viewed and therefore worked with. Too often we who are seen as disabled are not at all like people think or we don't become what we want to be and could be because it can be difficult for any oppressed population to break out of a stereotype weather those within that population have impairments beyond societies view of them or not.<br /><br />So the question that I have is: Does society want this population to be empowered? If so, how many methods of discouraging this empowerment that are currently being used are others within the general population willing to accept as part of the problem and how willing are they to work toward changing them?<br /><br />Mentally impaired people are more likely abused than other populations of disabled people. What I am reminded of though, is how few number of incidents of abuse that are carried out against this population are ever reported. If we are ever even listened to (which is rare), we are taught in harsh ways that we should never report these things and how we will be further punished if we do.<br /><br />I often wonder if many people have any idea how good a person must look and how refined their speech must be as a part of this population in order to report how we are mistreated. Of course the other problem is that if we look too good, sound too good, or write too good we are often seen as someone who couldn't possibly know about or be a victim of the kinds of situations that we are reporting.<br /><br />Whether or not abused people breaking out of this cycle is difficult or not isn't really doesn't need to be focused on as the primary issue, as long as there are so few efforts being made by others to correct the problem.<br /><br />The efforts to silence the autistic population such as the ways Autism Speaks is doing are becoming more blatantly abusive and therefore more clear to the general population, and I hope that this kind of awareness will create the campaigns that are really needed to change things.<br /><br />What's the point in claiming that some autistic people can't speak for themselves when so many efforts are made to prevent so many others of us from doing so?<br /><br />We don't come and neat packages. We don't come without pathological problems or even bad attitudes. The next time you simply don't like what an autistic person thinks or says remember how often they may have been ignored, and what they thought didn't matter at all to others. Whenever you see an autistic person whom you think dresses too nice for speaks too well for an autistic person, please remember that often them being seen as autistic in the past may have also meant them being seen as someone who wasn't supposed to look or sound very good and consider whether or not you only want autistics to be seen in negative ways and how your views may affect our future .Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-50590958022676001962008-06-20T05:14:00.000-07:002008-06-20T06:58:20.152-07:00Wherever You GoSorrow and sympathy are necessary parts of the emotional spectrum. When either of them begin to overwhelm and thereby control too many other aspects of our lives they can become diluted as well as delusional and therefore very harmful.<br /><br />Charity serves our humanity more than anything. However, how we define what charity is and then how we express that charity to others is what is really important.<br /><br />So often it seems to me that people begin with the right intentions about how we want to treat people and then somehow we express those intentions in a very different way then we began wanting to. We seem to lose our way.<br /><br />Some hurting is important and even necessary to everyone but so is denial. We have eyelids for a reason. Since we don't have ear lids, humans have found a variety of ways to adapt by tuning out what we can't deal with or don't want to hear.<br /><br />It's difficult to say what another person "should" not be in denial of because no one really knows another person's circumstances or where they are in terms of their emotional development. Still there must then be standards of ethical treatment that discourage the ways someone harmfully treats others as a result of that denial in order to protect what for them has become a safe haven. Once people manipulate or otherwise hurt others in order to protect their own thinking that may have just become misdirected at some point, they are then participating in the cycle of abuse that was most likely originally dealt to them.<br /><br />Sometimes I view someone's artwork and become very saddened and or hurt. I think about the courage that it must take for the artist to experience what they do and then express it in such a bold way. How people express themselves artistically with words or in other ways can make me feel like that also.<br /><br />Experiencing such a painful zone isn't always a choice, and whether it is or not, I often find that people who can experience what seems to me to be so much of one end of the emotional spectrum can also experience the other end just as richly.<br /><br />Too much avoidance doesn't allow for either. Being able to courageously enjoy life comes from the progressive understanding of what ones own choices are and realizing why joy is so important. Otherwise, we get stuck in a state of melodrama that never really takes us (in any kind of real sense) where we want to go.<br /><br />The term neurodiversity to me means encouraging the real and progressive means of looking at and dealing with adversity as well as learning to be accepting of thinking or behaviors that are just different. It's a decision that first comes from understanding your choices and then making the best choices that will help those around you and in turn you yourself to experience life in the best and fullest way.Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-41815176277996143152008-06-14T11:00:00.000-07:002008-06-14T13:18:39.085-07:00Agendas Matter<span style="font-size:130%;">I know that many ways of describing any spectrum can be empowering to everyone who has been otherwise mistreated, wrongly evaluated, and misunderstood. I too often see ways that people counter this view of the autism spectrum with the claim that the inclusion of too many people being described on this spectrum makes things difficult for those who are more autistic being evaluated or treated appropriately. I have experienced the opposite as being true.<br /><br />The best way I can describe this is that from what I've seen, when a treatment is thought of as being needed by people who also need to be sympathized with, the treatment isn't sympathetic at all. It's actually just pathetic at best, but usually it's worse. There can't be too much of an understanding for who people are, and what they may be experiencing to better know how to treat them with respect.