 
Support Wrong Planet Awareness!
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
opal
Phoenix
Joined: Jul 23, 2007
Posts: 551
Location: Australia
|
 Posted: Tue May 19, 2009 4:05 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Sophisticated my Aspergers!
Jellibean, there is more than enough evidence in this thread and others.
You refuse to see it.
Hmm. I think Jellibean has left the building |
|
| Back to top |
|
BarbaraJ
Emu Egg
Joined: May 20, 2009
Posts: 7
|
| Posted: Thu May 21, 2009 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| opal wrote: | Sophisticated my Aspergers!
Jellibean, there is more than enough evidence in this thread and others.
You refuse to see it.
Hmm. I think Jellibean has left the building |
My name, and my position, have been defamed in this thread. So, just so that everyone is totally clear and can make their own minds up as to their position, legal or otherwise...
Harry and I worked exceptionally well together to oppose the Action for Children 'autism monster' campaign. He is a journalist, as I am, and worked very hard to garner support against this campaign, with many others.
I got the first major celeb statement against this ad, from my friend and colleague, Tony Attwood. This statement turned the course of the campaign, and was a major coup. Following this, I got a statement from Mitzi Waltz. Sharon Fennell got a statement from Simon Baron Cohen, and the adverts were pulled.
Sadly, some people refuse to acknowledge, for whatever reason, their indebtedness to Tony Attwood on this issue and have tried to williewave and express some power and control issues over this.
I have been caught up in a very bizarre and slightly worrying backfire on this, which has led to some threats being made to me, and to Tony, online.
I should just like to record this. Some of the weird stuff has been posted on this board. I allowed a friend of mine to contact a member of this forum (I am an autism advocate) with my phone number, as he seemed to need autism advocacy of the type which helped her, and her family - ie filling in DLA forms and sorting out benefits.
I strongly deny the vile/filthy interpretation that has been made of my kindness in a friend of mine offering my help to someone in need
It's libel. |
|
| Back to top |
|
westernwild
Deinonychus
Joined: Oct 13, 2007
Posts: 313
Location: The wild, wild West
|
| Posted: Fri May 22, 2009 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BarbaraJ wrote: | | opal wrote: | Sophisticated my Aspergers!
Jellibean, there is more than enough evidence in this thread and others.
You refuse to see it.
Hmm. I think Jellibean has left the building |
My name, and my position, have been defamed in this thread. So, just so that everyone is totally clear and can make their own minds up as to their position, legal or otherwise...
Harry and I worked exceptionally well together to oppose the Action for Children 'autism monster' campaign. He is a journalist, as I am, and worked very hard to garner support against this campaign, with many others.
I got the first major celeb statement against this ad, from my friend and colleague, Tony Attwood. This statement turned the course of the campaign, and was a major coup. Following this, I got a statement from Mitzi Waltz. Sharon Fennell got a statement from Simon Baron Cohen, and the adverts were pulled.
Sadly, some people refuse to acknowledge, for whatever reason, their indebtedness to Tony Attwood on this issue and have tried to williewave and express some power and control issues over this.
I have been caught up in a very bizarre and slightly worrying backfire on this, which has led to some threats being made to me, and to Tony, online.
I should just like to record this. Some of the weird stuff has been posted on this board. I allowed a friend of mine to contact a member of this forum (I am an autism advocate) with my phone number, as he seemed to need autism advocacy of the type which helped her, and her family - ie filling in DLA forms and sorting out benefits.
I strongly deny the vile/filthy interpretation that has been made of my kindness in a friend of mine offering my help to someone in need
It's libel. |
Please explain to me why we should be "indebted" to the Good Doctor when he continues to associate with the likes of FAAAS, even serving on their board. Because of the likes of FAAAS and Autism Squeaks, (but especially FAAAS) my aspie teenage son is in for a helluva ride in life and I don't mean a fun, freewheeling one, either. When he completely disassociates from them and issues a public statement against them, THEN we might possibly be considered "indebted" to him. Until then, forget it.
_________________
Queen of the anti-FAAAS. FAAAS does NOT speak for me and many other families!!
Life is not about waiting out storms, but learning to dance in the rain-Anonymous |
|
| Back to top |
|
sinsboldly
Free Range Aspie
Joined: Nov 22, 2006
Age: 59
Posts: 13226
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 3:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RogerNMeyer wrote: | I've taken considerable time to see where Ari's "petition" is going, and I'm as distressed about its current direction as I was when I first read it over a month ago.
First and foremost, people claiming knowledge and being in possession of "the right position" should do their homework. It's painfully evident that Ari hasn't, and his expectation that enthusiasts within ASAN would adopt his defective thinking wholesale without regard to their own independent thinking and research about Attwood is appalling. With this one exception, I'm fully supportive of ASAN and what it's done in the past, and I expect it to continue to press forward to do in the future.
I've known Attwood since September 1997, when I first met him at a two-day conference on Asperger Syndrome held in a near-airport motel/conference center in Tacoma, Washington. Since then, Tony and I have corresponded periodically, always with mutual respect for one another's time and other commitments. One thing I've learned in corresponding with significant actors in what can be charitably but honestly called the "Asperger Industry" is that we've all had to parse our time. We've all had to establish self-imposed barriers to impulsive, demanding communications from others -- mainly individuals on the spectrum -- not because we don't inherently disrespect them but because "they" don't appear to have a broad enough perspective or understanding of boundaries as well as a well-formed concept regarding adult communication about "enough is enough."
