Tag: actually autistic

MBTI most accurate descriptions

jabberwockypie:

woolfhammer:

ESTP: super attractive physically but it’s all downhill from there. never quite know what they’re going to do next but you can probably bet it will be irresponsible. somehow still lovable. 

ESTJ: loud, logical, and get shit done — they are the warrior class of the life rpg. power stats make them unbeatable and if you encounter one, maybe just curl up and forfeit, to save time. 

ESFP: giggly little shits. fun fun fun till her daddy takes the t-bird away. great for lifting your mood, not that great at lifting your credit score. 

ESFJ: too appropriate, totally lacking in awkwardness. they’ll never forget your birthday, which will make you feel like shit when you constantly forget theirs. 

ENTP: excellent companions if you enjoy people who instantly see through all your shit. very clever and very intuitive, you can’t fool them. i suggest you invest in other friends — ones you *can* fool. 

ENTJ: impatient with people who make mistakes, namely, everyone. they’ll respect you if you stand up to them but why do that when you can run away instead. cuddle them and see what happens. i’m curious.

ENFP: too puppy to live. best suited for the profession of musical nanny. not advised for use around an open flame. 

ENFJ: way too charming and capable, maybe they should stop making everyone else look bad. prone to making other people care about stuff they didn’t want to care about. so annoying. 

ISTP: such butts. best suited for an apocalypse scenario, if no such scenario exists, they will create danger because they get bored. don’t encourage them, but don’t discourage them, as reverse psychology works too well.

ISTJ: low drama and low maintenance, best value at this price tier. best suited to actual human existence. least weird, which makes them kinda weird.

ISFP: squishy little darlings you might want to keep in your pocket, but please don’t or they will become forlorn. they notice everything, and it’s unnerving. 

ISFJ: quietly and proudly do things for others. if you have a ring you need to deliver to mordor, take an ISFJ along with you for best results. 

INTP: cute intergalactic spiders you want to hug and mistrust. prone to making you laugh but then days later you will wonder whether you were the butt of the joke. 

INTJ: major dicks and kinda proud of it. prone to being right. prone to liking trance music way too much. all the ones i’ve ever met have been unexpectedly kinky. so i guess, expectedly. 

INFP: they fall out of the sky and are raised by unicorns. if you feed one it will follow you home. they dissipate in water. 

INFJ: chameleons appropriating your emotions and going quietly mad. prone to meltdowns and needing lots of naps.

I tested as INTP a couple of years ago when I took this MASSIVE quiz with 10-15 pages.

Sounds legit.

Holy shit, I actually am an emotion-appropriating chameleon who has meltdowns and needs plenty of naps/downtime, wtf.

Autism language politics and history

realsocialskills:

Some people emphatically prefer to be called people with autism. Others get very offended. Some people empathically prefer to be called autistic people. Others get very offended. There are reasons for all of that.

They have to do with the history of the intellectual and developmental disability community, the autism parent community, and the specific autistic self advocacy community.

For intellectual and developmental disability:

  • Most self advocates have a very strong preference for person-first language
  • Person-first language in this concept means “I am a PERSON, and I am not going to allow you to treat me as a disability case study, nor am I going to tolerate your diagnostic overshadowing.”

Autism is a developmental disability. There is a highly visible and destructive community of parents who consider themselves to be afflicted with their child’s autism. There is an autistic self advocacy community that developed in part specifically due to the need to counteract the harm being done by autism parents. The language someone prefers will often depend on which of these facts seems most important at a given time.

Regarding developmental disability.

  • Folks who are primarily involved in the IDD self advocacy community usually prefer to be called people with autism
  • This is for the same reasons people with any sort of developmental disability usually prefer person first language
  • In that context, “person with autism” means “I am a PERSON, and you are not going to treat me like an autistic specimen.”

