Friday, February 12, 2010

Michael John Carley disses nonAsperger's lower functioning autistics

I have recently read an interesting post on the autism jabberwocky blog about neurodiversitite Michael John Carley. Roger Kulp of the new "smash the spectrum" blog mentions Carley in his post also. It would seem that Mr. Carley, an individual who was able to get married, have two children, support a family and was not diagnosed with an ASD until age 36 and only after one of his sons was diagnosed with an ASD feels that the new changes in the DSM which would eliminate Asperger's and make all ASD's part of a group just called autism are in his words "hard to swallow".

Carley has stated in his book Asperger's from the inside out that there is a universal feeling among persons on the autism spectrum that they don't want to be cured. He seems to want to speak for me in spite of being Asperger's which means he likely never had a speech delay as I had or spent several years in special education as I did. Naturally Carley has no basis for this blanket statement other than various things he has read on wrongplanet or other ND websites. So he spreads the same baloney that Alex Plank spreads. Carley takes pride in his Asperger's diagnosis because he states that Einstein and Jefferson had Asperger's syndrome. As at least some readers of the gadfly blog know I have written an essay which refutes this notion by Carley and other NDs.

Carley apparently does not like the idea of being called autistic because it means he would be classified along with persons who head bang or who are adults in diapers rather than being able to fancy himself another Albert Einstein or Thomas Jefferson.

MJ, author of the autism jabberwocky blog, who, if I am not mistaken, has two twin daughters who are both on the more severe end of the spectrum (I guess if MJ reads this he can correct me if I am wrong), naturally took umbrage at this comment. Carley's beliefs seem to be rather condescending if not somewhat bigoted. MJ pointed out that it would seem strange that this man who at one time made a living as a diplomat working with the United Nations would in fact be so undiplomatic and I agree with his assessment.

Roger Kulp, in the above linked post, pointed out some MRI studies that suggest that on a neurophysiologic level that autism and Asperger's may be more dissimilar disorders than people at first thought. So there may be something to the autism is not Asperger's mantra.

One wonders if other ND's share Carley's sentiments. They claim to be about dignity and human rights. They claim that autism speaks and the autism genetic resource exchange largely exist to deliberately come up with a prenatal test that would enable autistic fetuses to be aborted. Yet Carley does not seem to care about anyone but Shiny Aspies besides himself.

One can only hope that the new changes in the DSM will mean that most neurodiversitites who state they are on the spectrum who have asperger's rather than autism will no longer be able to call themselves autistic and say they are people like me, who had a speech delay as a small child and was probably pretty severely autistic and went to special schools for 8 years etc. I can also hope that perhaps the new DSM might mean the end of the neurodiversity movement. I wrote about this idea in a previous gadfly post but I reckon it is really too much to wish for.


Stephanie said...

It's just not cool to be 19 years old, completely non-verbal, in diapers, have zero academic abilities and if not watched closely enough might wonder off into traffic.

Other NDs embrace the change so that they can now call themselves "autistic" without parents of LFAs getting angry at them, so that they can now say they speak for everyone because everyone now has "autism!"

farmwifetwo said...

Can't say I'm surprised about those self dx'ing, late in life b/c I have quirks but still have a "real life" aspies are upset... maybe it'll get rid of those that think autism's some "cutsie club" that they can ignore those with true difficulties.

M.J. said...


Thanks for the mention. I think this is yet another example of why people like Michael John Carley do not speak in the best interests of people with autism. I just wish there were not so many examples of this happening.

My twins are probably on the moderate range of the spectrum - their communication problems are profound but the rest is on the milder side. They show every sign of being very intelligent so here is hoping that they will find a way to compensate for the disabling aspects of their autism. My youngest seems to be well on her way to being one of the "recovered" children with autism.

But even still, I think Mr Carley would find it "hard to swallow" being associated with any of them. Maybe someone should explain to him what the word "acceptance" means...

Larry Arnold PhD FRSA said...