Throughout his dealings with FAAAS, Attwood has been cautious NOT to endorse its poisonous mantras. With a naive hope that people so embittered and blinded by disappointment and ignorance would benefit from knowledge, I believe he set out and has continued to champion the notion that if you provide your most misinformed, inflamed, indeed hysterical critics with facts or consistent and new, factually supported information about AS, that they'd change their tune. Tony is NOT affiliated with FAAAS, just as he doesn't affiliate himself with ANY organizations over which he doesn't have direct control and responsibility for their communications with members or the public. He's vainly tried to correct the ingrained prejudices, bitterness, hysterical voices of spouses who've discovered their partners are on the spectrum who feel they've been duped, cheated, lied to, or been misled regarding the spectrum-sitting spouse's agenda (past and current). As we've all begun to realize, it's quite common for adult AS children of AS parents to finally recognize not only one parent on the spectrum, but, more recently, BOTH have a little bit of this and a little bit of that, and railing against one's spouse because he or she doesn't understand relationships, constant finger pointing, holding of perpetual pity parties, is as much a reflection of the more able but nevertheless likely spectrum sitter who does the most complaining in an AS relationship, but in no way does it invalidate the relationship. In my dealings with AS partnerships where one or both married partners are on the spectrum, it's common to see this type of negative bickering. As individuals remain in those relationships, however, over time with or without knowing anything about AS, accommodations are arrived at, tolerances build, the divvying of the workload of the marriage may be renogiated over time, and many things are "better left unsaid and undone" in favor of sustaining the relationship. Ultimately, the real question is whether either partner sees him/herself growing old with the other, and if the answer for the complainer or the complained-about one is "yes," there you have it. It's their business just how they manage this, and in each instance, the arrangement is quite unique and entirely their business and not that of others.
Understanding of AS is helpful but not a necessary condition to the success of an AS partnership. This is because a vast majority of individuals on the spectrum remain undiagnosed or mis-diagnosed, and it will always likely be this way. Does this therefore mean that only those upon whom the label has been officially or unofficially conferred have a special right to complain about their spouse or their relationship? I leave that to others to answer, but intimate and long-term relationships -- and these aren't necessarily the same -- have their own rules, develop their own boundaries, and are clearly no one else's business but those OF the relationship'd partners. Where children are involved, especially adult children, it's important for adults to remember that their parents' relationship to one another is THEIR business, not the childrens' business. Where there's interference by others, or a breakdown of the relationship -- as common within the AS community as without -- the usual recriminations, "get evens" and nasties abound. Marriages where there is a confirmed disability, especially those affected by communication breakdowns, always suffer worse than marriages where they may be a mere physical disability or incapacity, so in that regard, there may be a proportionately greater number of former partners of an AS relationship floating about unattached, but this fact doesn't invalidate my observations, nor does it discount or disparage the value BOTH partners appreciated about the relationship and one another when it was intact and when it was "working." In most societies, marriages are NOT arranged, and so something or some things remain sufficiently attractive to both individuals to make the possibility of a long-term hook up worth the work. And it is work.
So, to get back to Henault and Attwood. Both really aren't experts on relationships as much as they are highly experienced in working with individuals touched by autism in the family. One is highly informed about adult sexuality, but she can't claim that that expertise alone and her addresses before ill-informed, hate-him/her-anyways audiences is an "affiliation." Ari Ne'eman, of all people, SHOULD realize this, and this is one instance where Ne'eman, as a public figure who's in his very early twenties, really hasn't had the life experience in relationships AND in understanding some of the nuances of "get along" politics to recognize that being an attack dog, or leading a pack of attack dogs isn't always the best approach when one seeks to open dialogue with public figures.
Attwood has only recently looked at adult-adult relationships in a manner demanding as much time, attention, and self-learning as his understanding of children and adolescents. He may get it wrong. He may oversimplify, but I doubt that in either instance he has it "so wrong" as to warrant the kind of vitriolic attack explicitly expressed in this petition.
It is often said that some of the best-intentioned public and civil rights movements suffer premature failure because of the propensity of their members to devour their own as well as their friends. That very well could happen with this ill-conceived campaign. Regardless of the degree of success of Ne'eman personally -- and it's been substantial -- there is no substitute for other adults' weighing the evidence and conducting their own thorough, independent verification of charges leveled against persons or causes where they're involved in advocacy. To do any less, to slavishly follow a misdirected personal attack on two well-respected and admired figures even IF they themselves aren't on the autistic spectrum, is foolhardy and demonstrates a certain shallowness and slavishness to black and white thinking.
