If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   What an autistic Miss America contestant might look like   (foxnews.com) divider line 288
    More: Hero, Miss America, Miss Montana, Wineman, contestants  
•       •       •

39027 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Jan 2013 at 9:58 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



288 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-11 06:09:07 PM

DetrimentalScience: As someone who has been a lifelong sufferer of severe ADHD I often take a similar appoach to you when I encounter those who have only mild-ADHD. Many people get bogged down in being envious of those with less hardships, not realizing the other person is still suffering. Instead of acting like they are imposters or are somehow on easy street because their struggles aren't as hard as mine, I often will listen to and advise them based on my own experiences. What I often find is that because their symptoms are much more mild they have a hard time distinguishing between what is their own fault and what is caused by the ADHD. As this girl in the pageant described, they often don't understand why they can't be normal. They are close but not quite right. They are left feeling like a bit of a stranger but no clue as to what they are doing wrong and why. They often feel like maybe if they tried harder (like their mom/dad/friend/grandparent/etc. always told them) then they would succeed or they feel maybe they are just lazy like everyone tells them. So they spend their life working their ass off to try to reach an unobtainable goal and as a result always failing and feeling like a failure (as well as feeling alone in a crowd).

As for me, like most people with severe ADHD I display some traits of being autistic/aspie as well. Things like processing peoples emotions for me are very binary. I don't get the subtlety of most emotions. So I will miss someone is pissed until they reach a certain level and then I will read it as extremely angry (when likely they are just mad). I also have a difficulty figuring out socially acceptable levels of discomfort. So I tend to be more timid in confrontation because if I am not I can come across as an unreasonable raging asshole. Not because I enjoy being an asshole but because I don't know when its acceptable to push for things and when its time to back off. I just can't read that situation well at all. So I chose to try to not be an asshol ...


I was going to write my post much along these lines and I think you said it better than I could. I am too old to have a label (they just weren't used in the 1970s) but in my adulthood I've learned that I am clearly different than most people to at least a three sigma deviation but probably more. Appearing to be this so-called normal but actually not makes things difficult in its own way. People expect you to be like them, but you're not.

Sadly human society demands such strong levels of conformity to socially created constructs. If people were to do away with much of these I think logical/literal people would have a much better time of thing. What I don't understand is these social norms and constructs are usually things that cause even so-called normal people a great deal of stress of conforming to, yet they don't get abolished. Slowly they are being disposed of, but often to be replaced with something nearly as absurd.
 
2013-01-11 06:14:12 PM
Autistic people rock!

/back and forth, mostly
 
2013-01-11 06:22:36 PM

leadmetal: Wakefield's premise regarding vaccines is centered around the digestive tract.


Stop it. You're wrong and he's a fraud.

leadmetal: That is spread out vaccines instead of overwhelming the immune system of a small child. That's it. A very simple and sensible recommendation to take it slow when screwing around with the immune system of a child.


The "too many, too soon"" argument has no basis in science or reality. Immune systems are not overwhelmed by the mere presentation of antigens.

There is no evidence that vaccines have anything to do with autism. They shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence.
 
2013-01-11 06:31:35 PM

ParaHandy: +1 for the Ukraine


Glad to see someone wanted to play:

img24.imageshack.us

3-1 poland
 
2013-01-11 06:54:48 PM

Serious Post on Serious Thread: I would take her to the zoo, in a speeding bus, down a winding path, and would not stop until she was screamin'.

/Oh, and spermed


Dead Milkmen FTW
 
2013-01-11 06:58:18 PM

leadmetal: Wakefield's premise regarding vaccines...


4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-01-11 07:29:58 PM

Occam's Disposable Razor: leadmetal: Wakefield's premise regarding vaccines is centered around the digestive tract.

Stop it. You're wrong and he's a fraud.

I see you never read the farking paper. So why don't you shut the fark up about things you're too farking lazy to look into? No of course not, like most so-called 'normal' people you 'feel' instead of think. You apply ridicule and verbal abuse to socially correct people who stray outside the boundaries of so-called acceptable thought. Don't bother you with things like the actual paper.

leadmetal: That is spread out vaccines instead of overwhelming the immune system of a small child. That's it. A very simple and sensible recommendation to take it slow when screwing around with the immune system of a child.

The "too many, too soon"" argument has no basis in science or reality. Immune systems are not overwhelmed by the mere presentation of antigens.