For what it is worth Carley's comments sicken me too.

John Best said...

Most people don't realize that is just part of the overall propaganda foisted on us by Pharma under the guise of Neurodiversity.

The people who agree with this nonsense are lying. They know it's wrong. They could never stand face to face and look you in the eye and state that this makes sense.

As usual, the arguments from the Neuronitwits are all specious. The psychological warfare agents from my side won't take a stand so you know they're part of it. It's all designed to murder the most severely autistic in asylums and get rid of them.

Anonymous said...

Apparently, some people on the "spectrum" do not understand the intention of where someone like Michael is coming from.

Mike is basically saying from what he knows, most people on the spectrum do not wish for a cure. That's a fact he's observed within the autism community, and this does not indicate that he is totally unaware that autism is a horrible disability.

When he does say that he'd rather be labeled as having "Asperger's", that indicates he does not want to be classified under his personal documentation with the label of "autism". It's also another story for Mike to use the "Einstein/Jefferson" card to educate autistics on how important it is to not use your disability as a crutch. I'm pretty sure he'd be in line for a cure if it ever were to exist.

When Neurodiversity uses their "autism is a way of being" card constantly, one with at least average intelligence should be able to figure out after a while that they're taking it way over the top to the point he/she is able to tell ND is, in reality, full of pessimistic people (though it's not all their fault since we never know what the person behind the keyboard and monitor is going through in his/her life) who cannot stop obsessing over it and forget how annoying they're becoming toward others due to their lack of theory of mind. It especially becomes apparent when ND advocates and other members defend the lower functioning autistics, yet those same people complain that they don't want to be classified as having "autism".

Another thing I've recently thought about with the upcoming DSM V is that people on the autism spectrum have a tendency to get too caught up with labels since they do not completely grasp who they are and have a naive concept of who they are due to their lack of insight of their limitations. The truth is that people on the autism spectrum each have their own set of limitations and strengths. Some people with cerebral palsy may be in a wheelchair for the remainder of his/her life, yet that same individual could be someone who excels in school and work. There may also be someone with that same disability who has the same strengths as the individual described above, only he/she uses crutches. Others with cerebral palsy may be able to walk quite well by the time he/she gets older, yet that same individual struggles with handwriting and math. That's pretty much the same thing that occurs with autism, only we struggle with our own set of core deficits. That's why I said in the past that I prefer classifying the speech-delayed autistics as having PDD and the aspies as having Asperger's Syndrome while keeping the non-verbal, head banging autistics as having autism. Actually, I think what would be better is classifying HFA and AS into the Asperger's category where some affected individuals, such as myself, have a speech-language impairment or other learning disabilities; then simply categorize the non-verbal individuals with behavioral challenges as having "Autism" or "Autistic Disorder".

Adrianna said...

The autism spectrum concept *as it currently exists* is confusing and just not informative. However, as I have stated repeatedly before, I still support the existence of a spectrum in a *heavily modified* form. All disabilities have a range of presentations and of severity. The fact just isn't formalized as is the case with autism. Everything else I wanted to say about this was articulated beautifully by JediKnight and his example of cerebral palsy, even if he doesn't agree with the spectrum idea.

Besides, I really don't think it makes a difference what we call it. A lot of people will beg to differ with me here, and we'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't think the spectrum concept has harmed low-functioning autistics.

It's the idea that physical and mental illness, disability, trauma, and various other negative experiences should be romanticized. And that's not a recent concept whatsoever. This glorification of "Gothic" life elements has been going on since the beginning of time. It's the stereotype of the mad scientist, the tortured artist, the misunderstood villain, etc.

No matter what we do, morons like the autistic bitch from hell will find ways to feel like tragically misunderstood victims of society. Because enduring REAL suffering, and taking responsibility for your life, are too hard.

Stephanie said...

"Because enduring REAL suffering, and taking responsibility for your life, are too hard."

This is what I think all of these NDs need to do: learn to take responsibility for their lifes.