The real world is full of twists and turns, most of which we can't personally control. Attwood has been the Johnny Appleseed of AS, spreading the fruit of knowledge and common sense about AS to millions, and, in the process, reaping the rewards of a terifficallly punishing appearance and publishing schedule which he and others have set. He's been in this one for the long haul, unlike many of us who are Johnny and Suzie come latelies. He's taken on misinformed, authoritative figureheads where it's been necessary to haul them up short and publicly for their ignorance, but doing so as a matter of course is not his style. He'd much rather let the careful research of others take on the blowhards, our movement's equivalent of the Rush Limbaughs of this world. And in this regard, he's been successful, because as much as others have attempted to tar him with brushes either too broad or of the wrong color or material altogether, he's remained a consistent, steady voice urging understanding of AS to the unenlightened. Even among the enlightened, he's engaged in private colloquy where there's honest but minor differences.
As an example, I take exception to his premise that cognitive behavioral therapy, as modified for affective education by Attwood and Katherine Paxton, works the same way with adults as it may with children. I believe adults learn lasting lessons quicker by DOING things that then cause change in their defective thinking. Attwood and his cohort believes that because of the logical thrust of most adult AS individuals that they can be engaged intellectually to see the error of their approach. I hold onto my approach because I believe that lymbic learning -- involvement of the body, one's memory systems, and the mind -- is the best explanation and the best approach to address misguided thinking. If one didn't first have misguided thoughts, poorly thought-through behaviors wouldn't follow, either reflexively or as developed over time. To break the behavioral cycle, I believe that one can alter one's behavior more quickly than one's thoughts, and if those changed behaviors are engaged in frequently, not only do appropriate generalized thoughts start to emerge, but equally as obvious, the less efficient behaviors fade, and with them, reliance upon the defective thinking that drove those ineffective or harmful behaviors.
This is an example of a minor skirmish. By no means is it typical of the disagreements found within any movement where there is less than perfect understanding not only of a given set of conditions, but also how to set that understanding into the firmament of greater social expectations and the impression of others we can only hope to affect, but can't "control" in the way autistic individuals desire control of things AND others so as to affirm their own self-worth.
There are other ways of affirming one's self-worth than controlling others or engaging in campaigns that are likely to backfire, and which certainly can perpetuate distrust and a concern among one's allies that if they say or do the wrong thing, or are seen with "the wrong people," with the result that the cannon shots of public rebuke will be aimed at them. Fearing criticism ourselves, or being unable to deal with it civilly by agreeing to check our facts, to find third party intermediaries to carry our concern rather than responding in frustration when our impulsive outreach doesn't work the first time or even the fifteenth...these are more responsible components of positive approaches to understanding differences. When forming alliances, agreeing first to address our differences privately BEFORE engaging in public campaigns against one's allies is always a more successful approach because it models flexibility, not righteousness, as a prime value in the political arena. Having one's allies walking on eggshells is no way to run an alliance; fear of unwarranted, incompletely thought-out public attacks is a legitimate reason to cause one's allies to be wary of connections or engaging in current or future common actions.
Public legislative campaigns, appeals to civil rights equities, and going to the rescue in individual cases of abuse, neglect, and inhumane treatment are all approaches in advocacy that have a more substantial chance of gaining and sustaining alliances than ad hominem, personal attacks. The former will effect permanent gains; the latter will engender doubt, suspicion, and distrust.
Incidentally, "the latter" is also very autistic. While understandable, this does not convert an attack into a love stroke nor does it raise the esteem of those carrying this matter any further in the minds of those we wish to win not by vanquishing them, but by winning them over with positive approaches to understanding differences, and tolerating those differences rather than perpetually railing against them.
Roger N. Meyer
Portland, OR |
posted with permission of the author
_________________
where sin abounds, grace abounds the more;
Non omnis moriar |
|
| Back to top |
|
AmericanPie
Butterfly
Joined: Jun 20, 2009
Age: 32
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
[b]"but because "they" don't appear to have a broad enough perspective or understanding of boundaries as well as a well-formed concept regarding adult communication about "enough is enough."[/b]
That's some seriously patronizing shite. Like STFU, you're autistic, immature and we know best.
Check out the Wayback Machine - Attwood had his head up Rodman's butt when FAAAS Inc was still called Families AFFLICTED by Adults With Aspergers Syndrome.
'cuse me while I chuck |
|
| Back to top |
|
EvilZak
Blue Jay
Joined: Nov 30, 2007
Age: 31
Posts: 85
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 12:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's been said a few times, but I don't think it can be said enough - this campaign isn't an attack on Tony Attwood as a person, it's an attack on his endorsement of FAAAS. Whether or not he personally endorses their "poisonous mantras" is largely irrelevant - his name is being used to give legitimacy to the group - poisonous mantras and all.
This endorsement has not ceased (as per their professional advisory board and numerous other mentions of his name throughout the site).
He could change this with a word, and has chosen not to.
Tony's work in many other areas is to be commended, and if he chooses to remove his name from this group then I'd be happy to consider him a worthwhile ally of the autistic community. Just not before. |
|
| Back to top |
|
sinsboldly
Free Range Aspie
Joined: Nov 22, 2006
Age: 59
Posts: 13226
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 1:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| EvilZak wrote: | It's been said a few times, but I don't think it can be said enough - this campaign isn't an attack on Tony Attwood as a person, it's an attack on his endorsement of FAAAS. Whether or not he personally endorses their "poisonous mantras" is largely irrelevant - his name is being used to give legitimacy to the group - poisonous mantras and all.
