Proposed new criteria for diagnosing Autism:

       In the following link is the proposed new criteria that the DSM will use in diagnosing Autism: http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevision/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=94#
       I'm not sure what to think. Since I'm not a psychologist I can't say too much on the exact criteria but I do know I'm not comfortable with the way people are interpreting the DSM. The DSM has a difficult task of trying to absolutizing what is not absolute (or at least not a perfect science). I'm not implying that Autism is subjective, but such conditions are elusive to define. Some people seem to approach the DSM the same way a religious fundamentalist approaches Sacred Scripture except that the DSM is not even Divinely inspired. It also takes some intuition to properly apply the DSM. To me Autism does have a distinct pattern and while not all Autistic people may need the same level of services as those with severe symptoms, they still may be autistic. On the other hand there may be those with severe symptoms who might not be Autistic, but still need services since they have something. Now I may have some tendency towards bias since I am on the spectrum myself although as far as I know I will still meet the revised criteria. Either way I'm not going to lose my diagnosis but I am concerned to the future generations who may be affected by this. Like I said before I'm not implying that the DSM is wrong, I just think people need a more flexible attitude in interpreting it. I mean no matter how carefully something like this is worded if someone really wants to either obtain or avoid a certain diagnosis one can still find ways to manipulate their observations. Think of it this way, many people claim to go by the Bible and the Constitution of whatever country they live in, yet they still don't agree on how to interpret it and apply it to individual situations. Otherwise we wouldn't need theologians or a Supreme Court (and even the best theologians and judges don't agree on all the details).
       If you look at the link notice what it says in Category D: For something to be a "disorder" the symptoms together have to impair everyday life. This is the most important thing for every diagnosis. (I use the word "perhaps" a lot in this blog as a way to admitting that I'm not an authority on this.) Now perhaps, there are people who don't have Autistic Spectrum "Disorder" but they are nevertheless on the Autistic Spectrum. Such people may be some of the undiagnosed famous people who are commonly speculated about. Also one's environment and culture can determine whether or not the symptoms impair their daily life. For example a woman with Agoraphobia living in a culture or time when women rarely left the home may not get diagnosed since her symptoms don't impair their daily life anyway. Yet, the same woman in the modern world will then have it. Stuff like this is why why it's so easy to put a spin in news stories about Autism and other things. Facts aren't always truth. If a dying town has only one family left and a new family moves in for a specific reason, one can say the town's population doubled and it may make it the fastest growing town in a certain state. Should the town's mayor spin this to make it sound like it is now a boom town? Also it is important to note that many people have a trait or two of OCD, or a short attention span, a few mood swings... It doesn't mean they have OCD, ADD or Bipolar Disorder unless it messes up their lives. I'm using these above examples to show how important the "D" category is.
       One other thing to remember about the DSM... It is used mainly in the English speaking world. Maybe it is possible to be Autistic in one country but not in the US if the country has a different criteria, yet the person in question can travel from one country to the other and still be the same person. As far as I know the DSM is not universal. Until they come up with a "blood test" for Autism (hypothetically of course), I don't see there being a perfect, "one-size-fits-all" diagnostic criteria for it. The professional manuals will just keep revising and trying to do their job in identifying patterns and then clarifying them as research continues. It's a never-ending process.

Feedback Anyone?

       I mentioned previously that I wrote this blog to help people and not for commercial reasons. This is a free blog and I do not need any financial support but I wouldn't mind getting feedback from readers, this way I can help people better knowing who's reading this blog and what information they are looking for. Feel free to ask questions or make comments. I do however have to moderate comments first to make sure I keep this site "family friendly". I would like to make this site a little more interactive. I'm not that easily offended by direct questions- within reason of course. If people reading my stuff agree with me, that's great. If people disagree that's fine too and at least you are thinking. Sometimes people may even think they agree or disagree but may misunderstand something I write. This is another place where feedback helps me, remember I am on the Autistic spectrum, being taken the wrong way is a part of life for me. On top of that, written communication over the Internet visible worldwide to people of different cultures and different levels of understanding of each others languages it is important to use feedback and comments to make sure nothing is taken out of context. Saying Hello would be nice also...