I hear that many with HFA/AS can't drive but I can and am more disabled than most and have had a much more difficult life than most.

I have no one to take care of me, my mommy and daddy aren't going to buy me things, and I had to learn how to drive so that I could survivie (i.e. eat).

It doesn't seem like some of them understand that some of us HAD to learn to do things for survivial because we don't have people taking care of us and we don't have the money to live so easily.

If I had people to take care of me and buy me things than I probably wouldn't have learned to do a lot of things. But luckily that isn't how my life has been.

I also know of people with multiple college degrees who, for some mysterious reason, cannot hold a job. They can get through college, earn more than one degree with a high GPA, but they can't get a job. Can they even volunteer somewhere? At least I do that much.

I don't really have the luxury of just being able to "be" disable dbecause I can be, because it is my "right."

Droopy said...

I love how this new DSM writeup makes it clear autism starts in childhood (no duh, you think, really?) -- that also wipes Amanda Malingerer Baggs and any other "oh I feel a regression coming on in my 20's lemme grab a communicator and a diaper" set right off the map as well

I'm glad if this schmuck (Michael Carley) and his drunken bully friend "Clay" right along with the rest of them 'don't wanna be in the autism club' any more -- because they never were to begin with!

and don't be afraid that this is somehow going to make things worse that for some hardcore autism fetishists that they'll be 'calling themselves autistic' -- they already are and they already do

Its "I'm an aspie I'm a misunderstood genius, its a gift its a way of life" when it suits but they already "I'm autistic, I need a blank check on my actions, I can't be held responsible, I just need lots of sympathy and love and supports and goodies and.."

They're already doing that, playing it both ways when it suits

what else can they do?
This DSM thing is worthy of getting a bit nervous about and wondering, but looking at it I don't see how it can make things any worse.

It may however, make things better.

Especially because the way it reads to me it really rules most of Neurodiveristy out (thats worth its weight in gold.. if nobody noticed, this is one diaper-clad nonverbal autistic who is loath to be associated with their ASSperger asses at least every bit as much as they are mine.

and it'll have 'severity' marks on it as well

so now they don't wanna be in the autism club all of a sudden, and because it always has and always will include people like me and people much more severely impacted than me and they won't be so easily able to hide that fact and hide people like me from our own 'spectrum' that originates and is based on the challenes of people like me and beyond?

All I can say to that and to them is:

Hallelujah, good riddence, never wanted you here (seriously!) see ya, wouldn't wanna be ya, don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out!

Droopy said...

PS (and Jonathan please let both comments this and the one before it through)

I have said it before many times and it bears repeating now:

I was Autistic, when Autistic wasn't cool

John Robison said...

Good afternoon Jonathan,

Some of you may follow the research I'm involved with at Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Hospital. What I have learned is that there do seem to be brain differences that separate people on the autism spectrum from neurotypical folks. So science is beginning to figure out hard measurements that identify us as a specific subgroup of humanity, just as we have people with type a or type o blood.

You asked me about Lindsay Oberman the other day . . . this plasticity difference is her particular area of study.

However, there are no hard measurements (yet) that are predictive of autistic disability. The brain differences we see in autism apply equally to a nonverbal person and someone else you might call a brilliant fellow with a touch of Asperger's.

So the science is showing us (you, me, anyone else with this autistic difference) to be the same in that way, and the same in our differences even thouch some of us are profoundly disabled by this condition and a few of us are equally enabled.

No one has identified any repeatable reliable diagnostic criteria that would separate autism and Asperger's in adults. There are "high" and "low" functioning autistic and Aspergian individuals. While it's true that more high function people are identified as Asperger's, there is no hard line or diagnostic difference. It's really pretty arbitrary, it turns out.

That's the essential reason people advocate for this change. The available scientific evidence shows you and me to have many measurable brain similarities despite widely varying differences in social functioning and even general health.