Regarding the destructive autism parent community:

  • This parent community pushes the agenda of parents who believe that their child’s autism is a horrible tragedy that befell their parents and family
  • They call themselves the autism community, but they consistently refuse to include or listen to autistic self advocates (especially adult self advocates). They only care about neurotypical parent perspectives (and only from parents who think autism is horrifying)
  • They promote things like intense behavioral therapy for young children, institutionalization, group homes, sheltered workshops and genetic research aimed at developing prenatal testing. They do not listen to autistic self advocates who object to these things.
  • They don’t care about the priorities of autistic self advocates. They do not do any work on issues such as self-directed adult services, enforcing the Olmstead mandate to provide services in the community rather than institutions, or research into skills for listening to people whose communication is atypical
  • These parents have an emphatic preference for person first language. They say “people with autism.”
  • What they mean by this is “Autism is NOT a part of who my child is, it’s an evil brain slug attached to their head, and I want to remove it at all costs.”

There is also an autistic self advocacy community. It developed in significant part to counteract the harm done by the autism parent community:

  • A lot of the agenda of the autistic self advocacy community is the same as the IDD community and pursued in cooperation with the IDD community
  • But there is also a lot of work that’s specifically about countering the harm that has been done by the autism parent community
  • Much of the worst harm done by the parent community comes from the cultural consensus that autism is like an evil brain slug, and that any amount of brutality is a good thing if it might mean that the slug shrinks or dies
  • For this reason, participants in the autistic self advocacy community generally have a very strong objection to person first language
  • They call themselves autistic or Autistic.
  • In this context, “autistic person” means “Autism is part of who I am. I’m ok. Stop trying to get me to hate myself. You do not need to remove autism to make me into a full person. We are already people. Stop physically and emotionally mutilating people in the name of treatment.”

Neither set of self advocates are wrong. Both positions are legitimate and important to be aware of. In order to know what someone means by their language choices, you have to consider the context. 

Autists are the ultimate square pegs, and the problem with pounding a square peg into a round hole is not that the hammering is hard work. It’s that you are destroying the peg.

Paul Collins (Author of Not Even Wrong: Adventures in Autism)

citations for why “theory of mind” is bullshit

this-reading-by-lightning:

this is the brief synopsis (in articles/citations) of over a years work reading basically everything ever written on these subjects. i still study them. i plan to continue studying them. but i want to crowdsource knowledge of this stuff, because “theory of mind” (as applied to autistic people, and as applied elsewhere) is actually an intellectual farce. here is why, if you’re up to reading:

why theory of mind is psychological/cognitive bullshit:

“The weirdest people in the world?” by Henrich, Heine and Norenzayan in Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33

  • it’s bullshit because 99% of psychological research is sooo non-representative of humanity as a whole that it’s not. even. funny.

“Joint Attention: Twelve Myths” by David A. Leavens in Joint Attention (2013)

  • theory of mind is bullshit because this is literally the greatest thing you’ll read in a long, long time. i would propose marriage to david leavens solely on the basis of this piece. all his other work? ALSO GREAT. but thisss. this was published IN THE SAME VOLUME as (and was actually the chapter right before) work by almost ALL the most famous social psychology/’theory of mind’ researchers in the world. 
  • if you ever wanted to read someone INTELLECTUALLY WHOOPING SIMON BARON COHENS ASS IN A PUBLIC FORUM this is what you’ve been waiting for your whole life.
  • these arguments are on the topic of comparative psychology (i.e. comparing humans and other species—in this case, other ape/primate species) but they are like ALL relevant to human developmental psychology.

“Conceptual and Methodological Issues in the Investigation of Primate Intersubjectivity” by Racine, Leavens, Susswein, and Wereha, in Enacting Intersubjectivity (2008)

  • theory of mind is bullshit because the people who do all that research on babies and chimps and whatever else and autistic people and whatever…those people? yeah, they’re heinous at theoretical science AND heinous at experimental science. and here’s a discussion of why this is so by some great primatologists/comparative psychologists who work with non-human primates (including david leavens my boo). 

why theory of mind is anthropological/cultural bullshit:

“Toward a cultural phenomenology of intersubjectivity: The extended relational field of the Tzotzil Maya of highland Chiapas, Mexico” by Kevin Groark in Language and Communication 33

“Speaking the Devil’s language: Ontological challenges to Mapuche intersubjectivity” by Magnus Course in Language and Communication 33