This endorsement has not ceased (as per their professional advisory board and numerous other mentions of his name throughout the site).
He could change this with a word, and has chosen not to.
Tony's work in many other areas is to be commended, and if he chooses to remove his name from this group then I'd be happy to consider him a worthwhile ally of the autistic community. Just not before. |
I would like to ask a question with out placing myself in the line of fire, but I don't know you, Evil Zak, but who are you in the scheme of things? I mean, I am an Aspie and a moderator on a web forum and that is my resume for Autism/Asperger's Syndrome. My opinion of who Tony Attwood is and what he does means very little, so I was wondering why your opinion means so much and to whom. Do you have your own association or something?
Merle
Merle
_________________
where sin abounds, grace abounds the more;
Non omnis moriar |
|
| Back to top |
|
EvilZak
Blue Jay
Joined: Nov 30, 2007
Age: 31
Posts: 85
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 2:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sinsboldly wrote: |
I would like to ask a question with out placing myself in the line of fire, but I don't know you, Evil Zak, but who are you in the scheme of things? I mean, I am an Aspie and a moderator on a web forum and that is my resume for Autism/Asperger's Syndrome. My opinion of who Tony Attwood is and what he does means very little, so I was wondering why your opinion means so much and to whom. Do you have your own association or something?
Merle |
Hi Merle, pleased to meet you! Don't worry too much about any future "line of fire" - It's an entirely fair question, and I tend to have pretty thick skin anyways... *grins*
I'm an Aspie and a forum admin as well (over on www.spectrumites.com). As far as the petition goes, my role in the scheme of things was that our group has a small offline presence in Brisbane, and with the help of ASAN we managed to be the first to talk to Tony on this issue face to face.
As far as the importance of my opinion goes, I used the phrase "I'd be happy to consider" just to indicate that I was making this statement on my own behalf only, not because I feel that my opinion is especially more significant than any other opinion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
jelibean
Phoenix
Joined: Mar 24, 2008
Posts: 501
Location: United Kingdom/www.jelibean.com
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 2:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sinsboldly wrote: | | RogerNMeyer wrote: | I've taken considerable time to see where Ari's "petition" is going, and I'm as distressed about its current direction as I was when I first read it over a month ago.
First and foremost, people claiming knowledge and being in possession of "the right position" should do their homework. It's painfully evident that Ari hasn't, and his expectation that enthusiasts within ASAN would adopt his defective thinking wholesale without regard to their own independent thinking and research about Attwood is appalling. With this one exception, I'm fully supportive of ASAN and what it's done in the past, and I expect it to continue to press forward to do in the future.
I've known Attwood since September 1997, when I first met him at a two-day conference on Asperger Syndrome held in a near-airport motel/conference center in Tacoma, Washington. Since then, Tony and I have corresponded periodically, always with mutual respect for one another's time and other commitments. One thing I've learned in corresponding with significant actors in what can be charitably but honestly called the "Asperger Industry" is that we've all had to parse our time. We've all had to establish self-imposed barriers to impulsive, demanding communications from others -- mainly individuals on the spectrum -- not because we don't inherently disrespect them but because "they" don't appear to have a broad enough perspective or understanding of boundaries as well as a well-formed concept regarding adult communication about "enough is enough."
Throughout his dealings with FAAAS, Attwood has been cautious NOT to endorse its poisonous mantras. With a naive hope that people so embittered and blinded by disappointment and ignorance would benefit from knowledge, I believe he set out and has continued to champion the notion that if you provide your most misinformed, inflamed, indeed hysterical critics with facts or consistent and new, factually supported information about AS, that they'd change their tune. Tony is NOT affiliated with FAAAS, just as he doesn't affiliate himself with ANY organizations over which he doesn't have direct control and responsibility for their communications with members or the public. He's vainly tried to correct the ingrained prejudices, bitterness, hysterical voices of spouses who've discovered their partners are on the spectrum who feel they've been duped, cheated, lied to, or been misled regarding the spectrum-sitting spouse's agenda (past and current). As we've all begun to realize, it's quite common for adult AS children of AS parents to finally recognize not only one parent on the spectrum, but, more recently, BOTH have a little bit of this and a little bit of that, and railing against one's spouse because he or she doesn't understand relationships, constant finger pointing, holding of perpetual pity parties, is as much a reflection of the more able but nevertheless likely spectrum sitter who does the most complaining in an AS relationship, but in no way does it invalidate the relationship. In my dealings with AS partnerships where one or both married partners are on the spectrum, it's common to see this type of negative bickering. As individuals remain in those relationships, however, over time with or without knowing anything about AS, accommodations are arrived at, tolerances build, the divvying of the workload of the marriage may be renogiated over time, and many things are "better left unsaid and undone" in favor of sustaining the relationship. Ultimately, the real question is whether either partner sees him/herself growing old with the other, and if the answer for the complainer or the complained-about one is "yes," there you have it. It's their business just how they manage this, and in each instance, the arrangement is quite unique and entirely their business and not that of others.
