Standing up for your values might be decided to be a pathology - If you're autistic
Standing up for your values might be decided to be a pathology - If you're autistic
A research article concluded that autistic people cared too much about others, citing inflexibility to be an issue by following moral code even when individual gains are high. In my personal opinio…
This article picks apart a bunch of biases by the researchers of a given paper. The object of study was the differences in behavior between a group of autistic people and a group of non-autistic people when choosing between prioritizing value for oneself or value for the community.
I recommend reading the paper itself too. If that is, understandably, too much for you, I suggest you go for the introduction, the conclusion, and the segments mentioned in the article.
In my personal opinion as an autistic person, I would argue that the non-autistic participants underestimated the negative consequences of their actions, and simply chose individual benefit over their principles.
I may not be autistic, but I strongly agree with this statement.
You may very well be autistic if you agree with this statement. As do I, an autistic person.
Also, autistic people tend to see patterns very easily and extrapolate without effort:
One possible extrapolation is that it would be better to have autistic people make important decisions of grand scale then neurotypical people.
You could also extrapolate that an autistic whitness is more trustworthy than a neurotypical one.
You could even go as far as saying that neurotypicals tend to be hypocritical as they tend to fight for a cause publicly but undermine it privately if that benefits them.
I could go on for hours but I‘m pretty sure we‘re not allowed to hate on NTs here. I think you can very well see where this is going if you try to assert individual value for mankind.
This is very interesting. I’m not diagnosed but strongly suspect I’m on the spectrum and the article rings true for me.
I generally avoid confrontation but I will gladly ruin a whole conversation if I feel like someone else believes something I find immoral or unethical
I feel the same and am on the spectrum myself. I feel that if I don't say anything when something immoral is said, by not acknowledging it as immoral I'm tacitly supporting it. After all, if it bothered me, why didn't I say anything?
Of course, there's some nuance to when and how to have an argument. But I feel there's a much larger desire to keep the peace among my other family members. Even though some of those family members are really shitty people.
There are twelve people having dinner at the table. One of them is a nazi, and openly argues for the extermination of the one minority he hates. No one pushes back against him. There are now twelve nazis having dinner at the table.
Yes, motherfuckers, I do demand that all of my morals and beliefs be as close to 100% internally consistent as possible, and yes, I actually believe them all the time. Who are these assholes saying hypocrisy and amoral selfishness are fucking good things?
"Who are these assholes saying hypocrisy and amoral selfishness are fucking good things?" Pragmatists
This is honestly disappointing. I cannot comprehend, why being principled would make one inferior. Is not being a slave to what others think a curse of its own? Additionally, is not being unprincipled how we end up with corporate and government corruption?
Being principled is not inferior, we're being being pathologized for it because it is a threat to the corrupt powers. The existing power structures see this pattern as dangerous to them, because principled people are more likely to see through their bullshit and try to remake society in a way that is beneficial to all- which means removing evil from power. So, the powerful are using their influence in the media and medical establishment to consider principled behavior to be an undesirable symptom. So, we have to keep being principled. Keep caring. Keep resisting. Keep trying to create a better way. Keep trying to create networks, projects, and relationships based on real values, rather than harming each other, which only makes the established powers more powerful.
Couldn't agree more
I already heard about this, and fuck them. A whole lot. "Having moral convictions even when others aren't looking makes autistic people inferior! They should be sociopathic, just like the rest of us!" Sociopathy is what will destroy us as a species. As we're currently discovering, thanks to climate change.
Could not have said it better. Thank you.
There are more or less serious counterinterpretations like „how to spot you‘re neurotypical“ which turns the thing on its head. Equally hilarious and dystopian.
Have a good one.
I care so much it makes me ill
Reading articles like these really makes me believe I am autistic. Fortunately I have a doctor appointment soon to see about a proper diagnosis.
I was terminated a year ago from my last job for speaking out against the abusive behaviour of management as well as all the hate and bigotry from the tradespeople working on the workshop floor. That didn't go over well so I went to corporate and was assisting them with an investigation into the abuse at my company. Unfortunately that investigation had to be halted as my company fired me conveniently after I made a call to the employee hotline about all the abusive behaviour. I was advised to call the hotline by corporate so they weren't too happy with my company. So unhappy that they refused to represent them at the labour board regarding my wrongful termination case.
I think what was interesting about the whole experience was that many of my coworkers could not comprehend that I did all this to help my fellow coworkers. I wanted change so we could all be treated with dignity. Even now with the lawyer involved, they think I'm in it for the payout. I do not care about the money. I want change. I want accountability. Fortunately I have a couple people in my life that understand that and are encouraging me to follow what I think is right. Everyone else thinks I'm an idiot and there are no words to describe how confusing that truly is.
I think what was interesting about the whole experience was that many of my coworkers could not comprehend that I did all this to help my fellow coworkers. I wanted change so we could all be treated with dignity. Even now with the lawyer involved, they think I’m in it for the payout.
This sounds like an ideal scenario for the possibility that one of the people whose abuse you were putting in check decided to badmouth you behind your back, in order to pit your coworkers against you and prevent collaboration, especially if you didn't talk to them, one to one, about what you were doing and why. This is extremely common in office politics and people with more difficulty to navigate its social jungle are at higher risk of being victimized in this way.
The supervisor in question definitely trash talked all of his "subordinates" but I don't think it was particularly effective in this instance. He is past retirement age and his interpersonal skills are completely lacking which made him universally hated among workers and management. But he always said yes to management. So that makes him a useful idiot.