Introversion or Shyness?

       I'm not implying that introversion and shyness are mutually exclusive but there is a difference between the two concepts. The article in the following link says it well: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-power-of-introverts
       I'd also like to add that these are also fuzzy categories since there are many individuals that can be both introverted, extroverted, and shy depending on the context of the situation. Also some people on the Autistic spectrum actually do like being around people only they don't have much success in doing so. These contradictions make terms like "people-person" hard to define.

Feast of St. Thomas Aquinas

       This Italian/Sicilian born Saint was once nicknamed "The Dumb Ox" by the people around him. He was certainly not "dumb" but his large size, awkward manner, and taciturn ways. He ended up being one of Christianity's most respected philosophers. "The Summa Theologica" was a famous work of his where he pretty much laid out the Theology of the Catholic Church in a rather scientific, methodical way. He also promoted Scholasticism which was influential in the philosophy of the Western World in general. "The Summa Theologica" had many interesting takes on the Christian religion. One of my favorites is that after the final judgment, God will restore our bodies in their perfect state. That's nothing new in Christianity but he also mentions that no matter how old one was when they died, everyone will be about 30 years old- and single. I say single because in Roman Catholic Theology, marriage is a worldly institution and won't exist in the "next world". The concept of "soul mates" is not generally accepted in Catholicism. When he died he was frustrated since he realized that God is not something one can fully describe in human words.
       Now I'm not one who likes to diagnose the dead, especially those who lived in the thirteenth century, therefore I will say that we will never know if he was somewhere on the Autistic spectrum or not. He did however seem to show some traits of Autism- and no, I'm not just saying this just because he was a well regarded intellectual. What makes him relevant to me in the context of this blog is that he was someone who appeared to be slow witted (and maybe he was I never met him so I don't know), yet he became one of the most famous theologians and philosophers in Western Christianity. I say Western since he was more controversial in the Eastern Churches. Personally, I find a lot of his work complicated and time consuming to digest. There are a few areas where I may disagree with him but I'm not even sure since what was written in the thirteenth century and translated many times can easily be taken out of context. Some of his teachings can come off as rather cold and stern but he was supposedly a gentle soul on a personal level.
       Another thing to remember when judging the work of someone who is long dead. It is easy for one to learn about them and decide if you like or dislike them, but many times the fans and foes of a past thinker can easily put their own spin on things. In other words his works are complicated. Many times a contemporary teacher will try to translate things to concepts the average lay person can understand. This is great but in the process they can unwittingly inject their own biases and make the person out to whatever they want them to be. Abraham Lincoln is an example, both "conservatives" and "liberals" seem to like claiming him as one of their own.
       For more facts on this guy (St. Thomas Aquinas) go here: http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=2530

Communicating Through Silence

       Pope Benedict XVI had made a statement recently on communication and the value of silence: http://www.zenit.org/article-34184?l=english

Old Man Winter in his youth...

       Winter seems to have a stronger mystique in the earlier part (which is technically the late Fall). Maybe it's because of the associations with Thanksgiving and Christmas- at least around here. Many times the first snowfall is a heavy wet snow that sticks to the trees and the grassy surfaces when there is still green poking through. I took this the weekend before Halloween 2011:

An example of how words can "change" things:

