Other Unpopular Opinions

[Malkav]

I have three unpopular opinions!

One: I hate coffee of any kind. It's disgusting and I honestly don't know how people drink it.

Two(this one probably isn't that unpopular, but I never see people talk about it): Jokes about disabilities like autism or Down syndrome aren't funny. They're shallow and they make you seem like a horrible person. Like, if I had any major disorder I would hate for someone to make jokes about me.

Three: Ariana Grande's music sucks. What more can I say here?

Nothing is sacred. Everything may be joked about.

 

[Chimney Swift]

Two(this one probably isn't that unpopular, but I never see people talk about it): Jokes about disabilities like autism or Down syndrome aren't funny. They're shallow and they make you seem like a horrible person. Like, if I had any major disorder I would hate for someone to make jokes about me.

Yeah, basically. I'm autistic and the only one allowed to make jokes about me is me.



Going off of that, here's an unpopular opinion: Functioning labels (high/low, mild/severe, etc.) Are degrading, useless, and stigmatizing. I know that may seem shocking, since these terms are still often used by professionals, but hear me out.

You can pobably notice right away that these labels are both generalizing and polarizing. While it might be easy to visualize someone on the extreme "high" or extreme "low" end of linear scales like these, they actually tell you very little, and they leave a lot of "grey area" uncovered. Some scales throw in a vague "mid-functioning" or "moderate" label (like what I was diagnosed with),but what does that even mean? What kind of support does a "moderately autistic" person need?

Neuro-developmental conditions, like autism, are very complex. Most people you come across won't fit easily into one generalized functioning label. Continuing to use autism as an example, it encompasses a very wide range of traits dealing with communication, sensory processing, cognitive ability, behavioral mechanisms, and many more. And within each of those categories, each autistic person is going to have a unique set of skills, deficits, preferences and particularities.

For example let's imagine a person named Leigh. Leigh is autistic. They struggle to communicate verbally, and prefer to get their thoughts across using text messaging or an AAC device. They have sensory sensitivities to certain smells and textures, but can usually get through a day without serious overload. Their communication difficulties make it hard to socialize, but don't get in the way of their job at a computer store.

Now let's imagine Max. Max is also autistic, like Leigh, but Max has no difficulty speaking. In fact, Max is hyperverbal, and uses an unusually large vocabulary and has a tendency to overexplain, overanalyze and hyperfocus on things when they talk. However, Max also has very pronounced sensory issues. They can't eat a lot of foods because of the textures, loud or high-pitched noises make them panic, and they rarely leave their house without someone to help them in case they get too overloaded. Max has an extremely precise schedule which they really can't manage without and often struggles to find jobs and activities that accommodate it.

Comparing both of these people, where would you place them on a linear "high to low" scale? What traits would you use to determine that, and what traits would you not take into account? By doing this, are you giving people an accurate idea o these people's abilities and needs?

 

[Bone2pick]

Going off of that, here's an unpopular opinion: Functioning labels (high/low, mild/severe, etc.) Are degrading, useless, and stigmatizing.

Yeah, I disagree with that. If a person, family, or organization doesn't feel comfortable using functioning labels, then by all means, don't. But my family, and more importantly, the autustic community (and even the larger special needs community) in my area use them all the time to great effect. No one would argue they're particularly precise labels, but they're useful shorthand for conversation purposes.

In cases where a person on the spectrum doesn't comfortably fit into a functioning label, they needn't be used. But the severity of the disability should always be measured in order to understand what level of support (if any) should be administered.

 

[SandraDeelightful]

Two(this one probably isn't that unpopular, but I never see people talk about it): Jokes about disabilities like autism or Down syndrome aren't funny. They're shallow and they make you seem like a horrible person. Like, if I had any major disorder I would hate for someone to make jokes about me.

I have to disagree with this. I have disabilities of my own, and I still make jokes about it. I don't mind if others make jokes about it either. I believe that anything can be joked about and be funny, if the right joke is made.

 

[Chimney Swift]

Yeah, I disagree with that. If a person, family, or organization doesn't feel comfortable using functioning labels, then by all means, don't. But my family, and more importantly, the autustic community (and even the larger special needs community) in my area use them all the time to great effect. No one would argue they're particularly precise labels, but they're useful shorthand for conversation purposes.

In cases where a person on the spectrum doesn't comfortably fit into a functioning label, they needn't be used. But the severity of the disability should always be measured in order to understand what level of support (if any) should be administered.

Yeah, but that's the thing. They don't tell you what kind of support someone needs. They don't tell you what kind of communication is best for them, what their sensory needs are, what specific tasks they need assistance with, etc. They are virtually useless in describing what kind of care needs to be provided, and many give off the impression that people on the "low" end of the scale have no skills, areas of knowledge, or things they can do independently, and people on the "high" end have nothing that they can't do on their own.

I mentioned in my first post that I was described via my diagnosis as "moderate". That tells you literally nothing about me, and that's easily proved because that's probably all you know about me from reading this. Try guessing my short term memory skills, my executive functioning, and my level of independence just by the label.

 

[Bone2pick]

Yeah, but that's the thing. They don't tell you what kind of support someone needs.

I've already acknowledged that in my first reply. I said functioning labels needn't be used if you're uncomfortable with them or a special case, but the severity of the disability needs to be measured. Implying a more indepth assessment of impairment.

...and many give off the impression that people on the "low" end of the scale have no skills, areas of knowledge, or things they can do independently, and people on the "high" end have nothing that they can't do on their own.