If I worked in the office, I could definitely see this tactic being more effective. It was very common to see trade supervisors battling it out with other trade supervisors. The workers were all united through misery.
The majority of the trades people I worked with were hyper focused on their masculinity by focusing their lives around marriage, children, cars, property and expensive things to express themselves. All those things require money. The people I worked with always needed money.
So when all the answers to your problems is more money, how do you understand and treat someone whose motivations are not driven by money? How do you react when someone challenges authority and is still not motivated by money? Even when I plainly tell them why I am acting the way I am, they truly have a difficult time understanding me because money is so important to them.
They also believe that change is impossible so I'm an idiot for trying. Personally, there's nothing more motivating to me than being told I can't do something.
This is definitely true for me. I think way too much about the consequences of my actions and I could never work in a job where you're rewarded for tricking customers or being dishonest.
I used to do pest control. For a while, I worked for a company called Alpha Ecological where my job was to solve customer problems. Then they got bought out by and integrated into Western (Rentokil Global), and my job changed to convincing people who didn't need recurring service to keep paying for recurring service. I tried to keep working there and ultimately had a nervous breakdown. Didn't even quit properly. Just stopped leaving my apartment for a month or so.
Now I drive a truck. Driving is a wonderful job for folks with ASD who don't have any motor impairment.
Driving is great when you're doing it safely and get past the initial anxiety. I hope you live a happy life.
(ie most of them)
I was a terrible salesperson for this reason. "Here's a machine in your stated price range. It will die in 18 months. And it sucks."
I think it probably scared the researchers too much that the "normal" neurotypical people were less likely to have moral values in any meaningful sense, so they tried (badly) to reframe it as neurodivergent people being bad. That's probably what they're used to believing in general, so they made an argument closer to their comfort zone instead of reporting the facts.
Kind of reaffirming the study, in a way.
@SuddenDownpour Pathologizing aside, this matches up with another thing I've seen pointed out as an autistic trait that backs this up: value based identity vs group based identity.
Allistics typically tie their identity up in the groups they're a part of: family, work, church, town/city/state, etc
Autistics tie our identity up in our values: what we do, impacts we've made, accomplishments tied to our values
This is why you hear things like "snitches get stitches" because group loyalty is considered more critically important than values, or how we're seen as turning on the group when we call out how the group could be improved.
This would especially make sense in the mentioned study because when you take away the group it takes away the impact to their identity while our identities don't care if someone is watching.
Neurotypicals are kinda disappointing.
I‘m not totally sure but you could read into that why autistic people are shunned and looked down upon.
If we ever get our shit together and form one voice, we might actually save the world. From capitalism, climate change and other dystopian things.
Imagine, as a neurotypical person in power, you see that a certain group is actually born to do the right thing, uncorruptable. Would you not be scared?
Only all the time.
I've been saying this was my problem since junior high and people said I was just being dramatic. I feel vindicated slightly.
This hits very close to home. I've lost friends that were very dear to me because I tried to stand up for something important to me.
I just want to point out that this article also says that autistic people bad for not supporting autism speaks, btw
"This can be seen in autistic people’s stance against ABA for example, which decreases speaking opportunities for autistic advocates."
imagine not supporting abuse, nor an organization that wants to eugenics people with ASD...
You have misunderstood that line. The line is linking to this tweet, which says:
Wanna know a why many “big” advocates won’t talk about ABA in a bad light?
The ABA lobby is huge. If you are a public speaker in the autism world being antiABA closes a lot of doors.
I have been uninvited to speaking events because of my views on ABA.
No regrets.
Which the article sums up as, as you quote:
This can be seen in autistic people’s stance against ABA for example, which decreases speaking opportunities for autistic advocates.
This is a true statement. If you publicly criticize ABA, certain institutions are going to close their doors for you. The article is saying that autistic people are going to criticize ABA nonetheless when doing so is in line for their values, as the paper suggests, despite the authors wacky interpretations, and I think both the writer, you and I agree that making that criticism of ABA is indeed good.
Proud of the ASD participants. You guys get it!
Oh this is 100% me. Most people refer to me as stubborn, I like to use the word principled. When I care about something, I don't waver on my support and couldn't care less if people find it offensive or uncomfortable.
Chuck D said it best, "It's harder than you think."
You need to take care of yourself first. Don't set yourself on fire trying to help other people. It's ok to say no if people are always asking you for stuff.
I often feel like the titular character from Ella Enchanted because I just can't say no to someone who appears to need help, despite constantly being burned for doing so.
I've noticed this among people with autism or ADHD. A lot of them don't like to say no, but it's an important skill to develop. It can feel rude or uncompassionate, but you aren't obligated to help anyone. Obviously if someone you know is in need and you don't have another obligation, it's good to go help them, but you shouldn't feel obligated to go spend your afternoon at the mall if you don't want to go because someone wants a ride.
@r3df0x @SuddenDownpour That's not remotely what this is referring to and it makes me wonder if you read the article at all?
They were comparing public vs private actions of allistics vs autistics and basically determined that autistics are more likely to be charitable/kind without needing recognition or attention to it.
The real findings:
* We're less likely to differ our choices based on whether or not they're perceived
* We're more kind by defaultWhat you're talking about is a separate, but also common thing, called fawning. A trauma response that many of us also have in which we do whatever we think a person wants to avoid perceived threats and harm, even if that action itself causes us further harm.
This test did not examine fawning and did not examine charity at great personal cost. It was just whether or not someone would act charitably at personal expense or uncharitably at personal gain... an allistics basically were only good when people were watching while autistics were consistent regardless.