Understanding of AS is helpful but not a necessary condition to the success of an AS partnership. This is because a vast majority of individuals on the spectrum remain undiagnosed or mis-diagnosed, and it will always likely be this way. Does this therefore mean that only those upon whom the label has been officially or unofficially conferred have a special right to complain about their spouse or their relationship? I leave that to others to answer, but intimate and long-term relationships -- and these aren't necessarily the same -- have their own rules, develop their own boundaries, and are clearly no one else's business but those OF the relationship'd partners. Where children are involved, especially adult children, it's important for adults to remember that their parents' relationship to one another is THEIR business, not the childrens' business. Where there's interference by others, or a breakdown of the relationship -- as common within the AS community as without -- the usual recriminations, "get evens" and nasties abound. Marriages where there is a confirmed disability, especially those affected by communication breakdowns, always suffer worse than marriages where they may be a mere physical disability or incapacity, so in that regard, there may be a proportionately greater number of former partners of an AS relationship floating about unattached, but this fact doesn't invalidate my observations, nor does it discount or disparage the value BOTH partners appreciated about the relationship and one another when it was intact and when it was "working." In most societies, marriages are NOT arranged, and so something or some things remain sufficiently attractive to both individuals to make the possibility of a long-term hook up worth the work. And it is work.
So, to get back to Henault and Attwood. Both really aren't experts on relationships as much as they are highly experienced in working with individuals touched by autism in the family. One is highly informed about adult sexuality, but she can't claim that that expertise alone and her addresses before ill-informed, hate-him/her-anyways audiences is an "affiliation." Ari Ne'eman, of all people, SHOULD realize this, and this is one instance where Ne'eman, as a public figure who's in his very early twenties, really hasn't had the life experience in relationships AND in understanding some of the nuances of "get along" politics to recognize that being an attack dog, or leading a pack of attack dogs isn't always the best approach when one seeks to open dialogue with public figures.
Attwood has only recently looked at adult-adult relationships in a manner demanding as much time, attention, and self-learning as his understanding of children and adolescents. He may get it wrong. He may oversimplify, but I doubt that in either instance he has it "so wrong" as to warrant the kind of vitriolic attack explicitly expressed in this petition.
It is often said that some of the best-intentioned public and civil rights movements suffer premature failure because of the propensity of their members to devour their own as well as their friends. That very well could happen with this ill-conceived campaign. Regardless of the degree of success of Ne'eman personally -- and it's been substantial -- there is no substitute for other adults' weighing the evidence and conducting their own thorough, independent verification of charges leveled against persons or causes where they're involved in advocacy. To do any less, to slavishly follow a misdirected personal attack on two well-respected and admired figures even IF they themselves aren't on the autistic spectrum, is foolhardy and demonstrates a certain shallowness and slavishness to black and white thinking.
The real world is full of twists and turns, most of which we can't personally control. Attwood has been the Johnny Appleseed of AS, spreading the fruit of knowledge and common sense about AS to millions, and, in the process, reaping the rewards of a terifficallly punishing appearance and publishing schedule which he and others have set. He's been in this one for the long haul, unlike many of us who are Johnny and Suzie come latelies. He's taken on misinformed, authoritative figureheads where it's been necessary to haul them up short and publicly for their ignorance, but doing so as a matter of course is not his style. He'd much rather let the careful research of others take on the blowhards, our movement's equivalent of the Rush Limbaughs of this world. And in this regard, he's been successful, because as much as others have attempted to tar him with brushes either too broad or of the wrong color or material altogether, he's remained a consistent, steady voice urging understanding of AS to the unenlightened. Even among the enlightened, he's engaged in private colloquy where there's honest but minor differences.
As an example, I take exception to his premise that cognitive behavioral therapy, as modified for affective education by Attwood and Katherine Paxton, works the same way with adults as it may with children. I believe adults learn lasting lessons quicker by DOING things that then cause change in their defective thinking. Attwood and his cohort believes that because of the logical thrust of most adult AS individuals that they can be engaged intellectually to see the error of their approach. I hold onto my approach because I believe that lymbic learning -- involvement of the body, one's memory systems, and the mind -- is the best explanation and the best approach to address misguided thinking. If one didn't first have misguided thoughts, poorly thought-through behaviors wouldn't follow, either reflexively or as developed over time. To break the behavioral cycle, I believe that one can alter one's behavior more quickly than one's thoughts, and if those changed behaviors are engaged in frequently, not only do appropriate generalized thoughts start to emerge, but equally as obvious, the less efficient behaviors fade, and with them, reliance upon the defective thinking that drove those ineffective or harmful behaviors.
This is an example of a minor skirmish. By no means is it typical of the disagreements found within any movement where there is less than perfect understanding not only of a given set of conditions, but also how to set that understanding into the firmament of greater social expectations and the impression of others we can only hope to affect, but can't "control" in the way autistic individuals desire control of things AND others so as to affirm their own self-worth.
There are other ways of affirming one's self-worth than controlling others or engaging in campaigns that are likely to backfire, and which certainly can perpetuate distrust and a concern among one's allies that if they say or do the wrong thing, or are seen with "the wrong people," with the result that the cannon shots of public rebuke will be aimed at them. Fearing criticism ourselves, or being unable to deal with it civilly by agreeing to check our facts, to find third party intermediaries to carry our concern rather than responding in frustration when our impulsive outreach doesn't work the first time or even the fifteenth...these are more responsible components of positive approaches to understanding differences. When forming alliances, agreeing first to address our differences privately BEFORE engaging in public campaigns against one's allies is always a more successful approach because it models flexibility, not righteousness, as a prime value in the political arena. Having one's allies walking on eggshells is no way to run an alliance; fear of unwarranted, incompletely thought-out public attacks is a legitimate reason to cause one's allies to be wary of connections or engaging in current or future common actions.