       This may seem to be a contradiction to past posts where I talk about how people get too caught up on words, euphemisms and semantics. But for balance I'll give an example of where words, labels, or titles do have power.
       Yesterday I was walking in the grocery store and somewhat in a hurry. I noticed a big rack of "tomato pies". I didn't have time to look close but I'm the type who wants to taste everything once. Also being Italian-American myself I would sure want to be able to say I tried tomato pie. I threw it in the basket to take home. When I tasted it I must say it wasn't bad, but if you look close it is nothing but a well made pizza with no cheese. There is a barely detectable sprinkle of Parmesan as a garnish but not enough to affect the flavor. There were no fillings or special surprises in the crust and the "pie" was not cheap (at least now I can say I tried tomato pie). Now lets say for example one orders a pizza somewhere and gets told they are out of cheese but they can still make a pizza only without the cheese. Even better they can compensate even more and offer to sell it for half price. I know I and many others might say "No thank you." and go for some Chinese instead. I mean I'm not usually a pizza person anyway but take away my favorite part (the cheese) and it would be as boring as a rice cake. Now on the other hand when you see a cheese-less pizza in front of a somewhat upscale grocery store and it is labeled "tomato pie" and kind of overpriced... all of a sudden it seems exotic and special. People see it in a different light. Now of course if I knew that's all it was I don't think I would have got it but I thought there might be something "new" about it that I couldn't see at first glance.
       This also shows the importance of presentation and first impressions. I mean once you hand someone a cheese-less pizza when they're not expecting it and tell them to just think of it as a ... "tomato pie" chances are you may end up wearing that so called "pie" over your head and could then think of it as an "Italian-American inspired hat".

Old Man Winter Over the Hill?

       Almost... At least where I live the 20's of January are the time when the average daily temperatures bottom out. They also reach a maxima roughly around the 20th of July. After this week, it's all up hill from here at least in terms of averages. Of course every year is a little different. A common question is that if the sun in the Northern Hemisphere reaches it's greatest angle around December 21 and the opposite around June 20th, than why does it take so long for the weather to respond. The answer is the seasonal lag. The sun doesn't heat the air, it heats things and then they heat the air. Water takes longer to heat and cool than land. For that reason areas that are inland tend to have earlier seasons while in coastal areas it tends to be later. This is just a generalization of course. Even where I live some of our worst snowstorms have been in February and even March, but at least the longer days and stronger sunlight can help clear the roads up a little faster.

Changing the way one looks at things:

       While I've mentioned how I can be rather jaded when it comes to self-help gurus and motivational speaker stuff, I can always make an exception. Dr. Wayne Dyer had some good stuff out years ago, particularly before he jumped on the New Age bandwagon. I remember him saying "Change the way you look at things, and the things you look at change." (This website explains this perspective pretty well: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/creative-thinkering/201108/change-the-way-you-look-things-and-the-things-you-look-change)I can definitely agree with that, even though it may seem to contradict things I wrote in recent posts. It's just that sometimes the "self-help" or popular psychology community sometimes takes it too far. I believe in silver linings and seeing glasses as half full, but changing a definition doesn't change a dog into a cat. This is why we need to think carefully and critically instead of thinking in terms of just catchy slogans.

Visual-Spatial

       Here's another group of "categories". There are different patterns in learning styles. Just like many other labels these are probably valid patterns but may not be so cut-and-dry in real life. I was told several times as a result of standardized testing that I am a visual-spatial learner and on one test I remember seeing that is my biggest strength. From what I understand about learning styles I find this very believable even though I'm not 100% sure what it all entails.
       This website seems to explain it with a neat little comparison on the bottom of the page: http://www.gifteddevelopment.com/Visual_Spatial_Learner/vsl.htm. Wikipedia's take on this seems to be a little more objective: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_thinking. When I looked at the first website being a "visual thinker" myself I naturally went right to that nice (though a little simplistic) comparison chart I mentioned above that lists the traits of auditory and visual thinkers. For the most part the traits on the "visual" side sound like me but there are a few exceptions.
       Dr. Temple Grandin, the Autistic writer whom I have mentioned several times has a book called "Thinking in Pictures". Aside from a little skimming at Barnes and Nobles a long time ago I never read the book but thought I'd point it out. I don't necessarily see things the way Temple Grandin does either as we are all individuals. I also don't want to imply that everyone on the Autistic spectrum "thinks in pictures" or is a visual-spatial thinker. I just want to draw attention to different styles of learning.


      

Life in NWT:

       Way up in northern Canada's Northwest Territories is the city of Yellowknife. It may be a bit more obscure than London or Paris but I love obscure places. Despite an average January high and low temperature of -8F and -23F people do live there and there is a small but modern skyline. (It probably helps that there are diamonds and gold in the ground.)

