reality check

Post Reply New Topic

I know what you mean.

I think this is "spot-on". Denying that Aspergers is a form of mild retardation is not being realistic. I know I can only speak for how it affects me; there are some areas of my life I excel in while there other areas I do not. And to assume the majority of society views us as "loveable nerds and brainiacs" is far from the truth. We are still seen
as misfits who do not fit into society and are mostly viewed with scorn and mistrust.

Retardation is actually different but I understand what you are saying. Emotionally I feel like there is some retardation for me because of my AS but not intellectually or mentally.

People with AS are NOT ret*d in any way. They are merely hindered or impaired in certain ways. Facing challenges. To say someone is ret*d has a very negative undertone to it that belongs only to those who cannot speak, cannot communicate and live in a world of their own 24\7. A vegetable, perhaps. But Asperger people are definitely not ret*d.

mental retardation Miram Webster dictionary
noun
Definition of MENTAL RETARDATION
: subaverage intellectual ability equivalent to or less than an IQ of 70 that is accompanied by significant deficits in abilities (as in communication or self-care) necessary for independent daily functioning, is present from birth or infancy, and is manifested especially by delayed or abnormal development, by learning difficulties, and by problems in social adjustment

A person can be mentally ret*d and still speak and communicate and still do things. I know a mentally ret*d person who communicates very well and raced BMX with me. He also worked as a cook at his school as well as being a student there. It is not reserved for people in a vegetative state. There are many mentally ret*d people on the Special Olympics teams that I am on. They are not non verbal nor are they non communicative nor are they in a vegetative state. Granted some ret*d people might be those things but certainly not all of them. Mental retardation has an actual clinical definition and its severity levels can be mild or severe.

Here is the relevant portion of the Miriam Webster's definition of the word retardation:
a : an abnormal slowness of thought or action; especially : mental retardation
b : slowness in development or progress

I am, by definition, emotionally ret*d. That is a fact. It is not an insult unless you make it one. So if I call myself that, I am simply stating a fact about my emotional maturity, nothing more. I have no problem at all doing that. I completely accept this and I live with it and I have no issues calling it what it is. If someone wants to put a negative connotation on that, that is his or her issue, not mine.

The only reason the word "ret*d" has a negative connotation is because of the mean, ignorant, and stupid people who have made it so.

My perception of this debate splits all the differences - call it a delusion if that helps you, though I believe we serve a somewhat vestibular function in human evoluution; society has no legitimate need to be as complex as it has become, the way I see it, many aspies provide anecdotal evidence of how to accept solely the most useful advancements

_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos

I've been playing around with an idea. It's the idea (not uncommon I'm sure) that the "fundamental" ability NTs have that aspies don't is the ability in infancy and youth to automatically mimic others facial expressions, words and actions, and so to effortlessly learn the NT method of communication. And in place of being able to mimic and learn we instead try to "think" our way through life.

I'm not trying to defend the above idea (not even close), just use it in an example.

So for arguments sake let's say its true. If it is true (and there's a possibility) then HOW ARE WE RAISED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS (or any) "OTHER" ABILITY WE MAY HAVE?

Answer: We're not. Instead we're raised to try to emulate NTs and if there is an innate ability it's not addressed or considered.

It's like being raised with a successful NT sibling and where everyone keeps saying: "Why can't you be more like him/her?

But I'm about 40-50 years behind what's going on today and this training might already be happening somewhere? Or the idea has already been disproved? Has someone already devised (or tried to develop) training to take advantage of the aspie "focus?"

These things about disabilities and impairments are super vague, super subjective, and not fundamental to the concept of autism.
One person can consider themselves more disabled or impaired by autism than another, but when their autistic behaviors or brain functions are objectively assessed, they are closer to NT than the other person.
The only thing fundamental is how the brain functions differently from NT, which is the basis of autism.

Yeah, I'm sick of being told that I should enjoy having aspergers. I don't enjoy it. I don't want to be any less than I am or any less than I could be but I won't improve myself by denying my limitations.

And to Charloz do you think fifty years from now the term impaired will be a taboo word for adults and a playground insult for children? Is it the next step on the euphamism treadmill?