<br /><br />The next step after identifying more autistics needs to be to provide more realistic supports for students by being able to better identify how they learn and what they CAN do best. Also, the number of ways that I think the autistic label can be empowering for all autistic people is limitless. Unfortunately, western medicine and the most recognized western belief system that I refer to as "The Church of Modern Psychology" often make sacrificial lambs of anything or anyone they can use OR that stands in the way of what they call progress. Sometimes it's either one of these and sometimes it's both.<br /><br />I don't think that the benefits of any progress can be properly evaluated until or unless people also take a close look at what kind of progress is really being promoted and what wrongs are being justified in what is considered a progressive ideal. It is equally important to look at what ways people may be being abused in order to make what is seen as progress look good.<br /><br />Something that I feel is very important is that while I understand the need for teachers and employers to describe a person based on an evaluation of how well they can perform, I see little if any reason for anyone else to evaluate people this way. I see no need for anyone else to describe anyone as low functioning, especially if you don't also specifically describe what areas they are less and more capable in. The term low functioning too often seems to reflect someone's view that a human being should only be defined by their ability to function within overly strict societal evaluations.<br /><br />This term often seems to imply that a human being is in a static place and won't grow or change (which actually seems worse to me than the way the term retarded was originally meant to describe someone as being). Of course, if this really were the case what else would autistic people need to learn how to do other than learn to tolerate standing in line for the latest medicine or therapy?<br /><br />Here are several examples that I see as other times that more needs to be explored to make better decisions:<br /><br />1) I have many personal reasons to disapprove of how psychiatric medicine is used inappropriately by the pharmaceutical industry. Few positive changes are made to medicines or therapies within a really old and really bad mental health system. This system was never meant to serve patients or consumers. The public outside of that system is who it's designed to serve.<br /><br />However, it bothers me a great deal when someone says that all psychiatry is inappropriate and should be abolished without taking into consideration how the people who are dependent on those medicines would be affected by this abrupt change. Such views actually support the current system rather than encourage positive, effective, and lasting change.<br /><br />If you abolished all psychiatric medicines tomorrow without careful consideration of all the people who are taking these medications and what alternatives will at that point be available to them.... well, I just think lots of careful consideration should be given as to the consequences of such changes.<br /><br />2) I consider taxes on cigarettes in a similar way. While I don't know how many people actually quit smoking due to the cost, I know that those people who are already the most disregarded by society pay the highest price for the higher taxes and price increases. Those who pay the most or are most affected by price increases, have seen how this has directly caused violence and even killings. I think that better ways to discourage cigarette smoking needs to be explored.<br /><br />Again the agenda is disguised to create positive change but that's not what I think it really does.<br /><br />3) I can see how someone who works in a factory may be more concerned with the paycheck they use to eat and to feed their family than about the environmental toxins that their factory also produces along with its products. That doesn't mean that environmental issues need to be ignored, but it does mean for me that people are our most valuable resource and should be considered above everything else.<br /><br />Causes often don't have the best goals and sometimes their goals are really bad.<br /><br />The point I'm wanting to make about more careful consideration as it relates to autistic people is that when it comes to providing the best for autistic people what you try and how you try it needs to come as an addition to first seeing people as people. It's also important to look at the trends of how autistic people are being seen by the treatment and therapy promoters and make sure that this is their top priority. For instance, most institutional behavioral treatments I've seen were not focused on this at all (to say the least).<br /><br />If a label is being used to encourage and promote what's best for autistic people that have similar characteristics or even symptoms (if they must be categorized as such to acquire and maintain supports) then I feel the label is being used for the best purpose. However, when people start adding too many extra symptoms, purposely trying to make those symptoms sound as terrible as possible, and claiming that they are presented this way in the majority of autism cases for the purpose of creating one-size-fits-all programs for medical and behavioral treatments this automatically makes me suspicious of what the real motivations are for these program and treatment providers and their promoters.<br /><br />This is when I think people need to carefully evaluate whether those whom they look to for answers and support for themselves or the autistic people they care for really have their goals focused on what is best for autistic people who are in need of support rather than on another agenda that may just be disguised that way.</span>Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com14tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-13660969332730175622008-06-10T07:27:00.000-07:002008-06-10T07:28:38.211-07:00The Outside of No Where<span style="font-size:130%;">I've heard it said that there are two kinds of people in the world. There are those who believe that there are only two kinds of people in the world and those who believe there are more. The more I think about that statement the more the hardware between my ears starts to rattle and smoke. Meditation and contemplation be damned! There's just no reason for that kind of talk! : /<br /><br />Or what about this phrase: "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones." The way that someone defines what that means is one of the ways that an intelligent person is supposed to be able to find out whether another person is intelligent too. What I have never understood is why someone asking the tester the question, " Why is someone throwing stones inside of a house," makes a person less smart. It seems to me that if the person asking the question won't look at and explore the reasons for what the person taking the test may see as the inappropriateness of asking someone to explain the meaning behind what they see as an inappropriate metaphor (or at least one that the tester can't better explain) as a way to define someone's intelligence, how are they smart enough to judge the intelligence of the person taking the test?<br /><br />Just because children have questions doesn't mean that adults have answers and no longer need to ask questions because now they're smarter. Sometimes it just means that adults who are now in a position of authority over children can get away with answering their questions with, "Because I said so." rather than being vulnerable enough to think and ask questions anymore. This is also not just something that happens between someone considered as an adult and someone who is considered a child. Many people in positions of authority use the same method of avoiding what isn't convenient for them. Such expediency demands too much of a price from everyone.<br /><br />If all children learned the same things at the same times and in the same ways as all other children there would be little wrong with defining progress in a strict way. However, that doesn't happen. I, and many other adults, could define the time when we were seen as unable to learn as also being the time that many people gave up on teaching us. I can tell you that this does not always get better as someone gets older. Teachers are a terrible thing to waste.<br /><br />I see the ways that the media depicts autistic children as being not present and unaware is a ruthless despicable act. Not understanding why children who appear this way are different can't be justified when so much of those children's positive future depends on people seeing them in a very different way. This also doesn't stop when many autistic children reach adulthood. Whether we will learn to communicate better by having our way better understood and accepted or whether we also learn more typical methods of communication as we get older, it is important that no one be seen as not present or aware.<br /><br />The phrase, "Of course you are special, just like everyone else is" again doesn't factor in what kind of views are depicted in such a statement or the conclusion that the statement might suggest someone to draw. Therefore, the truth or validity of any part of the statement in any isolated situation can't be used to validate the statement without more of an explanation. There are typical standards and guidelines that have been made unreasonably strict, and we don't all fit into them.<br /><br />If someone can better define the words they are saying and chooses not to what they say can be used as a form of manipulation. This method of deception is very harmful to everyone including the person that uses it and none of us can afford that.<br /><br />The nature of who people are includes a mind and the soul beyond any description of a mechanical brain. Furthermore, a set of brains anywhere can't be seen and taught within an overly strict set of guidelines.<br /><br />We all see things in different ways, we learn things in different ways, and the unique ways that we express ourselves are not only valid, but they are very important. Also, diversity is more than just something that is important to recognize. It must be accepted and promoted as what has been the essential means of our past and future survival and every aspect of truth (and that includes the ways it is more uniquely seen and described or those who take longer to describe it) needs to be recognized, respected, and explored by everyone for diversity to be honored.<br /></span>Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-19532499229279092472008-06-06T10:41:00.000-07:002008-06-06T11:13:46.532-07:00Diversely Defended<span style="font-size:130%;">Sometimes I think that people stay confused about what motivates people to do what they do instead of trying to find out the reasons. It seems we tend to describe people within our society as losers based on a game that is considered standard and allows little room for difference. Sometimes people seem way behind in a race simply because they are focused on an entirely different finish line. Strict societal standards often leave people who can't or don't fit into the boxes that are defined for us, having to work really hard at finding appropriate goals. We also have to work hard at understanding how others see us, how we can fit into society, and how much of that we need in order to survive. Beyond survival, we have to choose how much of that we want.<br /><br />How we defend ourselves as individuals, and as we relate to the labels that society gives us, also often presents a real difficulty for us when so much of what we see describes our difference as inferior, unwanted, and unworthy of respect. When we feel engulfed by this way that society sees us, it's often difficult to see how to defend ourselves because the attitudes that are our enemies are too close for us to see. We often don't have a lot of resources for where to learn about such things.<br /><br />That's one reason why I think that blogging is such a valuable resource for autistics and our friends and family. The autistic population can also make a big difference in how many other diverse populations are defended, taught, defined, respected and how their rights are protected. We cannot only learn from other diverse populations that have had to fight for their civil rights, but I think we have something to offer as well.<br /><br />We have to be able to hear from more people to help us know the best ways to empower those that society tends to disempower. Too often societal standards allow for and encourage the view that the discarded and unseen are a necessary evil that is the only way to ensure progress. Few castles exist without dungeons so we need to be careful of the ways we honor or promote what we call our royalty.<br /><br />This often reminds me that if what someone says may help someone to understand something better, I wish it didn't matter so much what credentials they had or what label society has placed on their validity as a person. Unfortunately, too often it seems people are too busy trying to decide whether or not someone is valid enough by society's standards for them to take the time to understand what actually IS credible about what they're saying.