Snow removal in Yellowknife: by: George Lessard, 2007


Yellowknife, by: Trevor MacInnis, 2005


Downtown Yellowknife, by: Trevor MacInnis 2005

Long Live Emoticons

       Some people find them annoying, teenagers tend to love them, and others find them cute but prefer them in small doses. I would probably fall into the last category. Emoticons have their place but can get old fast. My favorite was the "dancing banana" but even that one got a little overdone. These actually have a practical purpose on the Internet. These tend to compensate in written communication for the lack of body language and tone of voice. They can help ensure we are not taken the wrong way and can clear up confusion when using humor, sarcasm, irony, or expressing frustration. Below is a shirt I've had for years, not for any practical purpose but just for fun. For some people on the Autistic spectrum, emoticons can be of even greater assistance. These gadgets can be useful for anyone when online or texting for reasons I just mentioned, but for people with difficulty in communication it would be nice to have access to these in real life conversation. I'm sure for those using facilitated communication there is something to this effect that they can use. The thing is it is the non-verbal people who tend to use these devices as they can be expensive and cumbersome. Maybe in time there will be some technology where even verbal people can have some way of clarifying their emotions in real life- something more practical than a t-shirt. Lets say the next time we are given a generous gift which we genuinely appreciate and people don't seem to be buying our "Thank You." than we could press a button on something that can do our "screaming and jumping up and down with excitement" for us. Even then the other person would have to trust us enough to believe that we meant it. I'm not even saying that I myself would need something like that though there are a few occasions here and there where something like that would be nice. It would be even better if such a device had reactions appropriate for ones gender, age, lifestyle, subculture or perhaps even let the user "customize their own mannerisms".

And another...

       Paris, France is in a similar boat. Traditional images tend to be of the Eiffel Tower and other typically Parisian things but then there is "La Defense", the more modern section of the city:

The Eiffel Tower and La Défense, Wikimedia Commons, 2007


Barges, Paris, France (La Defense district skyline in the background),
Wikimedia Commons, 2008


Hauts De Siene, Wikimedia Commons, 2011

A less traditional view of a traditional city:

       Photos of London are nothing new, but it's less often that I see the more modern depictions of the city. Much of London's developing skyline is in an area known as Canary Wharf:

Canary Wharf, London (UK), by: Umair Shuaib, 2007


Canary Wharf, Isle of Dogs from Greenwich, by: Green Lane, 2010

I have an idea!

