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/

All I say is make the challenge proportionate to the offence. Context is important.

That does NOT mean you excuse or don't challenge. But you temper your reaction to the intent of the speaker, if of course you can discern it. I appreciate that is not always easy or even possible.

I asked earlier if anyone thought PH was morally equivalent to RG, FB etc in their deliberate, repeated, goading use of insulting terms re disabled. I don't think he is or anyone else like him. Lumping them altogether in one big melting pot of evil is just counter productive as far as I can see. You will alienate people who genuinely want to learn and who are genuinely shocked and upset to realise they have been offensive.

You know why RG and FB got away with that? why there is an audience for such 'jokes'?

Because it is tolerated at low level.

Its either ok or it isn't, there are no 'degrees'

I don't think anyone has lumped PH with Ricky Gervais or Frankie Boyle, Spero? If they have, I've missed it. Can you point to a post? I can't see any insults or aggression towards him on this thread. I'd be shocked if I did. All the posters who disapprove of disablist insults seem to be trying to discuss this in more general terms (i.e. not going on about a particular individual).

Several posters have said that even a person who is upset/going through a bad time shouldn't use 'autistic' as an insult. That's all. How is that alienating?

cross-posted with amber, who makes a very good point.

I am sorry for repeating myself over and over. I guess I just feel my basic - and I thought very simple - point is ignored.

I am not saying you excuse it or don't challenge it because it is said by a sweet little old lady or an upset teenager. I am saying that you don't treat those people as 'horrific' or 'disgusting' because they probably would want to engage with you and learn something.

So you ask them to think about what they are saying. You don't launch into - you are attacking all disabled people, you are sick and a disgusting hater.

Bed hopper, the way you put it of course isn't alienating. But I have been on this thread from the beginning and very struck by some of the reactions to what was said - a lot along the lines of this was the worst thing he could have said, he clearly reached into the darkest recesses of his mind to find the most horrible thing he could say to his father... And I think that is just not true and an overreaction which doesn't get us anywhere.

I have heard you Spero - and agreed with you.

But I think you are missing that the ramping up occurs on both sides of any debate.

If you read through the thread the comments become more forceful on both sides as a counter to each other.
I have tried to discuss rationally throughout, as have many on both sides.

But just as you keep repeating and stressing in response to what you see as harsh comments, others are going to stress how awful they find the use of autistic in this context when they gets 'oh ffs' 'pic gorn mad' and 'lighten up' stuff.

You repeat more forcefully when your views are being dismissed. It's human nature.

You are only noticing the moments that are harsh towards the boy.
I notice more the 'jeez. Does it matter' stuff.

It's just different perspective.

It isn't being ignored, not by me anyway.

But this is not about some sweet old lady/angry teen saying something without realising it is offensive.

It is about someone saying it as a clear insult.

No one is launching into anything, people are saying that it matters not what the context was, it is either wrong or it isn't. There are no excuses.

Are we discussing engaging with people who are ignorant? or did you say something about PH not being as bad as RG and FB?

I suppose the crux of this particular point is that you appear to think PH said it in innocence? whereas I and others think he deliberately used the term as an insult. While many have said several times that they feel for him, he still said it in that way.

People can chose to educate themselves, there are many non hostile platforms for discussion and it isn't that hard to learn about what is and isn't acceptable with regards disablism/racism/sexism etc if you want to

But I believe that there should be a no budging condemnation of disablism in any form and if you allow for 'grey' areas then you are saying it is ok sometimes

I do notice the 'does it matter stuff' and I think that is profoundly wrong because of course it does matter, which I hope I made clear.

I suppose I find it hard when people disagree with me because I am right ALL the time. However luckily for this debate I now have to take the dog out.

YY to Pagwatch.

Spero! I know exactly how you feel.

I know Spero. I'm not having a go.
It's true on all contentious threads.
You can be having a reasonable thread but the longer it goes on the more polarised it gets. The middle ground gets ignored as the extreme ends of the debate get more and more incensed.
You are getting frustrated that people are judging PH far too harshly when compared with really intentionally nasty stuff.
I am getting frustrated that almost everyone has said that PH is more to be pitied than blamed yet this thread is being presented as a lynching all the time.

But go. The dog will shit in the house otherwise

I don't feel it's our place to intrude to be honest. Don't want to read the exchange, just feel very sad for the boy and am not going to judge anything he said in private to his own parent.

By contrast I was a bit alarmed by the stuff about Richard III. The speculation that if he didn't actually have a hump, he perhaps wasn't the monster that he has been portrayed as being. As if the disability made him a monster rather than the behaviour iyswim.

Thank you everyone for your posts on this thread. I have learnt a great deal from reading this, including that what I believed to be my 'rough' understanding of autism is pretty damn inaccurate. I am really grateful to have had my eyes opened.

I would never have used the term as an insult anyway but now understand so much better how deeply hurtful it is when people do so and will challenge it when I hear it used in this way in future.