<br /><br />It seems that often when I'm trying to get across something that I know really does have value, people are evaluating my societal status instead of the point I'm trying to get across. Sometimes it sounds to me something like this: "Who are you and why should I accept anything that you say has value." or "Who has given you the appropriate credentials that makes what you say valid". and "How do I know whether or not what you say is valuable if no one who has been described as valuable has ever valued you."<br /><br />This political, status seeking game continues to fight against itself and make losers of most players and eventually causes the group who is seen as the elite winners to dwindle in size.<br /><br />Claiming that victims see themselves as victims and cause their own victimization is a type of victimization itself that encourages the same in others and creates a vicious cycle. Aside from my personal view as to the moral aspects of why that is wrong it also seems completely impractical. When someone does become an achiever by society's standards if the attitude they are surrounded by encourages toxic emotions that damage their esteem, they sentence themselves to the bottom of the ladder that they may be under the false impression that they have climbed.<br /><br />I've heard it said that sometimes we are less respectful, gracious, and appreciative of those we are closest to. There's something about that pack mentality that motivates us to over-groom until we taste blood. Then our responsibility gives way to our more temporary primal need to eat. We tend to eat our young (so to speak). What's sad is that humans are the one species who have the most capacity to care and yet we are the only species that kills for no reason.<br /><br />When more restrictions are placed on the public and less are placed on the public's government, this creates more opportunities for there to be a corrupt government. It also encourages the laws that are broken by the public to be described among those in power as the biggest problem. While this is convenient, it makes many of the problems that need to be addressed more even worse. Furthermore, it promotes the idea that might is right.<br />Examples:<br />"The little kid on the playground was pestering the bigger kid." is too often seen as the reason for the little kid being hurt by the bigger kid. Often the bigger kid has been given more opportunities to create allies AND sometimes little kids aren't as visible on the playground, so they are more easy to ignore and later be seen as inconvenient to the overall progress for the goals of playground activity by the teacher or playground activities director. OR<br />"The deputy sheriff had just cause to shoot the suspect first." This is defined this way for the protection of nothing but the sheriffs department....Unless the suspect was the mayor's son or daughter. Then the protection goes to the highest bidder. AND "The teacher who abused the child is also a victim....and the school system is a victim of poor funding"....because the school system must be protected....unless the child was the mayer's son or daughter....where does it end?<br /><br />When we advocate for the more vulnerable populations among ourselves, we often meet with the same type of barriers no matter what that population is. Too often these barriers and unfair treatments don't need to be right in anyone's moral or ethical view as long as those with enough political power can find a way to temporarily avoid or stamp out what is a problem to them.<br /><br />Difference isn't just an excuse to ask for accommodations from those who have the ability to provide them and don't. We who are different (contrary to what often seems to me to be the most popular belief) are more than just consumers. We have lots to offer that gets overlooked and we want and need to provide that.<br /><br />If those with resources really want to solve the problem of what they see as a drain on what they feel are *their* resources by the rest of us whom they see as useless eaters, the best way to do that is to look for and encourage what we have to offer. The games of exclusion that may at times seem harmless, can and often do lead to the ideals that promote eradication. The winners in the game that ultimately eradicates its losers will meet with nothing more than an empty and temporary victory. The sweet taste of temporary success will meet with the eventual bitter taste that accompanies having lost at the game that they created and/or promoted.</span>Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-90409101353598628402008-05-31T08:41:00.000-07:002008-05-31T08:42:32.261-07:00The Specialist<span style="font-size:130%;">The goals that I've seen people to have for me and other autistic people often seem to vary between the strict lines of the boxes they know how to control. Some of these peoples ideas sound like this to me:<br /><br />"I'll treat you as a well behaved higher functioning autistic until or unless, you show me that you are a lower functioning autistic who needs to have their behavior managed by me."<br /><br />"I'll treat you as though you want no contact with others until or unless, you show me that you do in a way that I can conveniently recognize." or "I'll keep you in the environment that you claim is overwhelming to you but just right for the rest of us until you claim that you can't handle it."<br /><br />"I'll treat you as though you have no sense of humor until or unless, you show me that my jokes make sense to you."<br /><br />and this is the one that really bugs me "If you want to be seen as special, I'll treat you in the condescending, patronizing, and pitiful ways that special people get treated. Otherwise, say goodbye to your terminal uniqueness and hello to the mediocrity the rest of us know and have learned to tolerate."<br />Hmmmm....<br />Excuse me,but are there any other choices? Adding cheese to road kill and putting a fancy French name on it still doesn't make it very appetizing. I know it's the excepted diet around here but I really didn't "choose" to become a vegetarian for the glory that comes with individualism.<br /><br />One of the most inappropriate suggestions that I see too often as being described as a part of who autistic people are is the view that we are not concerned enough about the needs of others. I don't see this as a behavioral problem that autistic's have nor do I see it as a lack of maturity. It is however these things to all people (autistic and not) at different stages of their lives and certainly this would apply even more to when we are young, small, weak, and vulnerable and in the most need of assistance.