Public legislative campaigns, appeals to civil rights equities, and going to the rescue in individual cases of abuse, neglect, and inhumane treatment are all approaches in advocacy that have a more substantial chance of gaining and sustaining alliances than ad hominem, personal attacks. The former will effect permanent gains; the latter will engender doubt, suspicion, and distrust.
Incidentally, "the latter" is also very autistic. While understandable, this does not convert an attack into a love stroke nor does it raise the esteem of those carrying this matter any further in the minds of those we wish to win not by vanquishing them, but by winning them over with positive approaches to understanding differences, and tolerating those differences rather than perpetually railing against them.
Roger N. Meyer
Portland, OR |
posted with permission of the author |
Thank you Roger Meyer.......... 
Thank you sinsboldly for posting |
|
| Back to top |
|
millie
bits, pieces, brass, animals
Joined: Oct 26, 2008
Age: 47
Posts: 2981
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 6:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
^ thanks merle.
tall poppies always get a lopping in Oz.
_________________
animals are the safest friends to have |
|
| Back to top |
|
AmericanPie
Butterfly
Joined: Jun 20, 2009
Age: 32
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
"two well respected and admired figures"
yo! fan-boys in the house!
so, ya all got all his books? and videos? and the T-Shirts? are you happy in your role as profit centers for Tony Attwood Enterprizes Pty Ltd? happy to finance his expatriate, Gold Coast lifestyle. his international jet-setting life as hero of our nation's history and all round friend to everyone, including a bunch of equally profit-orientated ball-breaking career girls?
the best way to make enemies is to try and be everyone's friend. no moral compass, just a deep seated desire to get the most out of life, and be the prophet (profit) of this New Age?
and whatever happened to that rock star that Tony therapied? not so keen on pimping that client now is he?
bow down and worship. your Lord is here. a collection will be taken.
Zonker out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
millie
bits, pieces, brass, animals
Joined: Oct 26, 2008
Age: 47
Posts: 2981
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ho-hum...................................
_________________
animals are the safest friends to have |
|
| Back to top |
|
westernwild
Deinonychus
Joined: Oct 13, 2007
Posts: 313
Location: The wild, wild West
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jelibean wrote: | | sinsboldly wrote: | | RogerNMeyer wrote: | I've taken considerable time to see where Ari's "petition" is going, and I'm as distressed about its current direction as I was when I first read it over a month ago.
First and foremost, people claiming knowledge and being in possession of "the right position" should do their homework. It's painfully evident that Ari hasn't, and his expectation that enthusiasts within ASAN would adopt his defective thinking wholesale without regard to their own independent thinking and research about Attwood is appalling. With this one exception, I'm fully supportive of ASAN and what it's done in the past, and I expect it to continue to press forward to do in the future.
I've known Attwood since September 1997, when I first met him at a two-day conference on Asperger Syndrome held in a near-airport motel/conference center in Tacoma, Washington. Since then, Tony and I have corresponded periodically, always with mutual respect for one another's time and other commitments. One thing I've learned in corresponding with significant actors in what can be charitably but honestly called the "Asperger Industry" is that we've all had to parse our time. We've all had to establish self-imposed barriers to impulsive, demanding communications from others -- mainly individuals on the spectrum -- not because we don't inherently disrespect them but because "they" don't appear to have a broad enough perspective or understanding of boundaries as well as a well-formed concept regarding adult communication about "enough is enough."
Throughout his dealings with FAAAS, Attwood has been cautious NOT to endorse its poisonous mantras. With a naive hope that people so embittered and blinded by disappointment and ignorance would benefit from knowledge, I believe he set out and has continued to champion the notion that if you provide your most misinformed, inflamed, indeed hysterical critics with facts or consistent and new, factually supported information about AS, that they'd change their tune. Tony is NOT affiliated with FAAAS, just as he doesn't affiliate himself with ANY organizations over which he doesn't have direct control and responsibility for their communications with members or the public. He's vainly tried to correct the ingrained prejudices, bitterness, hysterical voices of spouses who've discovered their partners are on the spectrum who feel they've been duped, cheated, lied to, or been misled regarding the spectrum-sitting spouse's agenda (past and current). As we've all begun to realize, it's quite common for adult AS children of AS parents to finally recognize not only one parent on the spectrum, but, more recently, BOTH have a little bit of this and a little bit of that, and railing against one's spouse because he or she doesn't understand relationships, constant finger pointing, holding of perpetual pity parties, is as much a reflection of the more able but nevertheless likely spectrum sitter who does the most complaining in an AS relationship, but in no way does it invalidate the relationship. In my dealings with AS partnerships where one or both married partners are on the spectrum, it's common to see this type of negative bickering. As individuals remain in those relationships, however, over time with or without knowing anything about AS, accommodations are arrived at, tolerances build, the divvying of the workload of the marriage may be renogiated over time, and many things are "better left unsaid and undone" in favor of sustaining the relationship. Ultimately, the real question is whether either partner sees him/herself growing old with the other, and if the answer for the complainer or the complained-about one is "yes," there you have it. It's their business just how they manage this, and in each instance, the arrangement is quite unique and entirely their business and not that of others.