Against that, you have a large number of people whose identity is wrapped up in a diagnosis, and you have concerns that publich health or education funding may be cut when and if a person's diagnostic categorization changes. Finally, you have the possiblity of diagnostic confusion and confusion by lay people because the range of affect in autism spectrum disorders is so broad.

Frankly, I don't know if I should be for or against the change, but it's not for me to decide, and I can live perfectly happily either way. Remember that we are in tne end all individuals and all fellow humans, two points that transcend diagnosis.

It really troubles me that people at different ends of the spectrum often have such fixed and opposite views. Speaking for myself, my exposure to folks like you (Jonathan) has broadened my views and (I hope) made me a better advocate for us all.

I surely understand why you would wish to remediate the components of your disability, just as I understand Carley's desire to be left alone. It makes me sad that there is not more mutual acceptance of these positions because if we banded together even knowing we had opposite therapeutic goals, we could do a heck of a lot more.

I do hope you talk to Lindsay and I'll be sure to come welcome you if you decide to visit us at the TMS lab in Boston.

jonathan said...

John Robison: Good afternoon yourself. I may write to Dr. Oberman at some point in time again, I already did so once to obtain her mu wave suppression study. As you may know already, I also saw her lecture in Southern California recently. Congratulate her for me on her son who I guess will be born in a few months. If I ever happen to be in the Boston area I will be happy to take you up on your offer.

As far as what you have written about brain differences, I suspect you are talking about research Dr. Oberman has done which has not yet been published or submitted to any type of peer review. It usually takes a year and a half or longer before research is done to the point where it gets published. I am not sure what your understanding of scientific rigor is, but research has to be published in journals and then be independently replicated before it has any credibility (at least with me and I suspect most of the scientific community which I admit I am not part of). Until that research is published and replicated I will treat it as not being established fact. I would be interested in taking part in a TMS study but I am about 3,000 miles away from you and Dr. Oberman and it is most likely not feasible to do so and I never heard back from someone whom I left a phone message with at UCLA. Perhaps someday I will pursue the matter further.

John Robison said...

Jonathan, one of the ideas I'm talking about is that autistic people have greater than normal brain plasticity. That's a concept that's been discussed and reviewed in a number of peer reviewed journals.

Lindsay's study results - which are wending their way through the publication process - describe a new way to actually measure plasticity. So the difference is not a new concept but the measurement tool is.

Her measurement results are striking, and if you have serious interest I invite you to discuss them firsthand with her.

J.Benson said...

I encountered on of these NDs once, and pointed out that, from my understanding, many kids on the spectrum had difficulty empathizing with others. Did it ever occur to him that his bigotry and inability to see my child as needing "a cure" was actually part of his own disorder?

I sort of mildly disagree about Einstein though. I think he was on the spectrum somewhere, just judging from his social difficulties and some of his reported "quirks". However, since he had an unhappy marriage and basically took off on his children (one with his own disorder) to pursue his obsessive interest, where's the cool, people? No one wants to look the pain of this disorder squarely in the face!

Ender said...

Okay are you seriously going to try telling me that John Best doesn't hate the fact that there will be nothing else for real aspies to call themselves besides for calling themselves autistic. Its bad for both sides. Though when are you going to start protesting against NBC for putting a positive light on autism by putting an asperger's kid on their new show?

Droopy said...

something all these alleged genius so-called "aspies" DO have in common (Einstein, Gates etc) while its not autism related,

is that they all made something of themselves and could give a shit less about any stupid-assed label to wear and whine and bang around about, much less beating up on people who are disabled in the process.

they were/are too busy living their lives making something of themselves, and doing what they do best.

I know but only one person who might very well be the only honest-to-god "Aspie" I've ever met and (sans the famous part) he fits to perfection the above description,

and that's my own brother.

(He could seriously give a shit less about this crap, the label, and Neurodiversity, he's too busy living his life and doing his thing to beat up on people like his little sister or anybody else)

Hey all you Neurodiversitees

jonathan said...