<br /><br />I think there are many reasons that an autistic person is seen this way more often when the opposite may be true and the reason for others' misperceptions are not explored often enough.<br /><br />The best example that I can think of that illustrates the difference of how an autistic's behavior can be completely misunderstood is how our eye contact has been described. If one of your most firmly held beliefs was that honesty was revealed by one particular type of eye contact, and you now know that this is not the case when you evaluate the eye contact of an autistic person, can you also see how vastly different an autistic's diverse thinking patterns may compel people to not have a solid base for evaluating our behavior due to autistic's with what is considered inappropriate eye contact also seen as being more honest?<br /><br />I would hope that this reminder of how behavior is sometimes misperceived would help people to understand that what they may see as a person who is aloof, indifferent, or even uncaring about others may not be showing you a behavior that you can relate to that would appropriately indicate how that person is really feeling.<br /><br />Some of us who are older than the average autistic (as age is described by the statistics) know very well, that life is about choices, we know the joys of loving, caring for, and providing for others, and we know the benefits that accompany our being responsible. I don't think anyone at any age can be fairly evaluated as not knowing these things or not being willing to be caring and responsible until they have also been given an appropriate opportunity that would clearly indicate that.<br /><br />Autistic's not being given the opportunity to show more clearly who we are and how we really feel is the result of often being confined to only being seen by evaluators who continue to insist on using some very old and really wrong thinking to view us. I would like to believe that since there may now be a better understanding of autism, this would provide more opportunities to be viewed in better ways.<br /><br />Unfortunately, the rise in the numbers of autistic diagnosis's has instead often encouraged many doctors , teachers, therapists, and specialists (who are just oh so special), who are prone to being irresponsible in their evaluations of those people who are more likely to be seen as inconveinient, (based on how they are taught) to repeat and/or continue this ignorance and avoidance of reality by continuing to go around who autistic's really are.<br /><br />The older methods of avoiding who autistic's are may have been more convenient for many people because fewer of us were labeled autistic. Now avoidance seems to be packaged by spreading propaganda and showing in detail every specific part of our labels (along with some that don't even apply to us but that they decided to throw in any way) and how those parts should be fixed, cured, and eliminated. Since no disease or its cure has been identified, eradicating the people that they can't find a way to fix would of course be the ultimate plan within a world where that's the way things are done.<br /><br />Unless school systems, therapies, institutions, and agencies, are using dramatically new, more understanding language to empower autistics (which absolutely includes the acknowledgment of how the current most dominant view of autistics in the media is WRONG) are guilty of causing the problem, if not in any other way, by continuing to avoid what needs to change for our very survival (and by that I mean everyone's survival). Often their most common and encouraged language indicates to me a much more active role in causing the problem.<br /><br />If special is how you describe someone or something about someone that you resent and feel the need to ostracize and belittle, and you can't be more creative with how you evaluate others, then yes, it's best to see us all as special or no one as that way (which then makes the word special similar to the word inconsistent.... it cancels itself out....) If you can't use the label respectfully maybe it's better not to use it at all. However, if you do decide to evaluate someone as trying to obtain the benefits of being special that isn't willing to pay the price, it might be in your best interest to investigate further why they are even in the position that would indicate to them that they needed to make a choice about such matters . You may also want to look at why you think any such attainment such as being described as special could provide someone with a free ride. If you don't understand that, you may want to explore your personal definition of responsibility more thoroughly.<br /><br />If you want to really do something that's special, try evaluating what's good about someone and how you can make them feel more special rather than how they need to be fixed, isolated, and eliminated if necessary to suit and protect your convenient, exclusionary, peace-through-dictatorship hold on your mediocre environment.</span>Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-51165592611639159502008-05-30T07:31:00.000-07:002008-05-30T09:04:52.819-07:00When Advocates are Called to ProtectAs I have been learning about the recent story of <a href="http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2008/may/24/30gtteacher-lets-students-vote-out-classmate-5/">Alex Barton</a>, I have been disgusted by what has happened and concerned about why such treatment of children is allowed.<br /><br />As I read this account on <a href="http://autisticnation.typepad.com/thinking_in_metaphors/2008/05/portillo-teache.html">Christschool's blog</a> of how this teacher and other officials who were looking into the matter were describing these events, I was reminded of my biggest concern. I am concerned that the attitude this teacher displays is not new, and it has been woven into so much of our cultural fabric, that it can be glossed over much too easily.<br /><br />I'm so glad that there are so many who have spoken up and said how wrong what this teacher did really is. It bothers me that so many people have been unaware that this attitude is as prevalent as it is. For something so wrong to be described so innocently by these officials reminds me that we are too often using our sophistication to cover how we act in ways that are primitive and shameless.<br /><br />The human race is not moving forward when compassion is not our top priority. The goal of everyone being safe must include emotional safety, especially for our children. Every type of inappropriate violent act begins with someone feeling emotionally vulnerable. Therefore, all safety needs to begin with the emotional safety of children.