Portrait of the Autist As a Young Man

Autistics are known for learning instrumentally, rather than socially. One implication of this is that, since learning is more about accepting propositions rather than persons, it may be easier for us to parse out the different components of what someone tells us, accepting the parts that make sense to us and simply dismissing the rest. In fact, at the Building Bridges conference, I saw a video of a researcher demonstrating a procedure for taking an item out of a box -- a procedure that intentionally included a superfluous motion. It was related that when neurotypical children who'd just watched this were asked to accomplish the same task, they often incorporated the superfluous motion in their action, whereas autistic children skipped it.

Since I learned in February 2019 that I'm autistic, I've reflected on many of my past experiences in the light of this new knowledge. One that stands out for possibly having gone differently because of my wiring occurred when I was ten.

Usually I went straight home (a 10 or 15-minute walk) at the end of the school day, but for some reason I didn't feel like doing so this time. Instead, I hung out near the school's front door, doing nothing in particular. After a little while a man came from across the street and started a conversation with me. As best as I can remember, it was largely him asking me about my family, and me telling him about how my parents were very interested in current affairs like pollution and the war in Viet Nam. I may well have also told him I had a particular interest in science, and perhaps mentioned my admiration for Albert Einstein, about whom I'd read a book (The Universe and Dr. Einstein by Lincoln Barnett) the previous year. Looking back, it's quite natural that I responded to questions about myself and my family in terms of my special interests and those of my family members. This is how autistics typically respond when asked to tell about ourselves.

After some minutes, the man asked if I'd like to take a ride in his car. I declined, explaining that my parents had told me that it wasn't safe to go places with strangers. Then, in the manner of making a friendly parting gesture, he offered me a little change (fifty cents if I recall correctly). I asked what it was for, and he said I could buy myself a soda with it. I had no particular interest in doing so, but I politely accepted the money. Then he repeated the offer of a ride in his car, and I simply repeated what my parents had told me. So he said goodbye, and I never saw him again.

Now you might think, from this account, that I'd never been told not to talk with strangers. You would be incorrect. My mother had, in fact, implored me not to, more than once, and I had wanted to know why. So she had told me that some people might want to hurt me. I again asked why, and she had said someone might kidnap me. So, of course, I asked "why" again! So she ended up telling me that I might be kidnapped and held for ransom, and that she and my father might not be able to pay it, and then I might not see them again.

This seemed like a plausible scenario, and I also clearly got the message that it was something that greatly worried her, and I wouldn't want to add to her worries. So I resolved to make sure I wasn't kidnapped.

These considerations were in the back of my mind when the man started the conversation with me. I wouldn't put myself in a position where I could be kidnapped, in case that might be his secret intent. But, equally obviously, he could only do that if I got in his car or went with him to some unfamiliar place. Simply talking with him wouldn't give him any power over me.

I suppose a neurotypical child might have responded in a more binary way to the parental message -- either "believe Mommy" or "don't believe Mommy." But for me, it was perfectly natural to analyze the message and just assimilate the part that made sense, chucking the rest.

I never told my mother about this incident, but I did once recall our earlier conversation to her, and she admitted that she hadn't been comfortable stating what she'd actually been worried about. More recently, I've become aware that it may not have been so inevitable that I'd have come to any harm if I'd gotten in the car, since many minor-attracted people won't do anything without consent anyway. But, since some do, there's no doubt that leaning in the direction of caution was the smart move.

Focus on What's Important

"In the past, Thunberg has spoken about being diagnosed with Asperger's — and how that has helped her.

"'My diagnosis helps me helps me see things a bit more clearly sometimes,' she says. 'When everyone else seems to just compromise and have this double moral that's, "Yeah. That's very important, but also I can't do that right now and I'm too lazy and so on." — But I can't really do that.'

"Thunberg continues, 'I want to to walk the talk, and to practice as I preach. So that is what I'm trying to do. Because if I am focused on something and if I know something, and if I decide to do something, then I go all in. And it seems like others are not doing that right now. So yeah, it has definitely helped me.'"

There's no focus like autistic focus. 😃

https://www.npr.org/2019/09/13/760538254/greta-thunberg-to-u-s-you-have-a-moral-responsibility-on-climate-change

Keeping Culture Wars Out of the Neurodiversity Movement

The neurodiversity online magazine The Aspergian recently published a lengthy article about the so-called Autistic Dark Web, which consists of people on the spectrum who are hostile to the neurodiversity movement. Unfortunately it fell into the trap of ideological polarization that is probably part of the reason the ADW exists in the first place. I posted this comment below the article:

Since the Guardian piece was closed for comments, I posted mine here: https://dissenter.com/discussion/begin?url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/26/autism-neurodiversity-severe

The article above does a service by exposing the bigotry and vested interests behind opposition to the neurodiversity movement. But it's marred by tangling this issue up with the ideological culture wars between the "Alt-Right" and "SJWs."
Naturally the genuinely alt-right have contempt for those of us who aren't "normal" and refuse to consider ourselves inferior. But their efforts to influence critically thinking people are aided when they're able to portray the ND movement as "infiltrated" by SJWs or the "Ctl-Left" as some have called it. This is not merely a pejorative term for anyone who is progressive or cares about social justice -- although, naturally, the alt-right will use it that way since it's in their interest to conflate all who are opposed to them.