       I just got done clearing about 4 1/2 inches of snow. Luckily it was a light, fluffy snow since the snowblower didn't want to start. So far this Winter is still milder than average, but still... I don't like the cold and I don't care for snow other than a picturesque coating of wet snow on the grass and mountain tops. I could always move to Florida, but my family and job is here. I have a better idea. I'm not sure who has the power to decide what gets in the dictionary and how it is worded. I'm not sure who makes decisions of the ever changing dynamics of the English language, but how about we change the definition of cold. I mean for a Floridian 45F is cold. To many in eastern Russia 32F may be just a little chilly. Lets settle it all and say that under the new definition of cold it needs to be below -20F. It rarely gets colder than that here so it would suit me fine. We could also change the definition of warm to be anything above 15F... I mean no one has explicitly defined these terms anyway so it's about time... Today it was in the low 20F's and my fingers were getting cold, but under this new definition I would have been able to go outside without a coat on since it would be considered "warm". Oh, and since I'm not a fan of long Winters maybe the National Weather Service ought to redefine it narrowing the definition (actually the definition is different in different countries anyway) to the time between New Years Day and the last day of February. Perhaps this way we wont have to use so much money, energy, or *public resources* (hint-hint) in snow removal or heating buildings. After all don't a lot of those self-help books teach that we create our own reality. Only difference here is that it would be that an elite group of qualified decision makers will be the ones creating everybody's reality, at least for the English speaking world.
       For those who didn't yet read my post from yesterday on changing the definition of Autism than read it and you should then see where I'm going with this. I'm not saying I know more than the Doctors and I should be the one writing the DSM. I'm not saying I know better how broad or narrow the diagnostic criteria should be. What concerns me is when people try to absolutize what is not an absolute. There are many non-autistic people who need help and services, yet there are many who are clearly Autistic who are self-sufficient and don't need any help- at least not in the form of public or professional services. People rely so much on statistical and official definitions and then end up arguing over semantics and playing games with the English language.
       Tomorrow is the 39 year anniversary of Roe vs. Wade. It was a decision that affected what can easily be the most polarizing and divisive issue of our current time and culture. Without digressing too much as this post has nothing to do with abortion, I find this as a good example of how only a small group of people in a high position can have the authority to decide whether someone is even human and at what point they become human. The answer to that is a totally different discussion as I'm not debating here when life begins. I just want to point out with this most extreme example to show how a small group of authorities can have the power to decide on a label or definition. I think this is something that people on both sides of the abortion issue may relate to if they think carefully. Without me getting too carried away what if the right authorities decided that the dog pictured in this blog was going to be redefined as a cat. Could I then just buy him a litter box and forget taking him out in the cold? I mean he does have some cat traits, Miniature Schnauzers are bred to chase vermin, they have small feet for a dog, and they are roughly the size of many cats...
       As a weather geek here's some less controversial examples: For a hurricane to be major in the US it needs to have maximum winds of 111 MPH or greater. A few years back a major hurricane quickly came ashore in a sparsely populated part of rural Texas. There was some damage but it barely made the news. On the other hand a hurricane with 105 MPH winds can make landfall over a major city and stall for a while still causing wind damage on top of catastrophic flooding. But then you can at least say it wasn't a "major" hurricane. Also for there to be a heat wave at least here it takes 3 consecutive days with a high temperature of at least 90F, it doesn't even have to be humid and cold nights wont make a difference in the definition. What if there is a 30 day stretch of high temperatures in the upper 80F's, lows in the mid 70F's, and several 2 day stretches withing that period closer to 100F. For good measures lets say it was oppressively humid for the whole period. I'm sure air conditioners and dehumidifiers will be working hard but at least it wasn't a heat wave <grin>. The best example with weather that I can think of is snow. I've met a lot of sticklers and statistics geeks who are guilty of this. People in the mountains can just get done digging out of over a foot of snow. They then tell their friends about it. Then the weather comes and find that the official snowfall total at the nearest official weather station located in the middle of an urban valley officially records 5.8". Does this mean all those people were lying and the foot of snow was all in their heads. If the official weather station recorded any less than maybe they should have had school with no delays.
       My point here is to suggest that deciding on what someones needs are should be on a more individual basis and that facts and intuition need to work together. Perhaps more decisions should be based on individual symptoms and less dependant of the official diagnosis.
      

Dr. Temple Grandin's website:

       For those interested this is the official website for Dr. Temple Grandin with a good amount of information and resources regarding Autism and other topics.
http://www.templegrandin.com/

Throwing money in the wind...

