4 ms·

Different take: Interpreting that comment as being somehow mean and against autistic people is dishonest, judgemental, and frankly evokes a sense of taking adva

by zo1 5y ago

Different take: Interpreting that comment as being somehow mean and against autistic people is dishonest, judgemental, and frankly evokes a sense of taking advantage of a situation to promote a personal goal. The discussion is effectively de-railed, the person's comment demeaned and substance distracted from, and here we all are, forced to discuss this topic whereas 100% likely that the person that used the term "autistic" is neither against autistic individuals, isn't going to discriminate against actual autistic individuals, and is a decent human being that hasn't hurt anyone. So what have we accomplished?

jmconfuzeus 5y ago
The last phrase was sort of a joke and I'm not sure whether I should feel guilty or not. Anyway, what I've found is that people who speak out against "bad words" are quite toxic. It's obvious that autistic in this sense isn't the clinically diagnosed condition but in that of slang. If I say that you're like a pig, it doesn't mean that you go oink oink. And yet, educated people will take everything you say literally and turn into missionaries. Reminds me of the time when the church destroyed pretty much every text on Greek philosophy simply because they said that the soul doesn't exist.
- artemonster 5y ago
  They like the feeling being on a moral high horse.
  - Clubber 5y ago
    Sanctimonious is the word I like to use. Someone tried to defend me once about something stupid and trivial. I told them not to (in so many words). It's definitely patronizing and people shouldn't do it, especially so reflexively. What, 6 people jumped on that bandwagon?
  - goodpoint 5y ago
    Spare the performative cynicism please. Expecting basic decency has little to do with high horses.
- solarmist 5y ago
  This is sensible, except "pig" can't be taken literally when talking about a human. > educated people will take everything you say literally and turn into missionaries On the other hand, "Autistic" can and is taken literally regularly. So it feels pretty disingenuous for you to expect "educated people" to determine and keep track of how YOU specifically use the phrase compared to all the other people in their lives. And if one of the people reading/hearing what you say IS autistic, their experience of others using the phrase is probably not as light-hearted as yours. There are plenty of people out there who DO mean it literally. So it is entirely up to the person reading/hearing the comment to make that determination. You want to blast people in a professional setting who can't string together sentences, go for it. But describing them in a way that CAN be taken literally will cause problems. TL;DR: My suggestion is to stick to "bad words" that people can't be born with.
  - hackerfromthefu 5y ago
    I think you missed the point, twice. The point is it's also literally true that all the bad managers and colleagues are not autistic. And this is obvious. It's given. Unless you have gone out of your way to deliberately misinterpret it. And op then finds you toxic and presumably doesn't care about your personal issues on the topic. Just paraphrasing OP as you seemed to miss the points he raised.
  - bustedblade 5y ago

by zo1 5y ago

jmconfuzeus 5y ago

The last phrase was sort of a joke and I'm not sure whether I should feel guilty or not. Anyway, what I've found is that people who speak out against "bad words" are quite toxic. It's obvious that autistic in this sense isn't the clinically diagnosed condition but in that of slang. If I say that you're like a pig, it doesn't mean that you go oink oink. And yet, educated people will take everything you say literally and turn into missionaries. Reminds me of the time when the church destroyed pretty much every text on Greek philosophy simply because they said that the soul doesn't exist.

artemonster 5y ago
They like the feeling being on a moral high horse.
- Clubber 5y ago
  Sanctimonious is the word I like to use. Someone tried to defend me once about something stupid and trivial. I told them not to (in so many words). It's definitely patronizing and people shouldn't do it, especially so reflexively. What, 6 people jumped on that bandwagon?
- goodpoint 5y ago
  Spare the performative cynicism please. Expecting basic decency has little to do with high horses.
solarmist 5y ago
This is sensible, except "pig" can't be taken literally when talking about a human. > educated people will take everything you say literally and turn into missionaries On the other hand, "Autistic" can and is taken literally regularly. So it feels pretty disingenuous for you to expect "educated people" to determine and keep track of how YOU specifically use the phrase compared to all the other people in their lives. And if one of the people reading/hearing what you say IS autistic, their experience of others using the phrase is probably not as light-hearted as yours. There are plenty of people out there who DO mean it literally. So it is entirely up to the person reading/hearing the comment to make that determination. You want to blast people in a professional setting who can't string together sentences, go for it. But describing them in a way that CAN be taken literally will cause problems. TL;DR: My suggestion is to stick to "bad words" that people can't be born with.
- hackerfromthefu 5y ago
  I think you missed the point, twice. The point is it's also literally true that all the bad managers and colleagues are not autistic. And this is obvious. It's given. Unless you have gone out of your way to deliberately misinterpret it. And op then finds you toxic and presumably doesn't care about your personal issues on the topic. Just paraphrasing OP as you seemed to miss the points he raised.
- bustedblade 5y ago