to think that Chris Huhne's son was very wrong to call him 'autistic'

[Sallyingforth]

He is may be an unpleasant creature but that word should never be used as an insult.
order-order.com/2013/02/04/peter-huhnes-texts-to-lying-father/

That could be the case, spatsky. I don't think it matters too much what the specific interpretation is. It's not appropriate to use the word 'autistic' (or any other disability) to mean something other than it's actual meaning. Obviously using it as a form of insult makes it worse/more hurtful.

Actually maybe there isn't a difference ultimately. I'm struggling to put some of my thoughts into written word

Crossed posts with you bedhopper.

Move on and discuss something really important like how we are going to identify Autism as early as possible and help those with it and except that occasionally people who are just human may say things that may be thoughtless

One of the ways to help people with autism, politty, is to stop using the name of their medical condition as an insult.

Agreed .. but was my point entirely missed?

I think it's a specious point, politty.

Yes, other things matter. Some other things may matter more, and some may matter less. We don't stop caring about something because there is another injustice elsewhere.

Agree with that as well but since we have limited time (being mums etc) chewing over and over something that was clearly unintentional is daft in my view. Use that limited time to get to bigger more important issues or be sidelined. I am sick of being sidelined cause I have little time .. dnt get bogged down in this any more, what are we going to do about VIPs that lie!

If you think this thread is wasting your time, politty, then start another one on the topic that concerns you.

Your limited time is not a reason for me to abandon an issue that I feel is very important. And I'm not talking about Chris Huhne's son. I am talking about the way large numbers of people talk in disablist terms (and others, like you, consider that unimportant).

Yes this thread should be less about Chris Huhne and his son, more about the widespread and generally accepted use of the term "autistic" to describe someone as incapable of feeling emotion.

That makes a very relevant discussion and I think is what the op is actually about.

Would you excuse racism on the grounds that someone was young and upset?

Would someone who felt it shouldn't be excused be told to get over themselves?

I fail to see the difference.

I also don't think we are limited to one discussion. I think we can discuss and address several interrelated issues without losing anything.

I think that autism as an insult is a very important issue and one that is worth talking about.

I fail to see why people want to limit this to what this individual said when over and over and over again we are telling you that it is the issue of disability as insult that is the problem. This is simply an example of it.

The issue is important and should be discussed. Trivialising this big issue by pretending it's about one young lad and doesn't exist outside that and we are all wanting to talk about this boy specifically and exclusively and therefore are unreasonable and making a big deal out of nothing and getting bogged down in somehing important is missing the point by a mile.

I am happy to spend some of my limited time making it clear that autism does not mean cold, callous, unfeeling, cruel, thoughtless, mean or selfish and that people should not throw it at others as a way of calling them any or all of those things.

unimportant, that should read

emotion empathy

I think we all need to get over ourselves a bit here. Mr Huhnes son is a/ Young
b/ Very and understandably distressed.
Perhaps you'd like to discuss that point with one of my three ASD children, who get called names like 'Autistic twat' regularly.
Perhaps you should get over the fact that whilst discussing this, something else is not being sidelined, that too (whatever the issue, including lying VIPs) is up for discussion.

stop saying that anyone who does not agree is

(a) disablist
or
(b) uses casual disablist terms
or
(c) tacitly approves of people that use disablist terms

please

My issue is the these words should never have been put out there anyway, he was a minor at the time and its beyond inappropriate

one the one hands we have mothers here who are (understandably) concerned for this kids

Yet we are using the words of a distraught teen that we wrongly released (someone elses kid) to make a politcal point and have a bun fight

who knows why he chose that word, we will never know

"I think that autism as an insult is a very important issue and one that is worth talking about.

But hecate this is a thread on AIBU! Parliamentary questons time it aint! I see you have strong feelings, validly so

But may I gently suggest this this bun fight of a thread is not going to be a game changer? Its a bun fight, end of

That's a real shame. I had hoped that at least some people might have gone away from it with an additional perspective on an important issue and taken time to think about their language choices and their understanding of autism.

You can be reassured that I have certainly gained from this thread an appreciation that there is much more I need to read/learn about autism.

I still think its a shame that this was the example used to base the discussion because I still believe there is a moral distinction between such as PH and Ricky Gervais for eg. But I get that others don't agree.

Hecate, I've been watching this thread with interest and am learning from it.

Coincidentally, my DH observed to me the other day that people in his workplace are regularly diagnosing autism in others. He said he reckoned no-one in his workplace actually knew what autism is (including him) but that the "autistic label" seemed to make co-workers more tolerant of those who didn't fit in particularly easily.

This was the example given. I'd have discussed it given any example. But I can't not discuss it. iyswim. If there was a way to start it over with no example, that would be great! Having it as a general debate rather than being seen as specifically about someone - no matter how many times you attempt to generalise it and turn it into a debate about the issue and not an individual!

RG has been done. As I recall, those who objected were called miseries and po and the like cos he's a comedian and they have to be allowed to take the piss out of disabled people. And the frankie boyle one. People defended him too. We're over sensitive and it's really rather funny. Apparently.

You can see why it's always important to challenge...

I feel sorry for the young lad. Imagine if your own impassioned, personal texts were published in the national press.

He's young, and clearly does not know the correct meaning of autistic. I'm 42 and I don't know an awful lot about autism either. I think that the common perception of autism is a lack of social awareness. If this is wrong, as many are saying on here that it is, then that is an issue that deserves attention.

There are countless issues we should know more about, but don't. We are all ignorant about some things that profoundly affect others. I dunno. I read those messages in horror and they made me sad. But not because he said autistic. I'm sorry if that upsets anybody.

Take a poll of who here still thinks F Boyle is funny. Most Mners can't stand him now after his pathetic comments.

Of course it is always important to challenge. But if the likes of PH are lumped in with the likes of RG then I think that is going to cause a lot of people unease.

Like saying my dad - racist unthinkingly because of his generation and upbringing - is the same as Nick Griffin who starts a political party about being racist.

That doesn't mean I don't challenge my dad - I do. But he is not the same as someone who is deliberately, repeatedly, provocatively racist and incites others to join in. And if I were to approach him on that basis, I doubt I would ever have much impact on his thinking. He would reject what I was saying because of the obvious hyperbole.

I note that the contentious phrase has been published in most of the press today.
It will be interesting to see whether there are any letters printed tomorrow discussing mis-use of the word as an insult.
I do fear that the publication may encourage copy-cat behaviour, and I desperately hope I am wrong in this.
Hecate, having read your posts in this thread I am at a loss to understand how you manage to achieve so much, but you clearly do. You have my admiration.

I suppose those not horrified by this wouldn't find replacing it with spakka offensive either.

That's what shows what a long road we have to travel before people with disabilities are seen as equal. And so any of you are oblivious.

That's really sad.

Jeez if he was my Dad I would be calling him an arse and all thre rest. The poor boy is only 20 and he is naive. He needs some slack with a Dad like that.