  • (preface about anthropology: these are nerdy white male anthropologists acting as authorities on non-white, non-western cultures to which they do not belong. i dislike ethnography 99.9% of the time for these reasons, but these articles are tolerably not-dickish and very insightful/relevant, so i’m citing them)
  • theory of mind is bullshit because none (NONE) of the “normal human social development” or “normal human social assumptions” that theory of mind researchers constantly reference are consistently present in cultures besides highly industrialized western cultures.

why theory of mind is sociological/ethical bullshit:

“The Pathos of ‘Mindblindness’: Autism, Science, and Sadness in ‘Theory of Mind’ Narratives” by John Duffy and Rebecca Dorner in Journal of Literary and Cultural Disability Studies 5:2

“Minds Between Us: Autism, mindblindness and the uncertainty of communication” by Anna McGuire and Rod Michalko in Educational Philosophy and Theory 43:2

  • boom boom boom theory of mind is bullshit because its so obviously an idea people have made up specifically to tell certain stories about autistic people AND about neurotypical people. and those stories they tell with theory of mind? they’re not innocent or neutral WHATSOEVER. they make up theories like this for a reason.

AND THEN the best of the best. this was published around the end of my year of researching this, when i had been told by my advisor that i needed to publish on the topic, and when i was sitting around saying “my life is in shambles, i am almost getting kicked out of school, all because i can’t write, how could i possibly write this now? but it needs to be written?” and then i saw this one morning, and spent the rest of the day dancing around campus. i squealed when i saw the title. just knowing that someone else was thinking about this in similar ways was enough to pull me through that time. i love this piece:

“Clinically Significant Disturbance: On Theorists who Theorize Theory of Mind” by Melanie Yergeau in Disability Studies Quarterly 33:4

What Is Stimming ?

© Donna Williams

Someone asked me:

As I’m new to autism terminology, could someone please tell me what stimming is?

I replied:

Stimming stood for ‘self stimulatory behaviours’. Something non-auties imagined they didn’t have!

Stimming is aword created by non-auties with often negative connotations. It was a word created by non-auties who didn’t understand that some folks had compulsive but involuntary tics, some had self calming tools they didn’t understand, some had sensory fascinations they couldn’t relate to, some needed to tune out to tune in, some needed a tool for social distance in the face of compulsive social invaders, some needed to be repetitive in order to download, some needed to compensate for a non-autie multitrack world they couldn’t process in thier mono-tracked reality, some needed something to get lost in when utterly blowing all fuses…. and, anyway, the non-auties labelled, as is there tendency, this vast array of experiences with one word as if it was one thing at all times to all people labelled ‘Autistic’.

Forgive them. They know not what they see.

Donna williams (via sabatons-and-spectrums)

Yup.

Which is kind of why I go with “if you think you’re stimming, I’m not arguing.” Not like there’s a consistent definition to be had.

(via fuckyeahstimming)

jabberwockypie:

youneedacat:

ufod:

heres an idea: instead of trying to “fix” autism try to fix the way allistic people react to austic people because saying you want to cure autism and trying to find a way to make sure autistic children arent born is just like saying that you want to cure gay people and thats :///////

They actually did that.

As in, there were studies.

They found that when they tried to improve the social skills of the autistic kids, nothing much happened.

When they improved the social skills of the nonautistic kids (by telling them how to properly interact with autistic people without freaking us out and overloading us), then the autistic kids’ social skills suddenly improved.

Why?  Because we were reacting to being treated with respect for the first time ever, by other kids.  Because other kids were making room for our sensory sensitivities and our social differences.  Because they were making an accessible environment for us, and in an accessible environment, suddenly we thrived socially.

And that says everything about where the social skills problems actually lie.

How about making things that autistic people need more accessible and not cost WAY more money than most people can afford? If people are nonverbal much of the time but, say, have a much easier time typing, how about we just ACCOMMODATE THAT with electronic thingies that talk or whatever works best for that person?