There is no evidence that vaccines have anything to do with autism. They shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence.


You are standing on assertion. Nobody farking knows what vaccines really do. They are designed to expose the immune system and jack up the response to create an immunity. But nobody really knows what the consequences of doing this is. When problems occur a belief system kicks in that says 'it can't be the vaccine, vaccines are life savers'. It's a social response, not a scientific, logical or rational one. If you knew anything about the real science it would be obvious to you how little is actually known about the mechanisms.

Furthermore, testing is done on -adults- not children with developing immune systems. The order and timing of vaccination has -never- been tested to see if there are problems with interactions or anything else with some of the population. It's just all assumed to work together like some 16 year old throwing aftermarket parts on a honda civic in a one-size fits all fashion.

From an engineering perspective, vaccination is really done in a ignorant slip-shod manner.
 
2013-01-11 07:42:16 PM
I shouldn't have let myself get dragged in, but anyway...

leadmetal: I see you never read the farking paper. So why don't you shut the fark up about things you're too farking lazy to look into? No of course not, like most so-called 'normal' people you 'feel' instead of think.


Data above all. Feeling is for our ancestors, we do better than that. Feeling is what compels people with no medical, statistical, or biology training to associate a scary needle with doing harm. Feeling is what compels a concerned parent to blame a temporally related event to a deterioration in their child's condition without evidence. I have read the paper. The journal that published his initial work has apologized and retracted it. Wakefield is a discredited, disgraced fraud.

leadmetal: You are standing on assertion. Nobody farking knows what vaccines really do.


leadmetal: If you knew anything about the real science it would be obvious to you how little is actually known about the mechanisms.


These two together indicate that I've likely been hooked by a troll. Plenty of people "know what vaccines really do." The second sentence was particularly amusing, as I'm actually a doctor, and the guys in the immunology and infectious disease departments would go absolutely apeshiat over that comment.

I'm not looking for a fight or trying to argue from authority. You have fixed beliefs I won't be changing, and that's ok. For everyone else, here's a decent link explaining why "too many, too soon" is a silly argument. There's science and data behind the vaccine schedule. To say it's never been tested is one of the most bald faced lies I've read on here. But you can believe some dude on a message board (myself included), or you can believe people who make a career out of studying these things.
 
2013-01-11 07:45:42 PM
Also, I'd like to state that vaccines are NOT completely safe. However, the benefits far outweigh the risks by a wider margin than damn near anything else in medicine.

/mods should delete these vaccine posts because they are absolutely 100% off topic in a thread about autism
 
2013-01-11 07:58:06 PM

jaytkay: leadmetal: Wakefield's premise regarding vaccines...

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 449x330]


Another social response. This is what is so batshiat about so-called 'normal' people. Everything is about social appearances. It's why the world is so farked up. How masses of people are manipulated by a small group of sociopaths.

The paper that so many people get up in arms about is nothing exciting. All that it recommended was using the older method of vaccination. The UK's government run health care system couldn't allow that to happen and a witch hunt occurred. Not science. Then people like yourself volunteer to be social enforcers.

I don't know if Wakefield is correct or not, but others are moving towards diet based treatments (which is what Wakefield did) based on trial and observation without making a guess as to the underlying need for it. Anyway what I find most interesting is the social response of people who can't handle their belief system being the least biatchallenged. How they have to lash out with ridicule and worse. It's simply bizarre. I can see it with people whom have their careers based in the status-quo, but many if not most social enforcers don't even a horse in the race. It's like regular people who vote republican and democrat. They act as if they are going to get part of the winnings, part of the wealth that the winning team of the election gets to guide to their friends. They'll get as much as when their 'team' wins the superbowl. Nothing.

What's even more odd is how so-called normal people cling to beliefs that are based on nothing more than what a grade school teacher told them. It's as if they would be embarrassed for believing a lie told to them by an adult when they were a child.

How does the effectiveness of vaccination personally effect you so much that you feel the need to ridicule anyone that even suggests it as a possibility? Have the need to shut down discussion? It's just a discussion yet people lash out at the slightest mention of something contrary to their belief system.

