Geek Feminism Wiki

Talk:Autism is to blame

Back to page

1,186pages on
this wiki

Should have a clearer title/name Edit

I'm new to this wiki, but wanted to suggest that "Autism is to blame" be renamed to something that more clearly coveys the stance the article takes. ("Blaming autism"?) The current title implies that the article does blame autistic neurology for the behavior, effectively reinforcing the inaccurate stereotype (most people won't click through to learn otherwise) and giving the false impression that the geek feminist wiki folk are hostile towards those of us on the spectrum. Xyzzy (talk) 05:03, August 13, 2012 (UTC)

I see the problem, but we tend to name all our pages for the fallacies, eg Geeks are oppressed and Men are just like that and You should be flattered. Do you think this is a particular problem with this title, or with all of them? Thayvian (talk) 08:02, August 13, 2012 (UTC)
I don't have a huge objection to the name of this page. But it is more problemmatic than the other examples Thayvian cited. A title referring to "Geeks" (whether positive or negative) is unlikely to be taken badly when the vast majority of contributors and readers are known to identify as Geeks. A title which when taken out of context seems to hit all men probably won't be taken too badly given the fact that everyone who reads this site seriously agrees that there are significant gender inequalities. The title "You should be flattered" doesn't directly hit any group when read without context. So I wouldn't interpret a statement like "Men are to blame" as any sort of attack, but when I saw this page in my referrer logs I was worried for a minute (anyone can edit a wiki).Russell Coker (talk) 08:28, August 27, 2012 (UTC)

Disability vs DifferenceEdit

Within the NeuroDiversity community there is disagreement about whether an ASD is a disability or a difference, but there seems to be some agreement that Low Functioning Autism is a disability and that High Functioning Autism usually isn't. Professor Simon Baron-Cohen wrote a paper on this topic which seems to generally agree with this. Given that people on the Autism Spectrum who attend conferences tend to meet the "High Functioning" criteria the term "disability" isn't a good fit.Russell Coker (talk) 12:31, August 27, 2012 (UTC)

Never mind my previous comment, I'm not too happy with it. I think Simon Baron-Cohen is someone who has been criticized a lot by people with autism for speaking for them, so I don't think he's the best person to cite? I also find it pretty ableist to suggest that having a disability is a bad thing. This sounds kind of like the "oh, it would be so mean to people we like to suggest they are disabled, because it would suggest that they're like those awful disabled people who we would never want to associate with" line of reasoning. Monadic (talk) 19:45, August 27, 2012 (UTC)
The most common criticism of Simon Baron-Cohen is regarding his "Extreme Male Brain" theory, I'm sure that most people here would agree with such criticism. But I don't think that is relevant to this discussion, the paper I cited makes good points which coincide well with blog posts and discussions on, but Simon has described them in a much better manner. Also the Social Model of Disability is worth reading. I'm not going to argue with anyone on the Spectrum who identifies as disabled. But I don't feel that I am disabled.Russell Coker (talk) 03:50, August 28, 2012 (UTC)

It depends Edit

Sometimes ASDs will lead to sexual harrasment by accident or out of unnecessary desperation, and sometimes they won't. It depends what age they're diagnosed at, how much access there's been to treatment, whether the patient was still living with parents when first trying to date (I wasn't), whether a therapist knew to ask about the subject after that point, and whether anyone's given constructive feedback instead of just saying "stop being a creep". I wrote more on this here . Seahen (talk) 11:38, March 23, 2014 (UTC)

I just read that post on, Seahen's comment doesn't seem to have passed moderation. The other comments are mostly bad and the only reference to Aspies in the comments on that blog post is from a guy who is really creepy. Is the above paragraph even of sufficient quality for the talk page? Russell Coker (talk) 04:56, March 24, 2014 (UTC)

What is your opinion of Scott Aaronson? 02:35, February 8, 2015 (UTC)Collin237

I presume you mean this post by Scott Aaronson  He admits having psychological problems, his articles (and the commentary they inspired) are such a mess that it's difficult to say more about his points. Regarding the issue of Autism, he doesn't say that he's on the Autism Spectrum so it's probably best not to go further into that side of things unless/until he goes public.Russell Coker (talk) 12:12, February 8, 2015 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki