Thread that GA cannot lock. Debate continued in here. GA's Diaper time...

[Christopher McCandless]

Hadron often takes a contrary view of things against all logic, so it may be impossible to really make sense of it in some cases.

Its not contrary. But do try and actually show the lack of logic in my argument. Indeed find a case in this discussion where I have contradicted facts proven by the scientific method, which is a reasonable benchmark for proving me illogical. Rather than me merely going against other peoples unproved presumptions, which they are then treating as if they are sancrosanct fact.

I think in the bolded sentence he meant to say that no one has a right not to be offended, though.

True, being very late I dropped a word accidentally.

[Osensitive1]

I think in the bolded sentence he meant to say that no one has a right not to be offended, though.

True, being very late I dropped a word accidentally.

Tried adding the 'to' and it still gummed up the works, but the rewording helped. The gears seem to be spinning slow today, so maybe should opt out until another time.

["couldbecousin"]

Well, considering that ordinary people without AS can be transgendered too, I doubt a significant correlation with AS would be made, if at all. However the risk is there because the media is known to distort information to suit their own agendas for ratings. But even then, this potential correlation problem can be eliminated when multiple advocates are involved in the process. If each one is distinctively different from the other to show diversity, then the problem is solved.

So technically I see no issue.

Multiple advocates and the like sound like a recipe for becoming a second class citizen, not a first class one. Not exactly useful to the stronger of us who are not content to be second class citizens. If we are to win on that one, we need a strong movement and a clear message. But more importantly, we need the self-respect that some here seem to lack...

So do you propose that only one aspie, or one type of aspie, be permitted to represent the cause in public? If so, what qualifications would he/she/they have to have (other than, I presume, not being openly gay, bi or transgendered)?

[GalileoAce]

You cannot wake up one morning and decide that your arbitary group, united by an arbitrary and pointless decision that you have taken, suddenly have a special set of rights. Where do they come from? Why your arbitary group - as opposed to another group with a different arbitrary belief.

Where does Autism come from? Why choose it instead of something else?

[SleepyDragon]

I believe right X should not exist, where right X happens to be freedom from being offended.

Oh, absolutely. Delicate sensitivities should not obstruct reasoned debate. "Let a hundred flowers bloom; a hundred schools of thought contend." Set aside emotion, weigh all the available evidence, then draw one's own conclusions — in that order.  Too many are unwilling to examine information which contradicts long-held personal belief; this is an error.

[odeon]

[...]at the end of the day it will be understood, that he simply did nothing.

Yeah...What does he do? He claims this 'cause' and the 'work' he's doing, but has he ever said what that actually entails?

I am not in a position to reveal my hand at this stage - largely because the situation is quite serious. Though I am happy to vaguely outline to sensible people via PM what I am doing and what is going down at the minute.

The mystery, the mystery...

[GalileoAce]

[...]at the end of the day it will be understood, that he simply did nothing.

Yeah...What does he do? He claims this 'cause' and the 'work' he's doing, but has he ever said what that actually entails?

I am not in a position to reveal my hand at this stage - largely because the situation is quite serious. Though I am happy to vaguely outline to sensible people via PM what I am doing and what is going down at the minute.

You're a liar. Either prove your case and shut the fuck up. Isn't that the point of Intensity?

['andersom']

[...]at the end of the day it will be understood, that he simply did nothing.

Yeah...What does he do? He claims this 'cause' and the 'work' he's doing, but has he ever said what that actually entails?

I am not in a position to reveal my hand at this stage - largely because the situation is quite serious. Though I am happy to vaguely outline to sensible people via PM what I am doing and what is going down at the minute.

The mystery, the mystery...

It all is a cunning plan.

['andersom']

Well, considering that ordinary people without AS can be transgendered too, I doubt a significant correlation with AS would be made, if at all. However the risk is there because the media is known to distort information to suit their own agendas for ratings. But even then, this potential correlation problem can be eliminated when multiple advocates are involved in the process. If each one is distinctively different from the other to show diversity, then the problem is solved.

So technically I see no issue.

Multiple advocates and the like sound like a recipe for becoming a second class citizen, not a first class one. Not exactly useful to the stronger of us who are not content to be second class citizens. If we are to win on that one, we need a strong movement and a clear message. But more importantly, we need the self-respect that some here seem to lack...

Sorry, thinking in classes?

British old style?

The class system is alive and kicking in this country. Anyone who says it has died off is lying, frankly...

I'm not British, I don't understand the subtleties of your society.

Of course there are groups here, and there is stigmatising here, because of all kinds of things, also historical things, but we don't have the British class system. And that system does go beyond my comprehension indeed. Still, can't see how the main ideas of you make sense, in any country.

Think trains basically. You have 1st class where you get a plush seat and table service, 2nd class where you might have to stand up and 3rd class when you are hanging on outside the carraiges.

Oh, and maybe it is needed to work with the class-system for politicians, don't know. But, what you work with, is also what you keep alive. So, do you want the class system to exist?

Of course not - I am socialist.

What amazes me is that you use "first" and "second" instead of other words. Seems you are not only categorising here, but also giving a judgement on what is better and what not.

[Alex179]

The world already makes those judgments.   Society does it automatically.   It reduces people to second class citizens, just based on how they act, look, talk, etc.

['andersom']

The world already makes those judgments.   Society does it automatically.   It reduces people to second class citizens, just based on how they act, look, talk, etc.

But, if you want to represent people, it is important to not make that distinction. Certainly not in the group of people you claim to represent, or who you want the vote from.

[Alex179]

The world already makes those judgments.   Society does it automatically.   It reduces people to second class citizens, just based on how they act, look, talk, etc.

But, if you want to represent people, it is important to not make that distinction. Certainly not in the group of people you claim to represent, or who you want the vote from.

A politician would try to  act like such classes do not exist when trying to get elected to represent.   They would know deep down that such things will always exist, just never admit it to the public.

['andersom']

The world already makes those judgments.   Society does it automatically.   It reduces people to second class citizens, just based on how they act, look, talk, etc.

But, if you want to represent people, it is important to not make that distinction. Certainly not in the group of people you claim to represent, or who you want the vote from.

A politician would try to  act like such classes do not exist when trying to get elected to represent.   They would know deep down that such things will always exist, just never admit it to the public.

A politician should, ideally, be able to name the differences and address them (wealth, education, health, violence etc) without making it about a better type of people and lesser sorts of people. Not only in the words the politician uses, also in the thoughts the politician has.

That's ideally, I know. In practice, politicians back away from naming the differences, or do give a (hidden) judgement on the quality of the people.

[Christopher McCandless]

The world already makes those judgments.   Society does it automatically.   It reduces people to second class citizens, just based on how they act, look, talk, etc.

But, if you want to represent people, it is important to not make that distinction. Certainly not in the group of people you claim to represent, or who you want the vote from.

There is a difference between stating the fact that society treats people as certain classes (in which case they exist) and the belief that they should not exist. How can you solve the problem by sweeping it under the carpet?

['andersom']

The world already makes those judgments.   Society does it automatically.   It reduces people to second class citizens, just based on how they act, look, talk, etc.

But, if you want to represent people, it is important to not make that distinction. Certainly not in the group of people you claim to represent, or who you want the vote from.

There is a difference between stating the fact that society treats people as certain classes (in which case they exist) and the belief that they should not exist. How can you solve the problem by sweeping it under the carpet?

Think I answered that in the post above yours. I agree with you there, I think.