To me this subject of vaccines is largely about control systems, a course I took in engineering school. Except these are chemical based control systems. I understand overdamped and underdamped response well enough to see the chemical parallel. It's just understanding how a machine operates. Regardless of anyone in particular is correct or not has no bearing on my life. It's just a puzzle to figure out what does what and the understanding of all parties involved is rather limited. So, if I were to use ridicule it would be wrt the closed mindedness put on display.
 
2013-01-11 08:09:18 PM

leadmetal: Furthermore, testing is done on -adults- not children with developing immune systems. The order and timing of vaccination has -never- been tested to see if there are problems with interactions or anything else with some of the population. It's just all assumed to work together like some 16 year old throwing aftermarket parts on a honda civic in a one-size fits all fashion.


Wrong. I was in a vaccine test program as a child. Not only did I experience no ill effects apart from one minor injection-site rash that my Mom cleared up with Neosporin, but I'm also not anywhere near the autism-spectrum.

I work with people who are, though, and if you ever want to piss off a roomful of smart people, start spouting that Jenny McCarthy 'vaccines are cause teh autisms! oh noes!!1!' bullshiat in a room full of advanced-degreed Aspies. They will scorn you so hard that your grandparents will feel embarrassed and not know why.
 
2013-01-11 08:16:34 PM
Autistic chicks are cool. Autistic guys need their ass kicked.
 
2013-01-11 08:17:34 PM

leadmetal:
How does the effectiveness of vaccination personally effect you so much that you feel the need to ridicule anyone that even suggests it as a possibility? Have the need to shut down discussion? It's just a discussion yet people lash out at the slightest mention of something contrary to their belief system.


I have a good friend with an immunological problem and a known anti-vaxer's kid gave her whooping cough (easily-prevented pertussis,) and she spent almost a week in the hospital, nearly died, etc. I also have a cousin who is blind and mentally challenged because her pregnant mom was a schoolteacher before the German measles vaccine was legally required to attend public schools. That, and my godson, who is definitely autistic, wasn't vaccinated until he was nearly six and already well-established as an aut-tot.

So I have some resentment toward the anti-vaccine arguments. I shouldn't have typed so harshly, though, and can respect your willingness to question the medical status quo.

leadmetal: To me this subject of vaccines is largely about control systems, a course I took in engineering school. Except these are chemical based control systems. I understand overdamped and underdamped response well enough to see the chemical parallel. It's just understanding how a machine operates. Regardless of anyone in particular is correct or not has no bearing on my life. It's just a puzzle to figure out what does what and the understanding of all parties involved is rather limited. So, if I were to use ridicule it would be wrt the closed mindedness put on display.


What are your thoughts on the proposed theory that it may be safer to vaccinate children under a certain age with identically-blood-typed parents by vaccinating the parent and then doing a small blood transfusion while the antibodies were still active? Some doctors have suggested that white blood cells from the parent may be as or even more effective than traditional vaccines (partly why breastfeeding = healthier kids,) and others feel that it's a needless tertiary infection risk for short-term effects that may not last as well as a normal vaccine.
 
2013-01-11 08:22:43 PM

leadmetal: Anyway what I find most interesting is the social response of people who can't handle their belief system being the least biatchallenged. How they have to lash out with ridicule and worse.


Heh...

leadmetal: What's even more odd is how so-called normal people cling to beliefs that are based on nothing more than what a grade school teacher an aging blonde woman known for showing her implants told them. It's as if they would be embarrassed for believing a lie told to them by an adult when they were a child also an adult.


This can't be real.
 
2013-01-11 08:41:43 PM

Occam's Disposable Razor: I shouldn't have let myself get dragged in, but anyway...

leadmetal: I see you never read the farking paper. So why don't you shut the fark up about things you're too farking lazy to look into? No of course not, like most so-called 'normal' people you 'feel' instead of think.

Data above all. Feeling is for our ancestors, we do better than that. Feeling is what compels people with no medical, statistical, or biology training to associate a scary needle with doing harm. Feeling is what compels a concerned parent to blame a temporally related event to a deterioration in their child's condition without evidence. I have read the paper. The journal that published his initial work has apologized and retracted it. Wakefield is a discredited, disgraced fraud.

Such things as retraction and disgrace are social in nature, not scientific.
Wakefield was hunted like a witch because he said something that wasn't socially acceptable. Science has never been the issue at hand. And even if he were wrong, why was he attacked so harshly when others who have caused deaths based upon error, but error that is within the socially acceptable bounds, are not?

