(May 6, 2018 at 10:09 am)Whateverist Wrote:(May 6, 2018 at 9:53 am)Joods Wrote: I understood what you said. I think Hammy didn't understand and expressed himself as he was offended or bothered by the fact that autism was brought into the conversation. He admits to not reading past the part of your post that he bolded.
What I was relaying from his impression, was sort of a "see how it feels" position. People use the R word all the time here, knowing I have a daughter with MR. Doesn't seem to bother them to use that word, so I've had to just get over it and accept the fact that some people don't care who they hurt. My point with this to Hammy was, knowing that he uses the R word quite frequently, that it doesn't feel very nice when someone says things about a disability that's personal to you. Whether or not the intention was there to hurt, that's all.
But is it rude for people not on the spectrum to use their understanding of what that means gained from interactions with people who were as well as from what we've managed to learn about it to try to understand someone's actions? Neo's actions just struck me as empathically tone deaf. Not every person on the spectrum is that way, but many have to work harder to gain that capacity or else find work-arounds for it.
I find Neo's conduct reprehensible and I was fishing around for excusing conditions because I have liked interacting with him before. So I was just brainstorming ways in which Neo's behavior could have to do with how he experiences the world.
Obviously it would have been better not to go there at all. But I don't think that is really analogous to calling someone the spectrum equivalent of a "something-tard". Maybe I'm just not getting it.
I think you were genuine in trying to come up with a reason for why neo is the way he is. I just think that Ham took it as you were saying something against people on the spectrum. I don't think Ham understood the point of your post.
Disclaimer: I am only responsible for what I say, not what you choose to understand.