Understanding of AS is helpful but not a necessary condition to the success of an AS partnership. This is because a vast majority of individuals on the spectrum remain undiagnosed or mis-diagnosed, and it will always likely be this way. Does this therefore mean that only those upon whom the label has been officially or unofficially conferred have a special right to complain about their spouse or their relationship? I leave that to others to answer, but intimate and long-term relationships -- and these aren't necessarily the same -- have their own rules, develop their own boundaries, and are clearly no one else's business but those OF the relationship'd partners. Where children are involved, especially adult children, it's important for adults to remember that their parents' relationship to one another is THEIR business, not the childrens' business. Where there's interference by others, or a breakdown of the relationship -- as common within the AS community as without -- the usual recriminations, "get evens" and nasties abound. Marriages where there is a confirmed disability, especially those affected by communication breakdowns, always suffer worse than marriages where they may be a mere physical disability or incapacity, so in that regard, there may be a proportionately greater number of former partners of an AS relationship floating about unattached, but this fact doesn't invalidate my observations, nor does it discount or disparage the value BOTH partners appreciated about the relationship and one another when it was intact and when it was "working." In most societies, marriages are NOT arranged, and so something or some things remain sufficiently attractive to both individuals to make the possibility of a long-term hook up worth the work. And it is work.
So, to get back to Henault and Attwood. Both really aren't experts on relationships as much as they are highly experienced in working with individuals touched by autism in the family. One is highly informed about adult sexuality, but she can't claim that that expertise alone and her addresses before ill-informed, hate-him/her-anyways audiences is an "affiliation." Ari Ne'eman, of all people, SHOULD realize this, and this is one instance where Ne'eman, as a public figure who's in his very early twenties, really hasn't had the life experience in relationships AND in understanding some of the nuances of "get along" politics to recognize that being an attack dog, or leading a pack of attack dogs isn't always the best approach when one seeks to open dialogue with public figures.
Attwood has only recently looked at adult-adult relationships in a manner demanding as much time, attention, and self-learning as his understanding of children and adolescents. He may get it wrong. He may oversimplify, but I doubt that in either instance he has it "so wrong" as to warrant the kind of vitriolic attack explicitly expressed in this petition.
It is often said that some of the best-intentioned public and civil rights movements suffer premature failure because of the propensity of their members to devour their own as well as their friends. That very well could happen with this ill-conceived campaign. Regardless of the degree of success of Ne'eman personally -- and it's been substantial -- there is no substitute for other adults' weighing the evidence and conducting their own thorough, independent verification of charges leveled against persons or causes where they're involved in advocacy. To do any less, to slavishly follow a misdirected personal attack on two well-respected and admired figures even IF they themselves aren't on the autistic spectrum, is foolhardy and demonstrates a certain shallowness and slavishness to black and white thinking.
The real world is full of twists and turns, most of which we can't personally control. Attwood has been the Johnny Appleseed of AS, spreading the fruit of knowledge and common sense about AS to millions, and, in the process, reaping the rewards of a terifficallly punishing appearance and publishing schedule which he and others have set. He's been in this one for the long haul, unlike many of us who are Johnny and Suzie come latelies. He's taken on misinformed, authoritative figureheads where it's been necessary to haul them up short and publicly for their ignorance, but doing so as a matter of course is not his style. He'd much rather let the careful research of others take on the blowhards, our movement's equivalent of the Rush Limbaughs of this world. And in this regard, he's been successful, because as much as others have attempted to tar him with brushes either too broad or of the wrong color or material altogether, he's remained a consistent, steady voice urging understanding of AS to the unenlightened. Even among the enlightened, he's engaged in private colloquy where there's honest but minor differences.
As an example, I take exception to his premise that cognitive behavioral therapy, as modified for affective education by Attwood and Katherine Paxton, works the same way with adults as it may with children. I believe adults learn lasting lessons quicker by DOING things that then cause change in their defective thinking. Attwood and his cohort believes that because of the logical thrust of most adult AS individuals that they can be engaged intellectually to see the error of their approach. I hold onto my approach because I believe that lymbic learning -- involvement of the body, one's memory systems, and the mind -- is the best explanation and the best approach to address misguided thinking. If one didn't first have misguided thoughts, poorly thought-through behaviors wouldn't follow, either reflexively or as developed over time. To break the behavioral cycle, I believe that one can alter one's behavior more quickly than one's thoughts, and if those changed behaviors are engaged in frequently, not only do appropriate generalized thoughts start to emerge, but equally as obvious, the less efficient behaviors fade, and with them, reliance upon the defective thinking that drove those ineffective or harmful behaviors.
This is an example of a minor skirmish. By no means is it typical of the disagreements found within any movement where there is less than perfect understanding not only of a given set of conditions, but also how to set that understanding into the firmament of greater social expectations and the impression of others we can only hope to affect, but can't "control" in the way autistic individuals desire control of things AND others so as to affirm their own self-worth.