       I guess it can be fun to make a wish and throw a penny into a famous fountain. Whether that alone will make the wish come true, I doubt it. One expression I tend to hear from many social critics is that you can't solve every problem by throwing money at it. I can agree with most of that. I mean money makes the world go 'round and it takes money to accomplish a lot of things, but there needs to be other things in the mix such as time, energy, thoughtfulness, education, and public awareness. (Unfortunately many things that are considered "awareness campaigns" are merely fundraisers and have little to do with awareness or education.) I mean it does take a lot of money to address all issues, including Autism, but it would be nice to know more about how the money is used. In this dictionary of idioms there is a definition of all this: http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/throw+money+at
       If I want to beautify my yard in the Spring it will usually cost some money. I can put money into tools, advanced fertilizers, high quality seeds and plants... but it still takes energy and some knowledge. I still have to pull weeds and thin seedlings. Online I see a lot of places where one can buy wildflower seeds in bulk for a fair price and this can be a creative and relatively easy way to brighten up a dull spot of to naturalize an area at the edge of a property. It doesn't take much to take some seeds and toss them around, hoping for the best. If the weather cooperates it is likely that something nice will pop up somewhere, but if you really want to make an impact, you still need to clear some weeds, water a few times, make sure the seeds will come into contact with soil and light... You usually can't just take a stroll through the woods and just toss seeds in the air hoping to transform a bleak, rocky area into a botanical garden. We can also buy the most expensive plant food but one still has to pull the weeds.
       When we hear that money is being raised for Autism or some other good cause it may be good to ask for details. Who does the money go to? How is it distributed? I'm not even referring to scams or people stealing money- that's another story, but I'm thinking more in terms of efficiency and other factors. Thoughtfulness is important here. Throw some crumbs in a fish tank any old way and watch how quickly they can go from peaceful to fighting. There are many times when you may have to think about what your doing and maybe even separate the fish to make sure it is distributed properly. When it comes to public services I'm not saying we never need the help of government or large institutions, but it takes more than that and some issues are solved best at a more pastoral level. Sincerity of intentions is also crucial and unless one has power to read and control minds this has to be done from the inside. Superficial interest will lead to superficial results.
       Health care in general is another thing... It does cost money, but if money is just thoughtlessly thrown at the problems then we will have little way of knowing if it will help the people that it was intended to help. I'm no expert on economics and will be first to admit that our problems are complex. I can't give too much on the way of advice but I do know that there will always be people who will use loopholes, bureaucracy, micro-management, and strange regulations benefit their own interests while the people in need get nothing but lip service.
       There are many (sometimes less glamorous) ways we can help a cause from Autism to many others without money, formal organizations, formal expertise. Good will as with all good things comes from God and besides, we can't really organize God or put Him in a box or computer database. We can spread awareness on an individual level and "volunteer" without formal institutions. We can pray or just give moral support. We can also do research on the Internet to learn more about any issue or condition. Many times people worry about the needs of groups of people (which is great) but then forget about individuals right under their nose. Our actions set example which is more convincing than words alone.
       Let's say I myself had access to a large sum of money (I don't but I'll imagine for just a minute.). This money could be public or private (depending if I was a high up politician or an independent billionaire). I would naturally want to make the best of it and help society as many well intentioned people do. I could imagine however how it would be tempting to just sit and sign checks (and I'm sure there will be pressure from voices all over the place.) Maybe I'd feel I'm too busy to research every cause that asks for help or to decide who will make the most efficient use of the money. It may be tempting to just make a wish and sign the checks. I guess if your a private philanthropist it's still better than nothing but if you are dealing with public funds from taxpayers one has a duty to ask questions before they pick up their magic pens.
       I took this photo about 8 years ago of the famous Fontana di Trevi in Rome, Italy
http://www.aviewoncities.com/rome/trevi.htm. Many people toss coins in here traditionally with the hope that they will return to Rome one day. (I'm sure many other wishes were made.) At least here even if their wish never came true it's only a coin and hopefully their own money:

New definition for Autism?

