Using autism as an excuse to be an entitled jerk?

[Whoknew30]

What baloney. We're not making him look bad, HE'S making him look bad.

 

I wouldn't say I know a lot about autism. But I strongly suspect that very few are total a-holes like that guy is.

 

If he's going around murdering people "because he's autistic" are we supposed to give him a pass on that as well?

 

No! You’re wrong & it’s something that’s not opinion based. He’s not making himself look bad, he’s verbalizing how his brain processes something due to his disorder. Autism effects the brain of understanding typical social behavior & that’s includes how one processes thoughts pertaining to a different sex.

 

Comparing murder to how a brain processes thoughts on the opposite sex, shows that you don’t understand but still just want to have an uneducated opinion “just to have one”. I personally don’t understand that logic. Of you don’t know, research. It helps against embarrassing one’s self.

[Whoknew30]

Folks after editing a few posts I want to remind everyone that we frown on offensive terms being used to describe those with an intellectual disability.

 

 

Several will notice their posts have been edited. There are much better terms available. Intellectually disabled and Developmentally challenged come to mind. Please be respectful and opt for these terms rather then the alternative.

 

Autism is a neurological disorder not an intellectual disability. Intellectual disability is someone with a low IQ, majority of people with Autism have an extremely high IQ but due to their brains being wired differently, process information differently.

 

Developmentally challenged would only apply to severe cases of Autism, which is not the majority. Both terms you are extremely offensive to majority of people with Autism. Special needs is usually the way to go if unsure. ?

[mark clemson]

He’s not making himself look bad, he’s verbalizing how his brain processes something due to his disorder. Autism effects the brain of understanding typical social behavior & that’s includes how one processes thoughts pertaining to a different sex..

 

Huh. Well, here's what he wrote (CO was quoting from the original article):

 

There are so many tricks to learn. Women have emotional brains. They get addicted to feelings. You can use that to your advantage. The first time you meet her—tell her she looks amazing. But never give her a full compliment again. She’ll always chase that validation. It’s like a drug. Tell her ‘she looks beautiful for her age.’ Tell her ‘she looks good in this lighting.’ Keep her insecure with half compliments. Keep her feeling like there’s something wrong with her. Like she’s not good enough for you. Like she needs sex for validation. Of course it’s manipulation, but why should I care? I’ve been manipulated so many times in my life.”

 

 

If he knows enough to manipulate women through their emotions and brag about it, he knows enough to know that they're being emotionally hurt. And he indicates later that he doesn't care.

 

He's clearly no idiot. He knows better and he doesn't care at all. So, no, that's not an autism thing, that's an a-hole thing. Giving him a pass because he happens to be autistic is what doesn't make any sense here.

 

 

Comparing murder to how a brain processes thoughts on the opposite sex, shows that you don’t understand but still just want to have an uneducated opinion “just to have one”. I personally don’t understand that logic. Of you don’t know, research. It helps against embarrassing one’s self.

 

The comparison to murder is to emphasize how twisted the logic you're attempting to apply here is. He's autistic and so neurologically different. Therefore it's OK for him to hurt women. That's your argument in a nutshell.

 

I'm not even REMOTELY embarrassed to call BS on you attempting to make this ridiculous claim and then bash CO and others over it.

[basil67]

Several will notice their posts have been edited. There are much better terms available. Intellectually disabled and Developmentally challenged come to mind. Please be respectful and opt for these terms rather then the alternative.

 

Thanks for cleaning it up.

 

For the record, autism isn't an intellectual disability - it's a social skill disorder. However intellectual disability can be co-morbid with autism.

 

When it comes to terms for autism.....If we're talking with someone who's PC and uses person first language (often a therapist or parent of a young person) it's "person with autism"

 

If you're talking with someone who's on the spectrum, it's more likely they will use identity first language such as autie, aspie or autistic.

[CautiouslyOptimistic]

He’s not making himself look bad, he’s verbalizing how his brain processes something due to his disorder. Autism effects the brain of understanding typical social behavior & that’s includes how one processes thoughts pertaining to a different sex.

 

So your position is that his autism legitimizes his awful behavior?

 

Is it impossible for him to know better?

[Tristian]

Autism is a neurological disorder not an intellectual disability. Intellectual disability is someone with a low IQ, majority of people with Autism have an extremely high IQ but due to their brains being wired differently, process information differently.

 

Developmentally challenged would only apply to severe cases of Autism, which is not the majority. Both terms you are extremely offensive to majority of people with Autism. Special needs is usually the way to go if unsure.

 

 

Thanks for cleaning it up.

 

For the record, autism isn't an intellectual disability - it's a social skill disorder. However intellectual disability can be co-morbid with autism.

 

When it comes to terms for autism.....If we're talking with someone who's PC and uses person first language (often a therapist or parent of a young person) it's "person with autism"

 

If you're talking with someone who's on the spectrum, it's more likely they will use identity first language such as autie, aspie or autistic.

 

 

 

The terms I removed were not referring to autism.

Edited October 4, 2019 by Tristian

[Whoknew30]

On 10/3/2019 at 5:59 PM, mark clemson said:

 

Huh. Well, here's what he wrote (CO was quoting from the original article):

 

 

 

 

If he knows enough to manipulate women through their emotions and brag about it, he knows enough to know that they're being emotionally hurt. And he indicates later that he doesn't care.

 

He's clearly no idiot. He knows better and he doesn't care at all. So, no, that's not an autism thing, that's an a-hole thing. Giving him a pass because he happens to be autistic is what doesn't make any sense here.

 

 

 

 

The comparison to murder is to emphasize how twisted the logic you're attempting to apply here is. He's autistic and so neurologically different. Therefore it's OK for him to hurt women. That's your argument in a nutshell.

 

I'm not even REMOTELY embarrassed to call BS on you attempting to make this ridiculous claim and then bash CO and others over it.

You should be embarrassed. It’s obvious by what you’re saying, you just don’t understand & that’s the problem...most people don’t buy want sooo hard to have an uneducated opinion just to try & make a point. 
 

You’re  just purely uneducated about Autism, can’t fully comprehend what I’m saying nor this guy & want to “call bs” on something, just bc you want to be right. Im not trying to be right, I’m trying to educate. Wanting to be right, is not a logic that productive conversations based on. Definitely not the way to learn about a disorder you know nothing about.

You are comparing your own typical brain experiences & feelings to say “what is bs”...it’s like comparing apples & bananas. 
 

[mark clemson]

Hmmm. Again, if your point is that being on the ASD scale makes it OK to hurt other people, then I don't agree. That seemed to be what you were saying earlier.

If my brain processes things differently, does that make it OK for me to kill people? Or course not. Does it make it OK for me to deliberately deceive people about my intentions and hurt them emotionally? Again, of course not.

I would not say that I'm extremely educated on ASD. Are those who are going around saying that it's ok for them to hurt whomever they want? I sincerely doubt it.

In my mind this is not about "winning arguments" it's about not giving people (of any description, including those with ASD) a pass on deliberately hurting others.

If you want to win an argument, pick an argument you can actually win.