Ender: I expected your comment in the other thread. I will protest the TV show on this blog if it ever comes on the air and I hear that they are indeed giving an ND prospective, the way I always deconstruct the bullpucky that ND spews out on here

Droopy said...

You want to make fun of people, do you?

Here you go, Neurodiversity, in your face back at you

how many Neurodiversitees does it take to screw in a light bulb?

they're way too busy discussing whether the lightbulb is fluorescent or regular, how lovely it would be to 'stim' on it if only someone would change the bulb, endlessly going on themselves detailing how put upon they are and incapable they are due to their 'executive function' and other 'problems' ad nauseum

and how its all really the world's fault anyway

and how they can then organize and rally around 'Autistics'(but not *really* autistics they just mean themselves) should never have to sit in lightless dark (unless they're very briefly - this is taboo unless referring to meet their own ends to when one of us gets murdered -- referring to actual autistics -- who then they say should sit in the dark and out of sight anyway and really not talked about)

and how what they really should organize and rally around and make a campaign, made a media and telephone and email blitz bombing relentlessly until their targets give up for the sake of shutting them up, for their special 'rights as autistics' to not ever have to suffer another burnt lightbulbs ever again (email/media/contact bomb the manufacturer of the bulb too), because Neurodiversitees are self-proclaimed too 'special' to have to suffer this sort of thing

to make the world (and lightbulbs, lightbulb makers and those who should have already changed it for them) troubles and being misunderstood

and all these troubles that are the worlds fault that keep them so busy and incapable and are such an accessibility issue to keep them busy and talking and organizing,
but far from getting off their dead asses to actually change that light bulb.

Of course, none of them would ever ever really want to change the lightbulb in the first place

(and thus set off yet another hearty round of discussion) over the agreed upon conviction that the lightbulb is probably perfectly happy as it is (and since they can't ask it and it can't speak for itself) its agreed upon it is the job of the ever 'rights aware' neurodiversitee to speak for this 'lightbulb with a difference' and announce this and that no one really has the right to change it anyway,

cause Neurodiversity said so.

Droopy said...

Whats the very worst insult you can call a Neurodiversitee?


(how do you like me now?)

Droopy said...

Ender said...

"Okay are you seriously going to try telling me that John Best doesn't hate the fact that there will be nothing else for real aspies to call themselves besides for calling themselves autistic. Its bad for both sides."

I can't speak for John Best, but MY hopeful expectation is that 'real aspies' (which I see as actually considerably quite fewer and farther from and quite different overall than whats been 'demonstrated' by Neurodiversity)

certainly 'real aspies' will be included.

I believe "Real Aspies" are considerably more impacted than what most of you are demonstrating, and are much farther and fewer in between.

Some people read the new and say "gee anyone could be 'autistic'

(but that's exactly the way I've always read the "Asperger" criteria as it is now, when I first saw it in a doctor's office my response was exactly "jeeze now they've gone and put normal in the book' and I laughed, having no idea what a mess it was going to bring)

But I look at this new idea and it looks considerably more restrictive, at least the way I read it, and that makes me happy, gives me hope.

I've never been quite clear for example on just what Jonathan Mitchell's deal is (seems to be some confusion over whether he is actually in fact "Asperger" or within some sort of "uber HFA" realm, but at least a bit more realistically in his situation if that be the case).

I would guess that Jonathan will be included and does not have to worry greatly about 'losing his spectrum disorder' and I know I'm safe (this actually could even further help my personal cause and ongoing case I have for support services)

but with this new notion I think a lot of you Neurodiversitees will (or certainly should at least) find yourselves to no longer be included as diagnosed or 'on the spectrum" at all.

I should think quite a few of these 'self-diagnosed' can and should simply 'undiagnose' themselves/yourselves at this point.

If handled properly (and I wish I had a bit more confidence that it will be) this could actually be a very good thing, for us.

