flappy hands are happy hands! happy autism acceptance month!!!

don’t .

“ but think so easy read- ” not care , someone else disability not about you . keep to self .

“ but think seem cute and nice- ” go sit in corner and think before you infantise .

“ but have trouble read- ” understand , but language disability means person probably not have way make clearer . if really need ask , do not blame and complain about person .

this not something that choose do . talk this way because need something call AAC . brain have hard time make words without support . AAC give way say things , able use picture buttons that brain understand better and those become words . not all AAC same , but this what duckie use .

do you know how many people comment already that think cute or nice or easy how talk ?

do you know how many people ignore what say , so they can pat back for tolerate how say ?

do you know how many people then get tired , say need do better like have any choice ?

promise you . hear all this before . not need again . should not randomly point out things about other people disability , even if you think give compliment . 

ive had burnout on and off the past few weeks. today i saw someone in a video mention losing skills and wondered if it applied to me. i mostly was thinking of work skills, hobby skills, or motor skills for some reason. that sort of thing. and i thought, nahh. still have all those i think!

then later i caught myself going "WHY do i feel like all these therapy things i fixed are problems again? why is my brain insisting everything we do is 'cringe' why cant i talk abt my feelings, why am i second guessing everything i say in at least five different dimensions? why is my brain doing things it hasnt done in like TEN YEARS?"

surprise!

"New (old) perspectives on self-injurious and aggressive biting" published in Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis / Nine Inch Nails- The Hand that Feeds

I was troubled to see a trend of claiming that Autistic people who do not support Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) are a group of "low-support-needs" autistics who are monopolizing the conversation and taking resources away from autistics with higher support needs—I think it is misunderstanding.

Individual positive or negative experiences with ABA are irrelevant here—the fundamental core of the therapy is behaviorism, the idea that an autistic person can be "treated" by rewarding "desirable" behaviors and punishing "undesirable" behaviors, and that an increase in desirable behaviors and decrease in undesirable behaviors constitutes successful treatment

In researching I found that ABA practitioners have published statements condemning conversion therapy. They refer to an unfortunate historical association between ABA and conversion therapy, but it is not association—ABA literally is conversion therapy; the creator of it used it to try to "cure" little boys that were too feminine.

ABA is considered "medically necessary" treatment for autism and the only "proven" treatment, in that it is proven to create decrease in "undesirable" behaviors and increase in "desirable" behaviors.

Undesirable behaviors for an autistic person might include things like stimming and talking about their interests, desirable behaviors might include eye contact, using verbal speech, playing with toys in the "right" way.

The BCBA behavior analyst code of ethics does not prohibit "aversive" methods (e.g. electric shock) to punish undesirable behaviors

The code of ethics only discusses the consent of the "client," not the person receiving the treatment

Many people will say "my child's ABA therapist would never make them repress harmless stims, give up their interests, use electric shocks...They understand the value of neurodiversity and emphasize the consent of the child..."

But consider...if nothing binds or requires an ABA therapist to treat stimming as important, nor restrains them from using abusive techniques, nor requires them to consider the consent of a person being treated, what protects vulnerable people other than luck? The ABA therapist still has an innately unethical level of power over a child being "treated."

Furthermore, consider: can a therapy built on the goal of controlling the behavior of a person who cannot meaningfully consent to it, especially without hard limits or protections on the kinds of behavior that can be coerced or controlled, ever be ethical?

I found many articles that discuss teaching "compliance" in autistic children, treating "compliance" as a reasonable goal to strive for without qualification...

The abstract of the above article struck me with a spark of inspiration. Biting is an undesirable behavior to be controlled, understandably so, since most would feel that violence should not be allowed. But I was suddenly reminded of the song "The Hand that Feeds" by Nine Inch Nails, which is a play on the saying "Don't bite the hand that feeds you," meaning don't lash out against someone that is kind to you.

But doesn't "the hand that feeds you" implicitly have power over you through being able to give or withhold food? In this case, kindness can be a form of coercion. Thus "biting the hand that feeds" is used in the song as a metaphor for autonomy and resisting coercive power. The speaker asks the audience if they have the courage to test the benevolence of their oppressors, or if they will remain compliant and unquestioning even though they know deep down that it isn't right.

Likewise the article blunders into something unintentionally poetic when it recognizes that biting is an innately possible behavior in response to "aversive" stimuli or the "removal of reinforcers." Reinforcers and aversives in ABA are discussed as tools used by the therapist—the presentation of a preferred food would be a reinforcer, for instance (and is often used as such in ABA).

The journal article considers biting as a behavioral problem, even though the possibility that someone may bite can never be eliminated. Contrastingly, "The Hand that Feeds" highlights the coercive power behind the ability to control your behavior, even when that control appears benevolent and positive, and argues that "biting the hand that feeds you" is not only a possibility but a moral imperative.

Consider: In what circumstances would you bite someone? To defend your own body? To defend your life? Are there circumstances in which biting would be the reasonable and the right action to take?

What authority decides which behaviors are desirable or undesirable, and rewards or punishes compliance or resistance? Who is an authority—your therapist? Your teacher? Your caregiver? Any adult? Any person with the power to reward or punish?

In what circumstances might compliance be demanded of you? In what circumstances would it be justifiable not to comply? What authority decides which circumstances are justifiable?

How to reach goals as a neurodivergent person by not creating them from a neurotypical standpoint

A non-exhaustive list of the ways autistic people may show empathy even though we are assumed to not have it.

Are these exclusive to autistic people? No, not at all, we're just more often pathologized for them.

If I'm in a relationship with someone who does this, does that mean I just have to suck it up even if it doesn't work for me? No, it doesn't, but you do probably have some adjusting to do. You'll need to treat it as a mutual miscommunication instead of something it's all on the autistic (or ADHD, or whatever) person to fix. You'll have to change some of your expectations and get comfortable asking for (and explaining) the show of empathy you need - and you may even find out that the way you show empathy isn't working so great for them either. 😉

[Image description: AUTISTIC EMPATHY CAN LOOK LIKE… - Infographic by Autball.

White translucent boxes with black lettering inside on a magenta to purple diagonal gradient. The first four boxes read: (1) I’ve been through something similar, so maybe sharing my story will help; (2) Ooh, I know how to fix that! Maybe helping them solve their problem will make them feel better; (3) Oh man, now I have big feelings too! I just feel this so much!; (4) My favorite thing always calms me down, so maybe it’ll help them too. I’ll ask them to do it with me. These four are grouped together with a blue line and labeled: Misinterpreted as “Making it All About You.”

The next four boxes read: (5) I’m not sure how to help, so I’ll leave it to that person who looks like they do; (6) When I’m upset or overwhelmed, I prefer to be left alone, so I’ll bet they would like the same; (7) If I get involved, I’m gonna become overwhelmed myself, and that will take attention from them, so it’s best to just stay out of it; (8) I’m not sure how to help, and I usually make it worse when I try but get it wrong, so it’ll be better for everyone if I just do nothing. These four are grouped together with a blue line and labeled: Misinterpreted as Cold and Uncaring.

CN: ABA

People will say that ABA is no longer the abusive therapy that it used to be, but here’s the thing: the objective of ABA is to force the autism out of the autistic, much like gay conversion therapy was used to try (and fail) to force the gay out. How can you say a therapy is good when it’s trying to remove a part of who someone is?