I just don't get it. It seems like the vast majority of psychological issues are treated with some degree of respect in modern society, yet autism in particular appears to still carry a stigma that wouldn't be out of place in the 19th or early 20th century.
edited 29th May '14 6:37:00 AM by CombatC122
I think it's partly because of history (autism is documented much more recently than many other disorders). Also, I am not sure if other mental health problems are without stigmas.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanI got a question for the people here. It's apparently very common for people on the spectrum to prefer the company of and/or relate better to the opposite sex, and to not be particularly "masculine" or "feminine" as these terms are commonly used.
So, in that case, what sex are you, and do you prefer the company of (or relate to) the same or opposite sex better? (Related to this, what is your sexual orientation?) Also, would you consider yourself to be masculine/feminine/androgynous in your interests or personality?
I'll start with myself. I'm male and straight, and I really do prefer the company of females. When I was a kid, I played with boys more than girls, but I found girls interesting and I enjoyed their company. In sixth grade, I lost ALL interest in hanging out with boys and only wanted to hang out with girls, even just platonically. As an adult, I relate better to women than men, though I relate best to women who are either on the spectrum or borderline.
For my interests, I guess video games and tech are heavily considered "male" interests, and personality, I'm probably androgynous. It's hard to say, but I'm emotionally somewhere inbetween, I think, when it comes to how males and females tend to be (from what I've seen), not just how society might expect them to be.
Okay, your turn. Gender, sexual orientation, gender you prefer the company of, etc.
I'm a strait male and pretty much all my friends are female, it's been that way since I was 10, the few guys I do hang out with are not alpha-male types in personality (though one of them is built like a bouncer). As for my masculineness, well my ex has apparently refereed to be a rather "metrosexual" in discussion about me, and one of my male friends is a rather stereotypical camp gay guy, and I'm pretty much as camp as he is.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Fantasy writer turned Filmmaker.
I'm male, straight (but I lean more "gray-asexual"), and I find it easier to talk to women in general. Something about rowdy, testosterone-pumped men just bugs me. But I get along just fine with other nerdy guys like myself.
Actual Filmmaker trying to earn a Creator page. Gleahan and the Knaves of Industry — available now on streaming and blu-ray.I'm not sure if I have a particular preference for females (I'm straight for reference), but one of my closest meatspace friends is indeed female.
edited 29th May '14 6:16:26 PM by rmctagg09
Hugging a Vanillite will give you frostbite.Actually, (and, sorry to bust in late, here), but... All "mental illnesses" still have stigma. <_< You try walking around with a diagnosis of schizophrenia and not having bias hurled at you.
Dare you.
Other "invisible" conditions also still have many problems: not least from "more traditional" "disabilities". (Says somebody who has been run over by a guy in a wheelchair because he assumed "chronic fatigue syndrome" meant "lazy" rather than "disabled" — and, that, because I was walking, meant I didn't actually need the disabled car space.)
Frankly: autism is not that special in this regard. All the conditions that don't come with easily visible signs like crutches or lost limbs have problems. Even anxiety and depression, although much more widely accepted than they used to be, still hold stigma. Heck, people with epilepsy get bullied for being weird. And, that's hardly a new condition to the public mind. <_<
Autsim is the newest one to get the prominent treatment, but... don't forget: it's not the only diagnosis to get the rough treatment. For now, it's only the better known one in the public mind. Not that long ago, it was muscular dystrophy that was in the dodgy limelight. -_- Even earlier, polio was see often seen as "slacking". <_<
So, put it in context, please. It's not right — but, it is a common trend. In ten years, it'll be a different condition getting it more in the neck. But, just ask those with muscular dystrophy: just because they're out of the spotlight doesn't mean they have it any better when it comes to institutional bias and people treating them as weird.