<br /><br />Alex and every five-year-old child needs to know that they can trust those who are in authority over them. They need to know that they can grow and learn in an environment that allows them to be free from feeling the need to protect themselves.<br /><br />Right now Alex needs to know that teachers are provided for him to assist his learning, people wearing law enforcement uniforms are available to protect him, and whenever the educational system misbehaves or treats a child wrongly, that the public will step in and advocate for children. His mother needs to know that many of us really do care and that she and her son will not be alienated when the system they depend on acts inappropriately.<br /><br />We need for teachers and people who work within the educational system that are doing a good job in the right way to know that they will not be micro managed or wrongly accused. That can't happen if the public looks the other way when an injustice has been done.<br /><br />Children will identify adults by the roles we play in their lives. They will know what the teacher looks like because they guide and protect them when they are at school, protectors of the law will be wearing police uniforms, and the public who advocates for them and protects them when any of these officials do wrong will be known by us showing up when they need us. They will know what we who are advocates look like by us showing them that we care, that we won't look away when they need help, and that we will be there to do whatever we can when they need us.Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-90452127103884508072008-05-19T10:51:00.000-07:002008-05-19T12:15:30.222-07:00The Paper FactorySometimes agencies are developed and maintained for no other reason than to allow a certain part of the population or advocacy groups that represent that population to feel secure that what they are seeking help with is being worked on.<br /><br />I have heard these agencies referred to as paper factories. The idea is that as long as they produce enough paper that contains the right words they can postpone (too often what seems like forever) doing anything about what they were assigned to do.<br /><br />In order for a paper factory to really work some people's needs must be met. Politicians and political groups that create these paper factories try to appease a part of the population that will provide them with support and they in turn will assure them that some parts of their population that the agency is supposed to serve (and by that I mean the most visible and loudest part of that population) are given all they need and sometimes all they want as well.<br /><br />This creates security for not only the politicians who create these agencies, but also for the agencies themselves to survive as an agency. Then the "one hand washing the other" and "political backscratching" creates a situation where the majority of unwashed hands and unscratched backs are ignored, blamed, and sometimes descibed as the casuties of a necessary evil. <br /><br />I remember hearing Bill Clinton speak extensively about how many student loans go unclaimed every year. By saying that, the point that he was trying to get across was that the government was doing their part but that people were not making the effort to get these loans. What he failed to explain was how many other reasons there were for these loans and even similar grants not being applied for. The reasons are many and there are many barriers that the US government knowingly creates to prevent these kinds of programs from being accessed by the majority of the population. As is the case with agencies, the way to secure the false claims of unlimited access to these programs is by parading the few who have been successful at using these programs in front of everyone else and have those people tell everyone else how great these programs are and how anyone can access them the way they did.<br /><br />The way such things work (or rather don't work) for those claiming to be promoting education are very similar to the ways things are tried with in these agencies or paper factories that I'm describing. Unfortunately they have been successful at preventing real progress by promoting the illusion of success for too long.<br /><br />This illusion is also very prevalent in how many public agencies are claiming to attempt to serve the disabled. Acknowleging neurological difference is one of the biggest threats to hiding the failures of agencies claiming to serve the disability community in the United States and hiding how the old system that has not worked for so many for so long.<br /><br />If the US government truly accepted that disability was, in most (if not all) cases, an issue based on a lack of an appropriate job being offered to a person who is capable in ways that were not being acknowledged by the government and the public at large, they would need to change the core of their belief system and how they do things.<br /><br />I don't believe that the US government is organized enough to create the massive conspiracies that many people claim. I do however think that it is safe to say that somebody somewhere who is making major decisions about government policy knows that such things such as glamorizing mood disorders and blaming hyperactive kids while feeding them amphetamines will reduce the population of those they see as unwanted without being blamed for it.<br /><br />But how can autistics who are known to have a neurological difference be contained and maintained by the old-fashioned governmental paper shuffling rules and rulers? There will need to be a strategy to train the next generation of autistics to accept what the rulers (so to speak) describe as being their defects before the older autistics get the word out and spread their ideals that describe an "autistic culture".<br /><br />Of course behaviors have to be given pathological reasons and treated with behavioral therapies. Some of those therapies will be brutal but can be justified by claiming that they prevent self injury if enough influencial people describe them that way.<br /><br />The claims of outside sources such as vaccinations and inapppropriate foods causing autism will allow for the growth of the industry described as "therapies" along with marketing more of the lethargy and confussion causing toxic drugs that promote the pharmaceutical industry.