It's all about feeling and social processes. Science is not even in the question once the status-quo belief system was questioned. Ridicule about scary needles is just that, ridicule of anyone who so much as has an open mind that the status-quo isn't correct. Real science doesn't do that. But that's what this process is and you are participating in it yourself, doctor.


leadmetal: You are standing on assertion. Nobody farking knows what vaccines really do.

leadmetal: If you knew anything about the real science it would be obvious to you how little is actually known about the mechanisms.

These two together indicate that I've likely been hooked by a troll. Plenty of people "know what vaccines really do." The second sentence was particularly amusing, as I'm actually a doctor, and the guys in the immunology and infectious disease departments would go absolutely apeshiat over that comment.

I'm not looking for a fight or trying to argue from authority. You have fixed beliefs I won't be changing, and that's ok. For everyone else, here's a decent link explaining why "too many, too soon" is a silly argument. There's science and data behind the vaccine schedule. To say it's never been tested is one of the most bald faced lies I've read on here. But you can believe some dude on a message board (myself included), or you can believe people who make a career out of studying these things.

It sounds as if you are arguing by authority, and if you are being truthful then you know as well as I do that isn't particularly well understood. Then again doctors are often arrogant enough to think they understand something when they really don't. The way the medical profession does things is proof enough of that. The way vaccines are determined to be 'safe and effective' by the companies that make them and then approved by government is laughable. Cell phones undergo more serious testing.

Medical studies are generally crap across the board for those who know how to read through the special wording and definitions. Engineering work like most medical studies would be considered crap. Planes would fall from the sky if built on 'data' the way the medical profession works. Anyway, show me the studies that were done to determine that there are no problems with the childhood vaccine schedule. Just give me a link, I'll read it. I have an idea of what it looks like, I am sure that there is no proof of it being a six-sigma process or even close.

Doctors are largely good at school. That is they are well institutionalized people who know how to stay within appropriate bounds. People have to be to get through that much school. If a doctor strays the other doctors use licensing and government mechanisms to purge him. It's a social and political order, not a scientific one. Then again most "science" is social and political as well. Very little real science is done. Even in engineering in the corporate world much is done socially. I've had testing I wanted to do denied because someone was emotionally attached to the status-quo and didn't want me asking the question.

What I keep seeing is people who don't want to seriously address any questions. People who don't want to do failure analysis. This is the way we do things. The end. don't question. Teacher said so. Authority said so. Don't look behind the curtain, keep that little dog under control.

Occam's Disposable Razor: Also, I'd like to state that vaccines are NOT completely safe. However, the benefits far outweigh the risks by a wider margin than damn near anything else in medicine.


If other factors working in parallel are neglected. But anyway, let me know when that argument stops gun control.


/mods should delete these vaccine posts because they are absolutely 100% off topic in a thread about autism


Exactly what I set out to point out. That it's about keeping people in that narrow track of this artificially defined 'normal'. This demand for conformity to the socially acceptable status-quo. How dare people be *gasp* different, and have different thoughts. Perhaps there should be moderators on the human population. Like what many governments do to those who don't believe as they should. Just disappear them. Thankfully the primary tool in the modern western world is ridicule, it's a lot less fatal, but the way things are going there is no telling how long that will last before it returns to the traditional human way of dealing with people who can't keep their thoughts within appropriate bounds.
 
2013-01-11 08:45:20 PM

leadmetal: Occam's Disposable Razor: I shouldn't have let myself get dragged in, but anyway...

leadmetal: I see you never read the farking paper. So why don't you shut the fark up about things you're too farking lazy to look into? No of course not, like most so-called 'normal' people you 'feel' instead of think.

Data above all. Feeling is for our ancestors, we do better than that. Feeling is what compels people with no medical, statistical, or biology training to associate a scary needle with doing harm. Feeling is what compels a concerned parent to blame a temporally related event to a deterioration in their child's condition without evidence. I have read the paper. The journal that published his initial work has apologized and retracted it. Wakefield is a discredited, disgraced fraud.

Such things as retraction and disgrace are social in nature, not scientific.
Wakefield was hunted like a witch because he said something that wasn't socially acceptable. Science has never been the issue at hand. And even if he were wrong, why was he attacked so harshly when others who have caused deaths based upon error, but error that is within the socially acceptable bounds, are not?