Spero I agree with you on the 'scale' point you have been making. Basically that to use the term as an insult is always wrong but some instances merit far greater condemnation and some instances serve as an opportunity to teach the relevant person (and others) what the term really means.

I have learnt a great deal from reading this, including that what I believed to be my 'rough' understanding of autism is pretty damn inaccurate. I am really grateful to have had my eyes opened.

what a lovely post, imustbethepatient - that makes me really happy to read.

drjohnson - i know! on the tv programme, at one point, the presenter said, in a wondering sort of tone 'I suppose perhaps he could have had a hunchback, and still be a nice guy?^ No-one responded. Crazy thought, obviously.

Basically that to use the term as an insult is always wrong but some instances merit far greater condemnation and some instances serve as an opportunity to teach the relevant person (and others) what the term really means

I get your point, but the instance in which you feel serves as an opportunity to teach someone something, is still equally as hurtful to the person being insulted.

This is not about teaching people, there are better opportunities to learn that aren't at someone elses expense.

thank you for validating my hurt feelings. I don't think anyone was having a go but I was conscious I was banging my drum perhaps a bit too long. But I think Pagwatch's summary is concise and fair.

I think this has been a brilliant thread actually and didn't descend into the kind of awfulness that sometimes happens. I shall certainly be more mindful of what 'shorthand' terms I use in the future.

the poor dog blinked in the daylight and looked very uncertain. She hasn't been walked that often since I became a slave to the internetz.

Bloody hell, I have only just registered the stuff about Richard III and his hump. Now that is close to home. Looks like we have a very long way to go...

I think the Richard III thing has been taken somewhat out of context.
The Richard III society have spent years trying to denounce the Shakespearean/Tudor (ie. hunchback/withered arm/evil) version of Richard III as propaganda, and had convinced themselves so completely of this that when his remains did actually show him to have scoliosis, Phillipa Langley (R.III Society rep) was visibly shocked.
I don't feel she was intentionally disrespectful.

Good. I just remember David Aaronovitch interviewing some woman about romantic Mills and Boon type literature and asking her - couldn't the heroine ever have a disability, like a limp? And the woman replying, sounding really shocked 'of course not'. Which was nice.

yes, this has been a much better thread than most of the ones on MN that involve disability.

amber's point that disablist (like sexist or racist) terms are just as hurtful if they are innocently/ignorantly/naively meant as if they are cruelly meant is very true. In some ways they are more hurtful, because it makes you realise that people you like/love have such negative feelings about your disability.

I was thinking about this thread during the night (baby keeping me awake). I have a disability (not autism) and all my life I have really hated it when people make jokes/negative comments about it - not meaning to hurt, and often not even remembering/realising that I have that disability. The comments are so ingrained in ordinary speech that they don't even notice they're saying them. I've never said anything, because I realise they don't mean to hurt me, and I don't want to embarrass them (or to appear oversensitive). This thread has made me understand why it hurt so much. It is really alienating when someone makes a casual, negative, reference to your disability - I think only someone who has experienced it (and believe me, it is a regular, everyday occurrence) can understand.

I'm confused by some of the face palming on this thread. Does autism not effect someone's ability to interact socially then? If not, this website need some serious updating. I also know some professionals who probably have to review their use of the term.
www.autism.org.uk/about-autism/autism-and-asperger-syndrome-an-introduction/what-is-autism.aspx

PH was an 18 year old, not a medical professional. From those texts I think he does believe - rightly or wrongly - that his father is on the autistic spectrum and is not using it as a cheap insult. If people object to amateur diagnoses then they really ought to head over to the relationship board and crack down on the use of narc and PND He is also very, very hurt and angry. I do think anyone criticising him for those texts is BU.

We will have to agree to disagree on his intent.
He is using it as an insult IMO . People don't tend to talk about a diagnosis with 'you fucking (neutral diagnostic term) piece of shit' wrapped around it.

You fucking person with abandonment issue piece of shit.
You fucking diabetic piece of shit
You fucking epileptic piece of shit.

It only works if you put in something to do with SN or mental health as those are interchangeable in some quarters with an insult

i agree with pagwatch.

It is like if someone has red hair. Saying 'you ginger piece of shit' is clearly an insult, and criticises that the person's 'gingerness'.

Or if they are black or gay: 'you black piece of shit, you gay piece of shit' clearly criticises blackness or gayness.

Same with autistic, IMO. Doesn't matter whether or not he believes his father to be autistic - adding the word into the insult clearly criticises autisticness.

Interesting though that you don't see that, alittlestranger. Would you feel the same way if the word used was 'black' instead of 'autistic'?

I would rather have face palming than the particularly obnoxious response that used to be quite common on this site a few years back by constantly linking me to a site called 'derailing for dummies' whenever I asked (in my view) a genuine and sensible question about an issue, wishing to know more.

Well actually, I would rather that neither response was used because it is just annoying and shuts down a debate rather than opens it up.