There are other ways of affirming one's self-worth than controlling others or engaging in campaigns that are likely to backfire, and which certainly can perpetuate distrust and a concern among one's allies that if they say or do the wrong thing, or are seen with "the wrong people," with the result that the cannon shots of public rebuke will be aimed at them. Fearing criticism ourselves, or being unable to deal with it civilly by agreeing to check our facts, to find third party intermediaries to carry our concern rather than responding in frustration when our impulsive outreach doesn't work the first time or even the fifteenth...these are more responsible components of positive approaches to understanding differences. When forming alliances, agreeing first to address our differences privately BEFORE engaging in public campaigns against one's allies is always a more successful approach because it models flexibility, not righteousness, as a prime value in the political arena. Having one's allies walking on eggshells is no way to run an alliance; fear of unwarranted, incompletely thought-out public attacks is a legitimate reason to cause one's allies to be wary of connections or engaging in current or future common actions.
Public legislative campaigns, appeals to civil rights equities, and going to the rescue in individual cases of abuse, neglect, and inhumane treatment are all approaches in advocacy that have a more substantial chance of gaining and sustaining alliances than ad hominem, personal attacks. The former will effect permanent gains; the latter will engender doubt, suspicion, and distrust.
Incidentally, "the latter" is also very autistic. While understandable, this does not convert an attack into a love stroke nor does it raise the esteem of those carrying this matter any further in the minds of those we wish to win not by vanquishing them, but by winning them over with positive approaches to understanding differences, and tolerating those differences rather than perpetually railing against them.
Roger N. Meyer
Portland, OR |
posted with permission of the author |
Thank you Roger Meyer..........
Thank you sinsboldly for posting |
Well, well, well, look who finally showed up again in this thread. You have some questions to answer, Jelibean, and I see you studiously (and very obviously) ignoring them. Maybe you could try answering the questions many of us have asked of you in this thread. Atwood's endorsement of the hate group FAAAS, that has done and continues to do SO MUCH damage to ALL aspies, by his serving on the professional advisory board, gives legitimacy to their poison and it's unbelievable that you don't see that. Please explain why we shouldn't call him out on it. Unless you're a self-hating aspie. I certainly hope not, and I feel sorry for you if you are, but I've met more than enough of them to see the signs. And I've worked hard to ensure that my teenage aspie son IS NOT and WILL NOT be.
_________________
Queen of the anti-FAAAS. FAAAS does NOT speak for me and many other families!!
Life is not about waiting out storms, but learning to dance in the rain-Anonymous |
|
| Back to top |
|
jelibean
Phoenix
Joined: Mar 24, 2008
Posts: 501
Location: United Kingdom/www.jelibean.com
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hello, yes am still here Never went anywhere!
Please don't DEMAND answers from anyone. I am merely observing that's all  |
|
| Back to top |
|
sinsboldly
Free Range Aspie
Joined: Nov 22, 2006
Age: 59
Posts: 13226
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 10:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AmericanPie wrote: | "two well respected and admired figures"
yo! fan-boys in the house!
so, ya all got all his books? and videos? and the T-Shirts? are you happy in your role as profit centers for Tony Attwood Enterprizes Pty Ltd? happy to finance his expatriate, Gold Coast lifestyle. his international jet-setting life as hero of our nation's history and all round friend to everyone, including a bunch of equally profit-orientated ball-breaking career girls?
the best way to make enemies is to try and be everyone's friend. no moral compass, just a deep seated desire to get the most out of life, and be the prophet (profit) of this New Age?
and whatever happened to that rock star that Tony therapied? not so keen on pimping that client now is he?
bow down and worship. your Lord is here. a collection will be taken.
Zonker out. |
when I was a little girl I heard the story of Johnny Appleseed.
This guy was a nursery man in Massachusetts in the late 1700's that became an explorer in the lower Great Lakes Ohio River valleys on the edge of the vast opening of the North American continent. He went into the wilderness with a bag of apple seeds on his back until he found a likely spot for planting land by chopping out weeds and brush by hand. Then he planted his apple seeds in neat rows and built a brush fence around the area to keep out straying animals.
He did all of the work himself, living alone for weeks at a time with only the Indians and wild animals for companionship. He never carried a gun or weapon . Indians accepted him as a friend and he left the wilderness blossoming with apple trees, orchard after orchard of carefully nurtured trees he bartered to the new settlers .
He was a ($#%@#) child hood hero with always pictured with a sack of apple seeds on his back and a sauce pan jauntily perched on his head (it was said he used it as a snug hat, the handle protruding off the back of it) a legend in Midwest America.
are there tee shirts with him on the front, you bet!
Do people have museums and speakers about what he did and how he spread the word? Absolutely! Do little children sing his praises and act out skits about his adventures in front of proud parents in school auditoriums across that land? You guessed it! Of course they do.
But do they think that John Chapman (Johnny Appleseed?) is God? Do they bow down and worship him? Do we think he is The Lord? Absolutely NOT.
The idea is absurd.
Merle
_________________
where sin abounds, grace abounds the more;
Non omnis moriar |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