It's all about feeling and social processes. Science is not even in the question once the status-quo belief system was questioned. Ridicule about scary needles is just that, ridicule of anyone who so much as has an open mind that the status-quo isn't correct. Real science doesn't do that. But that's what this process is and you are participating in it yourself, doctor.


leadmetal: You are standing on assertion. Nobody farking knows what vaccines really do.

leadmetal: If you knew anything about the real science it would be obvious to you how little is actually known about the mechanisms.

These two together indicate that I've likely been hooked by a troll. Plenty of people "know what vaccines really do." The second sentence was particularly amusing, as I'm actually a doctor, and the guys in the immunology an ...


Still using ridicule eh, doctor?
How about slamming me with papers? With data? Nahh... too difficult. Too risky. Social ridicule is better. You're certainly confirming my opinion of medical doctors in general though.
 
2013-01-11 08:46:49 PM
Crap hit the wrong buttons... corrected:


Occam's Disposable Razor: leadmetal: Anyway what I find most interesting is the social response of people who can't handle their belief system being the least biatchallenged. How they have to lash out with ridicule and worse.

Heh...

leadmetal: What's even more odd is how so-called normal people cling to beliefs that are based on nothing more than what a grade school teacher an aging blonde woman known for showing her implants told them. It's as if they would be embarrassed for believing a lie told to them by an adult when they were a child also an adult.

This can't be real.



Still using ridicule eh, doctor?
How about slamming me with papers? With data? Nahh... too difficult. Too risky. Social ridicule is better. You're certainly confirming my opinion of medical doctors in general though.
 
2013-01-11 09:05:54 PM

leadmetal: Anyway, show me the studies that were done to determine that there are no problems with the childhood vaccine schedule. Just give me a link, I'll read it. I have an idea of what it looks like, I am sure that there is no proof of it being a six-sigma process or even close.


Link

To be fair I simply googled "studies that were done to determine that there are no problems with the childhood vaccine schedule" and the first result was a 16 page pdf of study after study, the first page ending with this gem:

"One study published in 2010 was conducted in response to concerns about the total number of vaccines children receive. In this study (the last one listed in this document), researchers found infants who followed the recommended vaccine schedule performed better on 42 different neuropsychological outcomes years later than children who delayed or skipped vaccinations. This should reassure parents that vaccinating their children on schedule is safe and is the best way to protect them from disease."

We don't get six sigma in medicine. We get a p value less than .05 or .01 if we're lucky. The n required to get that kind of power would be far too expensive and likely unbelievably unethical.

I argue because you are doing harm. These ideas are harmful. I don't make money on vaccines, and most drug companies make a pittance if they're not losing money on them. There is no ulterior motive here, there's simply nothing to be gained but a healthier population. You get a great deal of push back on this issue not because we're all authoritarian sheep and you're the enlightened wise man, but because we don't get many astoundingly cheap, incredibly effective wins in medicine. People fight you because they're old enough to remember polio. Vaccines are a wonder - it would be like arguing against antibiotics. I understand that old Edward Jenner of smallpox fame was lucky and stumbled blindly into the idea of vaccination. I agree that rational design and targeting biochemical processes we have an understanding of is the better approach, but medicine is not engineering, we're simply not there yet. However, characterizing the entire profession of physicians as brainwashed but adroit test takers who submit to some monolithic governing body is just a touch unhinged.
 
2013-01-11 09:06:34 PM
"In her contestant video, Wineman says she hopes to use the Miss America platform to spread awareness about autism."

Why do beauty contestants always try to spread awareness of something that majority of the world's population already know about? We are already aware of HIV, AIDS, CANCER, and all sorts of nasty bad stuff that destroy the health of people. Why not join the contest simply to win? Or if they can't accept the fact that they just want to be "the most beautiful American lady this year", why not pick another subject that people actually don't really know much about, but has significant importance?
 
2013-01-11 09:08:58 PM

SpiderQueenDemon: leadmetal:
How does the effectiveness of vaccination personally effect you so much that you feel the need to ridicule anyone that even suggests it as a possibility? Have the need to shut down discussion? It's just a discussion yet people lash out at the slightest mention of something contrary to their belief system.

