Comments on: Some quick corrections and clarifications.

By: Wired article on autism « Doctoral student - linguistics, language and studies

Mon, 17 Mar 2008 19:36:43 +0000

[…] and I think it was interesting. Amanda Baggs, one of the women featured in the article, wrote some comments on her blog after the article was […]

By: Shannon

Shannon — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:45:32 +0000

I found this site after reading the article. Thank you for sharing it, and these videos. Both have been extremely enlightening.

By: Danny

Danny — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 15:04:44 +0000

I read the Wired article and I saw the video (which was awesome, btw). You sound like an amazing person and an inspiration…thank you for sharing your story. :)

By: Calvin Lawson

Calvin Lawson — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 06:20:44 +0000

I saw your video on Wired. The article was OK (still rather insulting, I thought), but your video was AMAZING; you gave me a new experience and showed me a unique viewpoint.

I’m a “normal”, but think I understand a little bit how you see things, and I want to understand it more.

I can’t thank you enough for this. Your video will have a lasting positive effect on the world; you should be very proud!

By: Evelina

Evelina — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 22:35:12 +0000

Well, thinking it’s because of the tape is somehow really cute :) and innocent. You can always hope so, but i believe it always happens so with articles. Like when that time i gave an interview to a minor magazine about learning Japanese myself.. The girl wrote some stuff that sounded QUITE wrong.. Made me look smarter than i actually was.. That was rather awkward. Later i actually had to talk to people about it cause i offered my e-mail for people who wanted to ask questions.. (It’s been a half a year, they still mail me, i can’t believe that). Knowing they’d mail me, i didn’t want them to see me as someone i’m not. Anyway, they do that. Reporters, i mean. I guess it’s part of their work. Otherwise maybe people wouldn’t read the articles.

By: Ettina

Ettina — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:18:32 +0000

Dr L. Z.
Please don’t take what Amanda says just as about ‘autism’ either. You state that most of your practice is not autistic – many of them will likely benefit from you applying stuff that Amanda Baggs says about disability and difference despite not having the same label as her.
Regarding hand-flapping – I occasionally flap in public. I’ve gotten stares from people on occasion, but I’m working on not noticing them because I want to be freer to be myself. Ironically, when I’m with my family, even in a public place, I seem more free to be myself because they accept me.

By: Farson

Farson — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 02:24:33 +0000

I actually find helpful movement itself. Repetition isn’t the single overarching feature, although it does tend to having “themes” and some themes are very simple and repetitive. Often, though, what I do with my hands is kinda like signed gibberish, which I also do along with music. I also tap beats from music, and this got me in trouble from when I started doing it in sixth grade until I finally left public highschool for a less traditional setting. It was incredibly liberating when somebody told me to stop doing that and chill out and I was actually able to tell them to stuff it!

By: Melody

Melody — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 00:01:41 +0000

It was quite a good article, especially those who are uninitiated to the autistic rights discussions. It did strike me as odd in a few places, such as the false dichotomy they appeared to set up (that because autistics are more intelligent than was previously assumed, and because non-speaking autists can often communicate through typing, that it means that we’re not disabled, and furthermore – that it would be insulting to think of us as disabled, which it is not and shouldn’t be).

I also didn’t care for how they simplified Asperger diagnosis as being just eccentric, socially awkward people. It seemed too narrow a generalization. Some other minor things.

Overall, however, it is really a great, moreover accurate piece. I didn’t catch the misquotation, though I had seen christschool’s video, so I knew where the attribution for that actually is. Certainly it’s a far cry from the “pity these poor pathetic half-people who are trapped inside that horrible prison of autism” type stuff we usually see.

It still irritated me a bit that it seemed as if the case for being a valuable person was intelligence-dependent. It seems to stem from that idea of disabled people “needing” to compensate by being extraordinary in some other way. But that didn’t seem too prominent, whereas some other articles that’s the whole angle.

It’s nice to see someone listening to us, and then NOT horribly distorting our words to the ends of what they think makes a “sensational” story.

By: John

John — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 23:49:17 +0000

The Wired article does serve a good purpose of introducing neuro-typicals into the world of Autism. Just maybe some folks will reconsider that Autism means broken although I shan’t hold my breath since that would mean changing some pre-conceived notions.

Nice interview and I definitely like the creative means of communication.

At some point I’ll poke around the rest of your blog.

By: Dr. L. Z.

Dr. L. Z. — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 23:22:03 +0000

This is not a comment reflected toward your last posting, but to the entire blog that you have written.

I am a Psychiatrist, and have been practicing for 5 years. I have been trained and have learned about autism in the traditional way it was taught. My practice does not typically include autistic spectrum disorders, but I do see them from time to time. I am certain that you have had people refer to you as courageous and strong and congratulate you on your efforts, which you certainly deserve, but I am sure this was not your goal.

I want you to know that you have changed my mind about what I have learned. I appreciate the lesson you are trying to teach.

While it is an uphill road, I will climb it with you to begin to change people’s minds about this condition.

Thank you.

Dr. L. Z.