They're just a bit less obvious about it, now. Which can be more insidious. As, I'm sure everybody here knows. -_-
But, there is a positive side to the hell that is public backlash. It's exactly that: backlash. These things go in stages: recognition of a condition >> public awareness of condition >> negative public reaction >> increased research and better managerial techniques developed >> increasing public acceptance >> decreased acceptability in overt displays of discrimination >> next Big Thing.
Weirdly, many people with other conditions would welcome the hell: it'd mean actual research into their issues as money gets pumped into them for a spell. -_-
edited 30th May '14 5:16:19 AM by Euodiachloris
That's a very well thought-out post, and probably totally true. People with food allergies are often assumed to be faking it, right now. My parents didn't believe in my gluten intolerance. Now they do, although those gluten-free fad dieters are NOT helping overall.
Re: rowdy, testosterone-pumped men - No, I don't like them either. I don't relate to them at all. I saw a forum thread where autistics expressed their distaste towards "manliness" and how much they (male autistics) hate being forced into it, because it just isn't them. So much for the "extreme male brain theory". We'd be superjocks if that were the case, but instead, we almost always suck at sports due to our terrible coordination caused by a differently-functioning brains.
Similarly, females on that same thread chimed in with their dislike of traditional "femininity", and being told when growing up to act more like a girl. They don't like chattiness and gossip and dressing up.
Any females in this thread care to add if they relate better to the same or opposite sex?
edited 30th May '14 12:05:29 PM by BonsaiForest
So much for the "extreme male brain theory". We'd be superjocks if that were the case,
Actually, no. For one thing, it's fetal testosterone not adult and the same hormone can have different effects at different lifestages.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanRunning? Well, I do it as a habit when I am thinking of stuff, frequently in situations when running is not appropriate behaviour. I can also keep running for a while, and hiking over mountains for hours.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanAh, I'm a female, and I'm pansexual with a preference for girls. But, I do find it a ton easier to talk and relate to men. I find myself wanting to talk to men quite a bit. I think they "get me", you know? As for interests, I love videogames, computer stuff, drawing, reading, writing(I mostly do tragic stuff), and I love to jut let out my feelings to people who understand.
ppppppppfeiufiofuiorjfadkfbnjkdflaosigjbkghuiafjkldjnbaghkdFemales on the spectrum have sometimes said that they like males better because they have "simple language" and "don't play games".
@Daft, what do you mean about guys "getting" you better? Like how do they seem to understand better?
Thus far, multiple males saying they don't like the typical male or "macho"-ness, and one female saying she prefers the company of males. Another female Aspie, a former member of this site, told me she didn't like the "bimbos" of her all-girls school, and liked guys.
I find the fact that so many of us don't care for gender roles, especially our own, and that so many of us prefer the company of the opposite sex, interesting.
A new question now: for those of you who prefer the company of the opposite sex, do you like those who follow that sex's gender role to its extreme, or those who are closer to the center?
For example, if you prefer the company of women, do you prefer very "feminine" women, or ones who aren't quite so feminine? If you prefer guys, do you prefer "macho" guys, or do you prefer guys who aren't at all into that "ideal"?
Fantasy writer turned Filmmaker.
To your question, Bonsai: I said earlier that I like to interact with women more. That said, extra-feminine women are annoying. Uber-masculine men are equally annoying. I like my friends at a happy medium between those extremes.
Actual Filmmaker trying to earn a Creator page. Gleahan and the Knaves of Industry — available now on streaming and blu-ray.I don't really think it matters to me myself as long as I find some common ground interests. My wife, for example, does have her share of stereotypically feminine things she likes to do, but she also has quite a few interests in common with me, and those are what we bond over. And when she does need to indulge her "girly" interests, she'll go out with a female friend and exclude me, and I'm fine with that since she usually just assumes (correctly) that I'll get bored.
edited 2nd Jun '14 3:07:04 PM by CombatC122

The thing with PETA is that they have a moderate membership and an extremist leadership; their rank-and-file tends to be "ooh animals are cute" and the leadership is all "meat is murder we for one welcome our new animal overlords".
Schild und Schwert der Partei