No, it doesn't give off that impression. Virtually no one believes people on the low end of the spectrum can't do anything independently, or vice versa. But it does give the impression that on a variety of skills and abilities, severely autistic people are generally far behind their peers.

 

[Remembrance]

This is gonna be an unpopular one I bet you,

Everybody on this thread should just speak their opinions and be okay with it without having to feel ashamed for their beliefs and thoughts.

And now

Guns should be legal in all forms.

 

[Chimney Swift]

I've already acknowledged that in my first reply. I said functioning labels needn't be used if you're uncomfortable with them or a special case, but the severity of the disability needs to be measured. Implying a more indepth assessment of impairment.


No, it doesn't give off that impression. Virtually no one believes people on the low end of the spectrum can't do anything independently, or vice versa. But it does give the impression that on a variety of skills and abilities, severely autistic people are generally far behind their peers.

That is.. the opposite of addressing that. If something fails to make an accurate or meaningful statement, and instead incites false and potentially harmdul assumptions, it isn't about "special cases".

Also, that second statement... oy. You have absolutely no idea the extent to which we get underestimated or undersupported based on labeling, and you're making a lot of generalizations for someone who doesn't live with this every day.

 

[Bone2pick]

Also, that second statement... oy. You have absolutely no idea the extent to which we get underestimated or undersupported based on labeling, and you're making a lot of generalizations for someone who doesn't live with this every day.

You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. Not that I need be personally connected to autism to make this argument.

Edit: Click this thread to learn about my connection to ASD
i am not throwing away my shot

 

[Bone2pick]

That is.. the opposite of addressing that. If something fails to make an accurate or meaningful statement, and instead incites false and potentially harmdul assumptions, it isn't about "special cases".

You're simply spouting off about harmful assumptions as if it's a fact. It's not.

 

[Chimney Swift]

You're simply spouting off about harmful assumptions as if it's a fact. It's not.

Uh... hello? I live with this. These assumptions that people make on a daily basis are about me. I can't begin to number the amount of times I've been denied opportunity, agency, respect, or a platform to voice my thoughts based on assumptions people make based on my diagnosis. You have no fucking idea.
I was willing to calmly debate you before, but now you're actively trying to contradict my experiences and tell me that I'm " spouting off" false information.

Also, living with a disabled person does not, never has, and will never give you the right to make generalizations about the experiences of disabled people.

 

[Bone2pick]

Also, living with a disabled person does not, never has, and will never give you the right to make generalizations about the experiences of disabled people.

Everyone has the right to make generalizations about any group of people, disabled or not. Deal with it.

 

[Chimney Swift]

Everyone has the right to make generalizations about any group of people, disabled or not. Deal with it.

No. I don't have to deal with that. Generalizations erase people's experiences, and erase the voices of people who already never get heard.

Wealthy people don't get to say that poor people don't mind not being able to afford healthcare.

Men don't get to tell women that it's fine to make demeaning statements about their clothes, interests and lifestyles.

And able people don't get to say to disabled people that stigmatizing language doesn't affect us.

 

[Bone2pick]

No. I don't have to deal with that. Generalizations erase people's experiences, and erase the voices of people who already never get heard.

You do have to deal with that, and you're spouting nonsense. You can't erase my experience, or anyone in my family's experience, or anyone that I care about experience. You're welcome for your reality check.

 

[Chimney Swift]

You do have to deal with that, and you're spouting nonsense. You can't erase my experience, or anyone in my family's experience, or anyone that I care about experience. You're welcome for your reality check.

We're clogging this thread. PM me if you want to keep trying to tell me that my experiences as a disabled person don't matter.

When you do, please enlighten me on how anything I said was nonsense.

 

[Bone2pick]

Expect a pm today or tomorrow.

 

[LegoLad659]

Never so immediately have I regretted posting in a thread >.> Chill the fuck out.

 

[Laraes]

I hate Frozen with a passion and sporadically kick little girls with Elsa-Shirts.

 

[SandraDeelightful]

Being loud doesn't mean you're funny.

 

[SandraDeelightful]

A database that would allow people to access names and other information of 'cyberbullies' is a well-intentioned (at least, I hope) but terrible idea.

 

[Daisie]

A database that would allow people to access names and other information of 'cyberbullies' is a well-intentioned (at least, I hope) but terrible idea.

Is that actually a thing? That's a terrible and dangerous idea.

 

[SandraDeelightful]

Is that actually a thing? That's a terrible and dangerous idea.

I'm not sure if it's actually a thing, but I have heard the idea thrown out a disturbing amount of time.

 

[Daisie]

I'm not sure if it's actually a thing, but I have heard the idea thrown out a disturbing amount of time.

What would people even DO with that information? And where does the line between "Cyberbully" and a normal person stop? It's GOING to be abused heavily. In ways that will probably include murder and other crimes.

 

[SandraDeelightful]

What would people even DO with that information? And where does the line between "Cyberbully" and a normal person stop? It's GOING to be abused heavily. In ways that will probably include murder and other crimes.

Exactly. One person, Candace Owens, wanted to try to get website like that up. She even said that she would have no problems if minors were included because they should learn at an early age.

 

[Daisie]

Exactly. One person, Candace Owens, wanted to try to get website like that up. She even said that she would have no problems if minors were included because they should learn at an early age.

Holy mother of... No! That is a terrible idea! Having a database with young children's information being publicly displayed?! Has Miss Candace never heard of stalkers, rapists, murderers, or generally people who are criminally insane?! Does Miss Candace have two coordinating brain cells??