I just no longer trust the powers that be in any way shape or form (the same Sanjay gupta that ran a massive scam on our 'autism community' very nearly became our surgeon general and there is Ari up there.. Ari would certainly no longer be 'on the spectrum' if this is handled properly and as it reads at least to me)

Services and focus could finally go to those who really need them.

if the government etc really wants to save themselves some money and do it the right way, the sensible thing they need to close this currently open door so that people who don't need the services can climb on board and make demands for things they really don't need. This would be just the way do to that.

(Think of it as closing the "National Neurodiversity border" because we've had some real problems with this)

We could also see how much of an epidemic etc there really is, how many Autistics are there really, etc (yet another something else yet again that's been horribly confused and screwed up by all of this messing about)

Anonymous said...

"...Carley takes pride in his Asperger's diagnosis because he states that Einstein and Jefferson had Asperger's syndrome. As at least some readers of the gadfly blog know I have written an essay which refutes this notion by Carley and other NDs..."

Read this:

Even more points to support you!

jonathan said...

Droopy: I would most likely be considered high functioning autism since from age 2-1/2 to 4 I was almost completely nonverbal and the speech delay is usually what is used to differentiate asperger's and high functioning autism. Unlike yourself, I recovered my speech at about 4 years of age.

At one time I thought of myself as Asperger's like due to motor coordination problems and poor performance on performance IQ versus relatively high verbal IQ and have stated in the past that I had Asperger's symptomatology or the like before knowing the difference between Asperger's and HFA. Also I was on a national radio show some years back where the reporter incorrectly stated I had Asperger's. This may have been where the confusion originated. I now no longer really speak of myself as Asperger's but high functioning autistic. When I was first diagnosed as autistic it was many years before Asperger's was even added to the lexicon by Lorna Wing. So I don't believe the new DSM change would affect me.

Droopy said...

I can't even tell if this went through before (I always have a hellofatime with making out the letters on the the 'word verification' thing)

jonathan said...

[...]"I would most likely be considered high functioning autism since"[...]

[...]"At one time I thought of myself as"[...]

Okay as soon as I saw your reply I had an immediate response which I have been holding back (and figured you wouldn't post anyway), a response I'm betting I am not the only one to have had:

"would most likely be"?

(and you're probably not going to let this go through because its going to look like I'm questioning too closely or whatever -- well I do that, and its not always meant to 'call someone out' -- see what I said earlier/above, I meant that.
You do seem to be legit and safe from losing your diagnosis etc.. but you have to have one first, I mean currently)

I wasn't actually asking/wondering what you thought actually, I was asking what have (diagnostically/officially/label-wise), what are you called now, by (a) doctor(s) professional(s)?

Especially since you're in a situation I'm familiar with on two different levels -- a working familiarity with the SSA (since I have family members who actually worked for the social security administration in the SSI/SSDI division which as a side note complicated things a bit and made it interesting when I was first put on SSI many years ago -- though I still got it on the first try)

and the fact that I am currently in a related situation (insomuch as its a court setting, mine is not an SSA issue but instead regarding supports and services I need to continue living independently and I'm in the state that's 50th in everything and been hit hardest of all of them).

and so,
you could say I have at least a 'sense' or a 'good general working knowledge of" at least, of what's required

you're trying to get SSDI, right?

I made an assumption you were trying to get this based on having one or the other so-called 'spectrum' diagnoses.

Was I wrong in that assumption?

I would have guessed especially having particular reason to as you do, you would know, would have heard it said seen it written, etc.

"would most likely" does not sound like a phrase someone would use who's been recently actually formally diagnosed with anything (and would therefor know) Social Security take in records that you provide and also have 'third party' examiners, and if you haven't done and don't have that

then that resulting "would most likely be" just might be half your problem with not getting SSDI.

I am not asking you to post papers or write down diagnostic codes or prove yourself or anything of the sort.

I just wanted to know if the way 'they' do it now, if you have "HFA" or if you have "Aspergers."

and I'm telling you,
and this is meant as friendly advice:

that if you're going to go to court, then at very least you need to know.

jonathan said...