I have a good friend with an immunological problem and a known anti-vaxer's kid gave her whooping cough (easily-prevented pertussis,) and she spent almost a week in the hospital, nearly died, etc. I also have a cousin who is blind and mentally challenged because her pregnant mom was a schoolteacher before the German measles vaccine was legally required to attend public schools. That, and my godson, who is definitely autistic, wasn't vaccinated until he was nearly six and already well-established as an aut-tot.

So I have some resentment toward the anti-vaccine arguments. I shouldn't have typed so harshly, though, and can respect your willingness to question the medical status quo.


What I don't like about vaccination is the violence that sits behind it. That 'democracy' or the people who run it, get to decide for everyone in a one-size-fits-all fashion or else. I also don't trust any industrial product (modern medicine consists of industrial products) where the liability is on the government. Now the pro vaccination folks will say no vaccine would be made if the government didn't take the liability, which right there tells me that the problems are well known enough and larger than other medical products.

Anyway, If a private school (and I don't think government should be running schools) required vaccination, so be it, people who don't want to can find another school. But as to coming in contact with people that may have a disease there's not much that can be done about that. Even vaccinated people can end up infected. People also travel. I am not sure how being infected by another person would play out property rights wise. There may be a case for negligence on the kid or kid's parents for letting the kid out, but that's as far as I can go there. I still don't see it as justification for forcing everyone to be vaccinated.


leadmetal: To me this subject of vaccines is largely about control systems, a course I took in engineering school. Except these are chemical based control systems. I understand overdamped and underdamped response well enough to see the chemical parallel. It's just understanding how a machine operates. Regardless of anyone in particular is correct or not has no bearing on my life. It's just a puzzle to figure out what does what and the understanding of all parties involved is rather limited. So, if I were to use ridicule it would be wrt the closed mindedness put on display.

What are your thoughts on the proposed theory that it may be safer to vaccinate children under a certain age with identically-blood-typed parents by vaccinating the parent and then doing a small blood transfusion while the antibodies were still active? Some doctors have suggested that white blood cells from the parent may be as or even more effective than traditional vaccines (partly why breastfeeding = h ...


It sounds like it could work, but I don't know. It could be safer, it could also be more dangerous. Perhaps if there were some sound process to remove unwanted elements.
 
2013-01-11 09:09:39 PM

leadmetal: How about slamming me with papers? With data? Nahh... too difficult. Too risky. Social ridicule is better. You're certainly confirming my opinion of medical doctors in general though.


You now have 43 studies on one link if you followed it. Something easily googled with your own words. You don't want answers. You want to look down your nose at people who achieve more than you.

/sorry for the thread shiatting, anyone who read down this far
 
2013-01-11 09:48:29 PM

Wolfling: [missworlds.files.wordpress.com image 648x1021]

Game, set and match, Australia


I'd put my shrimp in that Barbie.
 
2013-01-11 10:25:44 PM
has "very mild symptoms." She said she struggles to communicate at times. She also said she often takes things too literally.

F*cking really?

Also:
Related Slideshow

Stars' first nude scenes
 
2013-01-11 11:00:57 PM
Mild autism huh? Well, she's certainly going after the "feel pity for me me" vote. I really doubt that she is autistic. I have full faith that the nose job on the left is full retard though.

BTW, subby, being a victim does not make anyone a hero.
 
2013-01-11 11:27:31 PM
She said she struggles to communicate at times.

So she's in good company then?
 
2013-01-11 11:31:00 PM

ModernPrimitive01: Carn: The Angry Hand of God: I am growing so tired about hearing about people with autism, ADD, ADHD, Asperger's, etc. Can't people just stop making up names for these so-called "conditions," and take some responsibility? I get it, you are socially awkward. When I was a kid, that would just mean that you gotten beat up here and there, but you would just go home as the beaten up weird kid, not some completely dysfunctional, Ritalin popping mess with some poorly diagnosed trendy "disease" caused by getting too many vaccinations.

My nephew is autistic for real, not borderline or awkward like this girl. He is making a lot of progress but still has a lot of very serious issues. So, f*ck off..

I would like to second that f*ck off. I've counseled college students on the autism spectrum and it's a lot more than being awkward. People with Asperger's don't understand social cues and do take things literally. One of my clients got in an argument with a professor and the professor told them "I'll do _______ when the cows come home." My client literally thought the professor was waiting for his cows to come home before he gave him a better grade. They also get horribly upset if routines change. People with more serious autism can't even communicate with others and some don't seem to want to, but people with Asperger's want to make friends but usually can't because they don't understand the unwritten social rules the rest of us seem to understand naturally so yeah you're either a troll or just dumb


Third.

