As someone who was diagnosed with Aspberger syndrome, reading that article made me want to throw up. There can be significant differences between a number of people with the same diagnosis, and generalizing them all under one mocking nickname of "aspie" is disrespectful. My diagnosis is not obvious to anyone talking to me unless I were to disclose it, and I have done very well in school leadership activities; I particularly enjoyed being involved in a debate club. I don't want Aspberger's to define me, and I wish that CNN would be more supportive of people who are working to overcome their disabilities instead of writing a puff piece about how special and disabled we are.
I couldn't agree more - as another person with Aspbergers I feel that this article tried to fit us in to the broken genius pattern, rather than recognize that these kind of syndromes manifest themselves differently in every person.
I am in no way special or helped by my syndrome, I am not difficult to work with, I am not in any way disabled, like normal people I have issues with emotional repression and other peoples point of view, but that being said I am human, first and foremost.
No one (outside of medical and psychological circles) except my girlfriend, mum and best friend know I have Aspbergers, my differences are just a part of my personality.
Without going into detail, there's a lot more going on internally that doesn't meet the eye in addition to varying ticks most folks wouldn't notice outside of spending significant amounts of time around the person.
Completely agreed. I found the article mildly infuriating. Aside from the fact that it manifests in many different ways, I wouldn't even think of Aspergers as a disability in the "traditional" sense; people with Aspergers are just different, it's not like they function any less well than people without Aspergers. I don't have Aspergers myself but a good friend of mine does, and the casual stigma and misinformation I've observed drives me crazy.
> it's not like they function any less well than people without Aspergers
Some do. Some people have more severe symptoms; I read an autobiography by an author with Aspergers where she describes being completely overwhelmed by loud noises or too much visual input. And when some schoolyard bullies told her that "We're going to beat you up every day", she accepted it as another rule among many incomprehensible school regulations, and actually went and reminded them if they forgot to beat her up.
I agree completely about the "disability" description - I think that I became used to calling it that because in situations where I did need to get support for it in college (ie. requesting a single room, which seems to be a natural human need and not just an aspberger issue) it always had to be done through the disability services office, and maybe that definition stuck in my mind. It's good to be aware of how bureaucracy can unconsciously influence our mental thought patterns.
Some of the mass media articles about Zuckerberg have just been absolutely venomous taunting about his Asperger's. You can be the most successful internet billionaire of your generation and average people will still sneer at you for having a mental disorder. The stigma against it is still incredibly strong (even though it has no connection to violent/abusive behavior).
Despite it's sensationalist tone, this article raises certain issues that deserve to be raised.
The link between Aspergers and the infuriating (and abusive) behavior of certain tech companies seems extremely plausible.
Having Aspergers does not make someone an innocent victim, especially if they yield considerable power. People don't dislike Zuckerberg for having Asperger's, they dislike him for his behavior and policies.
> As someone who was diagnosed with Aspberger syndrome, reading that article made me want to throw up.
As another 'Sperg, I can't help but think you're overreacting. Sure, the article was a tad patronizing at times, but the overall tone was positive. It's not a problem that it was a bit of a "puff piece", as you said, because it'll help people perceive us in a more positive light.
> My diagnosis is not obvious to anyone talking to me unless I were to disclose it
I grew up without a clue about Asperger's or having it. It just wasn't known back then, so I operated under the assumption of being just an ordinary (or "normal") person, and despite some quirks, even pulled off the role.
But immediately upon reading about Asperger's, my sister recognized the characteristics in me. The point is that someone who knows the "symptoms", may well recognize them in you. It may even be obvious.
> I don't want Aspberger's to define me
It doesn't, but it inevitably does to an extent. You probably display most of the characteristics, but at least some of them are under your control. For example, sometimes you'll want to "fit in", so you'll refrain from being as blunt as you'd like to.
Upon close inspection, no one is "normal". I'm a little wary to take these syndromes at face value, because every year they discover a different one. Some years ago ADD didn't even existed, nowadays 1 in 2 people would be diagnosed with that.
Maybe Asperger's is just a personality trait. Maybe it's just not putting up with other's people crap. There are days I would be diagnosed as having Asperger's, for sure.