       Even if Autism was an "epidemic", since when is the best way to deal with it than to narrow the definition, now we'll be able to say that a large number of those affected have been "cured" overnight. It's unfortunate that many have this mentality that for anything to exist it must have a label. I do understand that there may be things about these changes that I don't understand and only time will tell how this will all work out. I still have my concerns. I do understand that there are a lot of politics on many sides in this "Autism movement" and that there is a lot of over-diagnosis. It is also important to note that Autism can manifest in such a wide spectrum of ways and people need help on all ends of it. It's just that these needs vary. I don't people to assume that those on the Asperger's end of the spectrum are just "faking it". Even when someone is misdiagnosed as Autistic they still may have something else.
       One can learn a little about "spectrums" by visiting the paint store and looking at the swatches. I grew up with 64 color crayon boxes, yet in many paint stores there are closer to 1,000 colors or more. We are taught about "Roy G. Biv" to understand the colors of the rainbow. Lets say from that spectrum you decide you want some orange paint only to be asked what shade of orange. There may be over 100 shades of orange from "Pumpkin" to "Mesabi Copper" to "Tangerine"... Each shade may have a different purpose, but they are still in the Orange family. Then there is "Harvest Gold" from the early 1970's. That is more of a yellow, but it has a lot of traits of Orange so it is kind of in-between. In many paint stores the border between the reds, oranges, and yellows may not have a sharp border and there will be overlap. Then there are the earthy shades, not only will there be overlap between two adjacent colors on the spectrum but a hint of brown or gray. These more sophisticated colors may not appear on a linear color spectrum. These differences can be more significant than they appear. Turquoise may be rightfully grouped in with the blue shades but that doesn't mean it will suffice for painting the blue part of the American Flag. Notice also when editing a picture how many different dimensions there are. You can adjust the hue, the saturation, the brightness, the contrast, and the sharpness. To make things more individualistic, try patching up a white ceiling with paint from store A with a white paint that appears exactly the same from store B. (Shouldn't "Extra White" and "Arctic White" look the same since white is white?) Yet you patch up the ceiling only to discover a noticeable contrast. So then you go back to store A and get some Extra White but forget the sheen. Patching up a flat ceiling with a satin sheen paint of the same color will still stick out. My point is we are all unique, yet in a bureaucratic society we need categories to get the services.
       While I'm not a neurologist or a psychiatrist, I have a pretty good intuitive feeling that most cases of Aspergers are in the family of Autism. Perhaps there may be a few here and there who may have severe OCD, severe ADD, or a personality disorder that may slip through a crack and get misdiagnosed with Aspergers. Even so this does not mean that they don't need help or social services or that they will need to wait until their real diagnostic label becomes a fad. There is a lot of money, time and energy going into Autism causes and if all that was a worm in a mother birds mouth than there is a very crowded nest of open mouths pushing each other out of the way. Sure there may be a few greedy birds in that nest but for the most part they are all in need. Don't forget that people with special needs are not just consumers, but can also be producers.
       As far as diagnosing there are many in the clinical/professional world that can't seem to think beyond black and white (a trait more often associated with Autistic people). I mean one does need to be smart to get a professional degree and I'm not going to arrogantly say that these doctors have no "common sense" or intuition. I think it's more that we have a system where their hands are tied from using their intuition. If several symptoms are necessary for a diagnosis and the patient only has 6 then they don't have "condition X" period, so it must be in their head. A while back I had this respiratory infection that was going around. I had the same exact symptoms that many people who I was in close proximity to had which included an on and off fever. I went to a P.A. who typed everything I said into a computer and seemed to be reading to me what the computer said. Now I may be a health geek but I'm not one of those pig-headed patients that read one website and think they know more than the doctor, but while the professional may have more knowledge than I do know what my symptoms are (I mean a doctor can't tell me my bedroom is blue when I know I just painted it white.) The P.A. said I don't have anything except allergies -because- I don't have a fever (She had just taken my temperature.) What I couldn't get into her head is that I had low grade fevers on and off that past week but since I didn't have one at the moment she took my vitals and entered them into the computer, then it necessarily means that I never had a temperature at all that week and I must have been dreaming. I'm not saying the P.A. was stupid as she did have to get through a lot of schooling, but she may have had her hands tied by an overly rigid protocol.  Sometimes for a diagnosis a symptom needs to have occurred in the last six months- but if that one missing symptom occurred 6 and a half months ago instead does that mean one is totally fine and wasting the professional's time? I can't even say I have a perfect solution to these dilemmas because if things were too flexible than it opens up doors for services to be drained by people who don't need them. There is no perfect, one size fits all, crack-proof system as long as it involves human beings. Even in an almost perfect system people can find loopholes and semantic games to suit their own needs at the expense of others. Sometimes a pendulum swings from under-diagnosis to over-diagnosis but that doesn't mean we should push the pendulum back the first extreme. The following is a New York Times article on this issue: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/health/research/new-autism-definition-would-exclude-many-study-suggests.html?_r=1