I worked with someone with Asperger's at a job that involved a ridiculous amount of one on one communication.  Knowledge as well - which he had in spades - but being able to communicate that to people was something he just couldn't naturally do.  He had the passion for what we were working on, but was just about to be fired before one person sat down with him and actually mapped out the most common conversations, how to answer the most common questions, when people said ____ you had to realize they might actually mean ____, etc.  Our boss gave him a pass because he actually worked on this chart of his for hours, more than likely an entire weekend straight... but it worked, once he could fit most people and conversations into flowcharts.

/of all the people she gave "one last chance" to, holy crap did he step up
 
2013-01-11 11:55:32 PM

TheSlothAlive: [s14.postimage.org image 498x353]


Is Leia sucking on Darth's finger there?
/Giggity
 
2013-01-12 12:31:23 AM
Anti vaccine nuts are like pro gun nuts. Wrong.
 
2013-01-12 12:39:02 AM

BolshyGreatYarblocks: brantgoose: Congratulations, male heterosexual and lesbian Farkers! Miss Americas are now even more unlikely to acknowledge your existence!

I bet some of you think all pretty women are autistic.

Most autistic people have some talent, so no.


Autism usually does not work that way. My son has autism (the real thing, properly diagnosed. etc.) I have met many people on the autism spectrum. Not one of them had savant syndrome.

Rain Man confused a lot of people about what autism is. I've lost count of the number of people who have asked me "what's his ability" when I mention that my son has autism. He has autism, not super powers.
 
2013-01-12 12:52:30 AM

IAMTHEINTARWEBS: She's autistic?
Not compared to the autistic folks I have come into contact with she isn't.
She seemed very normal to me.
misdiagnosed maybe?


Aspergers presents itself as an incredibly mild thing.

She, like most people with Aspergers, will be falling off the end of the spectrum come DSM-V.

Also,bear in mind she probably rehearsed this...
 
2013-01-12 01:09:49 AM

sendbillmoney: He has autism, not super powers.


Yeah, but as one dad to another, I'll tell you I've been known to joke about my autistic kid having super powers. It's nice to play for a minute like there will be some extra payoff from all the therapy and work my kid does.

That's what most of the haters on this thread don't get. My kid works his ass off to be close to a 'normal' kid. Being autistic isn't some green light for extra coddling. It means the kid has to work harder and learn to deal with more stuff than the average kid.
 
2013-01-12 04:55:19 AM
If you're capable of participating in a contest that's like 90% about your ability to communicate (albeit not necessarily verbally), then you've been misdiagnosed, miss. Your awkward phase was probably a result of "being a kid" disorder, and not an actual disease.
 
2013-01-12 06:17:29 AM
So for the talent portion she communicates with someone else?
 
2013-01-12 11:30:30 AM
^What someone who wants to stick his penis in Miss Montana looks like.
 
2013-01-12 12:19:10 PM
Autistic people obsess over a certain area.

Autistic people have problems communicating or taking things too literally.

Why don't autistic people ever obsess over English, or puns?
 
2013-01-12 01:23:21 PM
just wanted to see if I could find the bottom of the thread...
 
2013-01-12 04:07:19 PM
She's cute. I hope she wins. That pageant is a sham anyway.
 
2013-01-13 04:43:56 AM

Krieghund: sendbillmoney: He has autism, not super powers.

Yeah, but as one dad to another, I'll tell you I've been known to joke about my autistic kid having super powers. It's nice to play for a minute like there will be some extra payoff from all the therapy and work my kid does.

That's what most of the haters on this thread don't get. My kid works his ass off to be close to a 'normal' kid. Being autistic isn't some green light for extra coddling. It means the kid has to work harder and learn to deal with more stuff than the average kid.


Don't worry; that hard work does pay off when they get older. I went through therapy for fine motor control and speech therapy; I've got the auditory processing difficulties as well, which goes over really well the foreign nationals I work with. "I swear I'm not making fun of your thick accent! I just need to hear that sentence a fifth time!".

What I have carried with me since then is a great work ethic, a decent personality, and a case of beer for the event where the first two don't pan out.
 
Displayed 38 of 288 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report