Droopy I was diagnosed as autistic by a psychiatrist and my pediatrician long before there was such a thing as Asperger's. Dr. Alan Lincoln who has worked with Eric Courchesne has confirmed my diagnosis. You can believe whatever you want about me without knowing me personally.

I am applying for SSDI. The majority of persons who apply for SSDI are initially turned down and there is usually a long arduous court fight that goes on for several years. It is even worse for me because I worked in spite of my limitations, so I don't have a very strong case.

That's all the explanation I owe you for anything. That is my last comment to you on the subject and I am not going to discuss it with you further.

Droopy said...


I never said you owe me anything -- and neither do I you
(just so we're clear on that)

but before you brittle up and burst a blood vessel or something over there, know that by my addressing it head on, and by a stroke of luck it actually eliciting a response to it out of you

I think I was doing you a favor.
(not that I owe you any)

Its a question I'm sure a few have had, especially at reading your earlier response (and I guess by the manner in which you replied that you really haven't been reading me).


Thanks for adding my blog to your list of links lineup

(and you may consider this a retraction of at least that portion of the remarks that I made over at John Best's blog)

Anonymous said...

"Everything else I wanted to say about this was articulated beautifully by JediKnight and his example of cerebral palsy, even if he doesn't agree with the spectrum idea."

Thanks, Adrianna! :)

It's not easy for me to articulate things the way I desire to when I'm talking to people offline, but with my deep thought processing skills to express myself much better through typing and with persevering on autism for over a decade, it's much easier for me to explain how I feel about my autism, especially as I've matured with age.

Anonymous said...

mr. carley called me "lazy" on the phone during a conversation we had several years ago. i told him then and several times after that he had no business using this term towards me. i did not think that he knew me well enough to say this even with the best of intention,that is to say,as a form of "tough love",or well intended cajoling. i reminded him,that my comming from a spanish speaking background,made that sort of allusion to being slothfull,inappropriate to say the least. he has never come off his arrogant self serving high horse. BTW-this is just one incident. in and of itself,i'd never make that big a deal of this. i have even tried my best to be diplomatic and try to meet him half way. i have faults,like everyone else. but michael's monomaniac intransegence seems to know no bounds. i believe he saw me as a threat to his authority,which in his mind,could compromise the accolades and monetary gravy train. a g

Jona E. Kessans said...

Really....who cares if the label is Aspergers or doesn't change anything for those of us who have gone through all that we have and still have to deal with a society of a majority of NT's and their rules imposed on us. Michael John Carley is doing good by advocating for those of us on the how can anyone fault that? Advocacy is a positive way to promote something as opposed to revolt or fighting against something. I am a 42 year old female U.S. Army Veteran, multiple degree holder, and "officially" diagnosed this year. So what again? Does it mean I did not have speech delay - not sure as what is normal time frame for someone to speak? What is a fact is that I had speech therapy and much of it and many years of extra reading teachers and classes and was in a "special ed" class for years before there was such a thing in public schools. I did work to make my weakness of English my strength and got a BA in English with Honors. Big whoopee again! Went on to study law and now getting yet another graduate degree in Neuro-Economics. Never been able to hold a normal; W-2 job as NT rules and processes just don't jive with my Aspie/Autie brain. But been very successful as a self-employed consultant and published writer. Again big fat deal!

I guess my primary point it, who cares what one labels him/her self? Some are not going to like losing the Aspie term and some are not going to like that we MENSA level Auties are here. Too bad, so sad......but in the end it does not do one damn thing to change all the NT crap all of us have had to endure. So why should we all be at one another's throats for nothing but what amounts to semantics at most. HOw someone goes about advocating for us is their right and should be their right.

Sitting back and bitching bitterly and being a miserable self-pitying schmuck is just a waste of time and energy. Having Autism/Aspergers - or whatever the hell you want to call it is a fact we all have to deal with and the more empowered we become the less NT society can shove their "disability" lable down our throat. Make sense?