<br /><br />The one thing that will make traditional methods of isolation and exclusion look bad and ultimately less effective is allowing people to believe that differences can actually be accommodated. Tradition is protected by describing things as dis ease so that ease can be marketed based on the claim that this ease (or answer to the dis ease) will come in the form of fixing, curing, and possibly eliminating differences that we find it to be uncomfortable and/or inconvenient to support or encourage.<br /><br />The accommodations that have been provided for people with all types of disabilities within the United States to be more productive has increased in an alarming slow rate in comparison to the rate of expansion and development of the products and services that we as a nation offers. Our traditional paper shuffling and ignoring people who are seen as inconvenient has created nothing but an enormous debt and a larger part of the population than ever who is seen as unproductive. While it may be difficult for some people to recognize, these kinds of inappropriate and irresponsible management practices have a way of catching up with everyone.Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-37282027503613313142008-04-16T05:09:00.000-07:002008-04-16T10:34:14.238-07:00Correct ThinkingIt seems too often that thoughts or patterns of thoughts are described as incorrect when that's not the case at all. Too often this discourages diverse or unconventional thoughts and ideas. This is a luxury that no society has ever been able to afford and we won't survive that way.<br /><br />While unconventional ways of thinking may not immediately be seen as practical, that doesn't mean that it isn't practical. Often what is standing in the way of progress is the way someone with little or no experience at being listened to has not developed the best way to transfer their diverse ways of thinking into a more conventional form that others can readily understand. Then there is of course the matter of more conventional thinkers not training themselves to listen and explore ideas that are outside of the"normal" box which starts or keeps the cycle going.<br /><br />In many ways I see the larger group mentality (or herd) as being in charge of things. That includes the decisions as to how the majority is described as thinking and even how many people it takes to make a majority. So many people are not factored into what is described as the majority because of economic and social status. My thinking is that the majority of less influencial people are not seen as having something worthy to say. Then they don't say it or when they do, it isn't seen as having validity which discourages people from attempting to influence others.... and it can and often does discourage them from feeling that they have any influence on any aspect of their lives. Which came first isn't nearly important to me as people making real efforts to turn that around.<br /><br />I feel privileged to be able to learn things online from people who not only think in what are often described as unconventional ways (although they think in ways closer to the way I think and seem more practical to me), but people who are willing to question convention and challenge it.<br /><br />It seems like diversity would be approaching the extent of it's usefulness if there were too much inclusion such as describing the misbehavior of serial killers as someone having a series bad days. That doesn't seem like the extreme that is the most threatening to our society at this point.<br /><br /><br /><br />How can we rationally discuss the crime rate when the laws of capitol punishment are being endorsed by a president who was previously the govenor of a state where so many innocent people were put to death by the legal system for not being able to secure adequate council.<br /><br /><br /><br />How can the the United States approach the problems of immigration when we owe so much of the foundation of the country migrant workers? How can this be discussed rationally when the current president and his family owe so much of their wealth and their future wealth to migrant workers? You can hardly say you own something if someone unwillingly bought it for you.<br /><br /><br /><br />I wonder if people who are trying to figure out who (if anyone) should help with the mortgage crisis remembers that this land was taken over from people who didn't believe that land could or should be owned.<br /><br /><br /><br />How do we approach the problems of public education when states are promoting the sale of lottery tickets to fund the schools instead of being more responsible with other funding and expenses.... or when those who purchase so many of those tickets can't afford them (many because a public school system that failed them) and they are then blamed for being useless eaters that don't know any better and/or that don't matter.<br /><br /><br />Crime prevention doesn't start with guns and more police. Practical ways to get around problems get stiffled when people depend on punishment motivation and neglect mothods of empowerment. A lot of problem prevention starts with empowering kids and adults so people have a future to look forward to.<br /><br /><br />If someone wants to explore with me better ways of doing things, I don't want to argue with them. I want to listen. I want what isn't working to change.<br /><br />How is anyone's approach to civil rights, autistic rights, and neurodiversity even an inconvenience to anyone unless something they say makes some sense to someone.<br /><br />Forgive me if I don't always know how to respond when someone takes me seriously. I'm not very accostomed to it. However, don't let that stop you. I'm looking forward to getting used to it. :)<br /><br /><br /><br />So, where are all those neurodiversity bloggers who are preventing or trying to prevent kids from recieving support? I haven't seen them.<br /><br /><br />A lot of so-called science isn't being challenged and when bloggers that actually can and do challenge the conventional methods of treatments and therepies for autistics that have been harmful and that have the potential for being harmful to others....and they get intimidated and bullied....who's future is served?<br /><br />When I see people making a lot of effort to disempower people before they have been empowered.... or when they make irrational, unfounded accusations about someone who is saying something that challenges convention , I am likely to label them as part of the problem.<br /><strong></strong><strong></strong><em></em>Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-2278820740056099112008-04-07T11:09:00.001-07:002008-04-07T11:09:29.403-07:00What's it all about Cliffy?