Rather, these terms refer to a specific kind of ideology that is rooted in postmodernism and derogates open inquiry and critical thinking because it's based on a subjectivist epistemology. This is an ideology that is in fact anti-science and objectively constitutes an obstacle to progressive social change, notwithstanding that many of its adherents may consider themselves "radical" or even "anticapitalist." You can read a Marxist critique of it here: "Adolph Reed Jr: Identity Politics Is Neoliberalism" https://bennorton.com/adolph-reed-identity-politics-is-neoliberalism/ And here's one from a left-liberal or social-democratic perspective: "Identity Politics Does Not Continue the Work of the Civil Rights Movements" https://areomagazine.com/2018/09/25/identity-politics-does-not-continue-the-work-of-the-civil-rights-movements/

Because it falls into the trap of the Alt-Right/Ctl-Left dichotomy, the article perpetuates a good bit of misinformation. For instance, most of the Intellectual Dark Web is not Alt-Right but, rather, various shades of liberal. And #Gamergate was, in fact, about opposing corruption and political authoritarianism in videogame journalism, which is why it included considerable numbers of women, POCs, LGBTs, and people with disabilities: "Giving Voice to the Voiceless: The #NotYourShield Project" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzwGIHUCtjU&t=2s "3 Women of Gamergate Fight Back!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtzrUsi6Y1s&t=1s Liberal vlogger PSA Sitch has a good short allegorical explanation of what it was really about here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STl7-_f4_eA Oh, and one more thing: it actually won victories for ethics, as with this regulation that came out of the FTC: https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/38gocf/ethics_major_ftc_update_the_ftc_has_updated_their/ (Elsewhere, I saw actual acknowledgment from that agency that the #Gamergate-affiliated UV campaign was the reason for this reg, but unfortunately I didn't save the link.)

Half-Baked Thinking About Autism

A recent article in the Guardian claims, without offering any evidence, that the neurodiversity movement is "marginalizing" autistics who can't speak. Since comments have been closed on that page, I used Dissenter to post mine. You can read it here: https://dissenter.com/discussion/begin?url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/26/autism-neurodiversity-severe

Quote of the Month

Discretion is advised. It is also advised that discretion is over-rated.
 

-- zoecdarazsdi, “Finding Adult Autistic Women in the Media: A Unicorn Hunt” in The Aspergian

A New Window on Myself

A week ago yesterday (2/21/19), in the last of three interviews at the Center for Autism, I was informed that I place on that spectrum, albeit very close to the cusp.

I'd suspected for some years that this might be, but also thought that those aspects of my experience that suggested it could be symptoms of something else instead, such as social anxiety disorder, with which I already had been diagnosed. But the psychologist who assessed me said I showed too many other signs that aren't characteristic of social anxiety but are consistent with ASD. I still could (and, I think, do) have SAD, but I have this as well.

But this was still a rather abstract understanding. I accepted her expertise, but didn't feel strongly convinced -- until today.

She'd informed me a conference on autism was coming up and, at her recommendation, I was offered a scholarship to attend as a "self-advocate." So I went, and it was, almost literally, eye-opening.

I refer to an epiphany near the beginning of the first session. The presenter was talking about differences in attention patterns between young children who are neurotypical and those on the autism spectrum. He then remarked on how our ability to study these things has been improved by the development of eye-tracking technology.

Despite this lead-in, I still wasn't prepared for the revelation that came next. He showed a video of a woman researcher demonstrating for a child (not seen in the video) a novel way of removing a bottle from a plastic bin and then taking its cap off. The bin was one of a row of them of different colors. He repeated the video while verbally emphasizing the novel aspects of her behavior that were intended to engage the child's interest.

And now he showed the video a couple more times, but with a difference: there was also a red dot on the screen that moved around, showing where the observing child's eyes went while the woman was demonstrating the procedure. So I got to follow the eye movements of the neurotypical child, and then those of the child on the spectrum. And so, after the unusual bottle-removing-and-opening procedure itself, I had a second novel experience: the eye movements of the neurotypical child.

At the start of the video the child's eyes were grazing over the varicolored bins, until the researcher started doing something with her hands. Then his eyes shifted -- toward her face (hmm, that was unexpected!). Then to her hands, back to her face, etc., for the duration of the procedure.

In the last video the ASD child likewise is initially looking at the bins, until the woman starts demonstrating the procedure. Then he starts watching her hands, and stays focused on them for the rest of the video. Same as I had done! And it would never even have occurred to me that someone else might do otherwise.

The presenter then explained that this illustrated the difference between social learning -- focused on looking to another person for cues about their intention -- and instrumental learning -- focused only on the physical action itself. These two styles had been exhibited by the neurotypical child and the ASD child, respectively, in the eye-tracking videos. And the latter also by me.

There were some other revelations at the conference that were pretty striking too, but that was enough to convince me that I'd been diagnosed correctly.