My brother is 15 and autistic.  He also has some cognitive impairments.  Sam is … I don’t know a good way to say “more autistic than me” (which sounds awful) without resorting to a Functioning label, unfortunately, and I don’t want to do that.  (I’m afraid I avoid looking up autism stuff like the plague because it makes me want to set the cure and anti-vaxxer types on fire and I don’t need that added stress.)  *considers*  Sam consistently has more difficulties than I do, though we’re both on the Autism Spectrum.  How’s that?  (Seriously, if you can help with terminology, I’d appreciate it. iamshadow21, do you have anything for me that doesn’t sound terrible?)

You know what would be really great for Sam?  A service dog.  Even though we’ve been working on the “Sam, you have to look both ways before you cross the street.  Stop look and listen!” thing for years, Sam just can’t get it down.   That’s a serious safety hazard!  And I think it’d help him feel less isolated, too.  AND it’d help his anxiety and stress levels in loud, crowded public places when he starts to feel overwhelmed.  But there’s no way we can pay thousands of dollars for that.  AND a lot of service dog programs are focused around little kids with nothing for teens or adults.

Most of the autism programs – at least in our area – stop around age 10.  MAYBE a couple go to age 12.  But … apparently autistic kids aren’t going to grow up to be autistic teens and autistic young adults?  There is quite literally NOTHING for a kid Sam’s age.  There isn’t in most places.  And I’m not talking about a cure thing, but being able to socialize with other people his age who GET IT.

Sam knows he’s different.  He’s a pretty happy kid, but he does know that.  He’s lumped into a general special ed class for his first and last hour at school and mainstreamed for the rest with an aide and I HATE IT.  I hate it SO MUCH.  Half the time they just dick around and show the kids movies.  That is not educational in any way whatsoever – it’s not like they talk about the content in any way.  They don’t even seem to have anyone trained properly in Special Ed – based on my observations at any rate.

You know what Sam needs to learn that ISN’T stupid movies?  Real life skills like practice with money and how much money is worth.  (We work on that at home with his allowance for chores, but we can’t do it completely alone.)  Telling time – though he’s actually not bad at that and I try to work with him, but I’m not a trained teacher and I can’t quite figure out which part is tripping him up.  IN THEORY his actual teachers should be able to help with that.

I threw a hardcore temper tantrum – tears streaming down my cheeks and repeating sentences over and over and rocking A LOT, and screaming over my mom using the telephone – when I found out that in high school they were putting him in the “Vocational Training” class.   That’s a polite way of saying “They have the Special Education kids empty the trash and the recycling bins and sometimes work in the cafeteria serving school lunch so they don’t have to pay somebody to do it.”  And if Sam is doing that, he should damn well be getting paid.  I went to that high school (before I dropped out).  I saw the way the other assholes at high school treated those kids!

The ONLY reason that I’m putting up with it at all is that my mom has been sick/injured enough to require a lot more of my attention and doesn’t have the energy to deal with it and *I* can only handle so much – especially since I’m Sam’s sister and not his legal guardian.  And Sam likes it, but he’s being taken advantage of horribly and it infuriates me.  I want to rip their faces off with my teeth.

Goddamned fucking circle people.*

*Again to quote House:  See, skinny, socially-privileged white people get to draw this neat little circle. And everyone inside the circle is “normal”. Anyone outside the circle needs to be beaten, broken and reset so that they can be brought into the circle. Failing that, they should be institutionalized. Or worse – Pitied

If he can tell you, I’d ask him how he categorises his autistic experience and respect that, but basically, disability is not a dirty word. If particular aspects of his autism are disabling, if they affect his life in ways that need accommodation or support, then disability or difficulty are the right words to use. You are both autistic, but your patterns of dis/ability will be different from each other, as they would with any two autistic people, especially if either of you has other diagnoses to factor in. Sam may struggle with things you can manage, and vice versa. Many autistic people object to functioning labels because they imply a line, with ‘severe’ at one end and ‘neurotypical’ at the other and all the bullshit assumptions that go along with that flawed viewpoint, when really, neurodiversity is like a colour wheel scattered with buckshot. Everyone’s skills and difficulties form a different constellation.