<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'><p><object height='350' width='425'><param value='http://youtube.com/v/sxlKG4Ki4TU' name='movie'/><embed height='350' width='425' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src='http://youtube.com/v/sxlKG4Ki4TU'/></object></p><p>This is a great video by Autism Diva.<br />Thanks Kathleen. I'll support you any way I can.<br /><br /><br /><br /></p></div>Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-26078737215179979482008-04-02T08:43:00.000-07:002008-04-02T09:12:24.324-07:00Pity Never Serves Justice<span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-size:130%;">I am encouraged that the autism awareness campaign has only designated one month out of the year as "Autism Awareness Month". I am happy that there are still 11 months that are not considered "Autism Awareness Month."<br /><br />Until there are campaigns that promote who autistics really are, all other campaigns are to likely to spread the misinformation that has caused so much problems for autistic people in the past.<br /><br />Not only is spreading misinformation not helpful, but calling attention to misinformation described as helpful can be very harmful.<br /><br />When I looked at the mainstream media yesterday on how this campaign was being described, the word that came to mind was "pitiful".<br /><br />When I thought of all the problems that were associated with pitiful attitudes I felt like vomiting. I didn't need any heavy metals chelated from my body nor were there any typical behaviors that I was in need of learning. The dis ease I was feeling was a societal attitude that I have too often digested and the best chance that I have at being healthy is learning to reject this toxicity.<br /><br />There is nothing I haven't seen that I need to in order to feel more compassion. Pity is a convenient way to ignore the effort, diligence, and patience that it takes to be compassionate. Justice requires compassion. Pitiful justice is unjust.<br /><br />I heard Senator Obama say recently in a speech that pain trickles up. It reminded me of a boil that has become ripe enough to lance.... or a volcano that couldn't stay quiet any longer.... or a landfill that continued to stink. What we waste will not continue to stay hidden. It seems we fight wars on soil where we dig deep into the earth to extract fossil fuel and yet we find more and more ways to ignore and waste what is REALLY our greatest resource which is human lives and human potential.<br /><br />Asking the question of whether or not autism is a disability or not can prevent us from looking at the poor and convenient attitudes that disable us all. The main thing I've heard the disability community in the US ask for from the larger or more accommodated public for many years is respect and empowerment. Instead this population is told that this is not what they REALLY want.<br /><br />Christopher Reeves never seemed motivating at all to me. I in no way mean to minimize what his pain and struggles were. However, he neglected to learn about the struggles of others in the disability community along with what they were working toward and what had already been learned about in the best ways to achieve that. This alienated many people and prevented rather than helped anyone's cause.<br /><br />If the money that is spent on research to cure autism or eradicate us by trying to isolate the gene that makes us autistic for one year was used instead to empower autistics, they may find this to be a much better investment.<br /><br />When people pity other people, the pity pot just gets deeper, wider, and more difficult to escape. True compassion can truly enable and empower people when everyone can see the attitudes that are disempowering and how to move beyond them.</span><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /></span>Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36759819.post-31377552219931669032008-03-31T08:26:00.000-07:002008-03-31T08:34:26.529-07:00How We Respond<span style="font-size:130%;">The social model of what is expected of us all is presented to the decision making population of voters all time. This model of how everyone should look, act, dress, eat, purchase, etc. is on billboards, TV,and the Internet all the time. When people fail to meet these standards, the cycle of rejection serves no one.<br /><br />Of course everyone will not be able to meet these standards and it is important to look at what can happen to them when they don't and be able to adjust our personal standards of them in order to better include them.<br /><br />The ways and speed that someones nervous system evolves cannot be determined in each individual person. However, it can be better encouraged when someone's nature is better understood.<br /><br />There are some things that are understood about the nature of autistic people that can be helpful to everyone.<br /><br />Too often the societal demands of conformity can prevent people from understanding how what to encourage and at what speed.<br /><br />How we were originally designed will become more evident as we get older. However, we will also learn from our environment what is acceptable and what isn't and it is everyone's nature to develop habits.<br /><br />Reacting impulsively to our environment is partly determined by the ways we have been taught to respond and whether we can access such a response to the situation. It also makes a difference how that response is accepted.<br /><br />There are several things that I have learned are NOT likely to promote a healthy response from an autistic person or promote better ways for us to learn to respond. Adult autistics and children are at different places and may learn at different rates but we never stop learning.<br /><br />The conforming box of the social model is more likely to place unrealistic demands on anyone but even more so when someone who is designed differently.<br /><br />I can't see how anyone can be encouraged by hearing that society sees them as unwanted.<br /><br />When everything about what others describe as acceptable and best is contrary to the best and most reasonable goals based on who someone is, it is likely to be discouraging.<br /><br />When classrooms are designed to accommodate only a narrow set of skills that anyone is not likely to acquire, this is also discouraging.<br /><br />No one will be likely to conform to the ever-changing and unrealistic expectations if they continue becoming more narrow.<br /><br />Learning to encourage diverse types of expressions, skills, and responses will create a more healthy environment for everyone.<br /></span>Edhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08354784098768688627noreply@blogger.com4