Santiago de Chile

       Chile, as with many other places in the Southern Hemisphere seems to be one of those places that is rarely talked about (outside of the penguin community), yet it also seems to have a lot going on. It contains one of the world's driest deserts, and climates ranging from subtropical to sub-antarctic. Right now it is the middle of Summer down there. Santiago is the country's capital city and it is doing quite well. I've never been anywhere in South America myself, but here are a few public domain photos of the country:

Santiago, Chile- Wikimedia Commons, 2008


Santiago, Chile (Sanhattan), by: Jimmy Baikovicius, 2010


Aerial view of Titanium La Portada (Left) and Costanera Center (Right). Santiago de Chile, by: Horacio Parragué, 2011

I found some good news... and some more good news...

       On this snowy Winter night I thought I'd do a Google search for some good news. It seems bad news always travels farther than good. Now I can be all for "telling it like it is" depending on how people use that term, and I realize that it is necessary to call a spade a spade at times. An often overlooked part of "telling it like it is" however is mentioning the positive. In my search I found a couple sites. I don't know much about them as I didn't take the time to read them. I also don't want to endorse anything until I know more about what they stand for but this site looks like a good example since there are sections for different topics: http://www.happynews.com/ My point is not about this particular site, but for people to take a moment to Google for something positive for a change instead of looking for confirmations for the latest conspiracy theory, doomsday prophesy, public sex scandal, celebrity D.U.I., or some health scare.
       I've been following news and listening to informational shows since I was a child. I've heard many predictions about disasters, the economy, war... some came true- some didn't. Thinking of the good things that happened over the years, our economic booms, advances in medicine, the convenience of microwave ovens, unlimited Internet for the common folk, smartphones that can practically tap dance... it just seems that many "prophets" rarely bother to try and predict stuff. I mean it's not that good news makes and impact but people seem to be more interested when there's speculation of some of the things I mentioned above causing Cancer. There also seems to be an element in the media that loves to burst bubbles and tell us smugly that some popular food that people thought was healthy can increase the odds of getting Alzheimer's or something. Perhaps if people paid more attention to hopeful news, we may start to hear more of it. I mean this is a free market- at least where I live.

Snow in Florida-January 19,1977

       It was 34 years this week when a cold snap hit the normally subtropical State of Florida and brought snow to much of the state down to Homestead (just south of Miami). http://www.miamiherald.com/2009/02/03/886359_jan-19-1977-the-day-it-snowed.html
       In Tampa there was a more significant amount of snow, at least to Florida's standards. In some parts of central Florida, several inches of snow were unofficially reported. http://www.baynews9.com/article/news/2012/january/371641/Weather-blog:-Snow-in-Tampa,-Jan.-19,-1977 While the snow was merely a novelty in Miami, there was enough in other parts of the state to have an impact and cause a few problems.

Another double-edged sword regarding self-advocacy:

       Please bear with me. Sometimes, in order to make a point it is necessary to make a few generalizations which some people (including me) might take exception to.
       A major challenge in self-advocacy is that sometimes to get one's voice heard in society it takes group dynamics, organization, and sometimes "safety in numbers". I've heard the expression more than once that organizing Autistic people is like herding cats- in other words, it can be done, but it can be a challenge. (I tend to gravitate more toward canines myself but that's beside the point.) By their very nature people on the spectrum tend to be rather independent in their thinking and not as given to the "herd mentality" common in the rest of society. I'm not implying that this makes Autistic people superior or inferior to the rest of society. It's just a general observation. This also can cause Autistic people to be mistaken as selfish, especially in environments where there is a fear of individualism. There are however growing organizations of self-advocates and many popping up organically. I think part of the secret to success is for organizations to accept that they are just collections of individuals working toward a common cause and not monolithic "cults". Unfortunately, not even Autistic people are immune to the "us vs. them" mentality that has always plagued humanity; and yes, the "Autistic/Aspergers community" can have it's own version of cliques, elites, hierarchies/pecking orders, selectiveness, and internal divisions just as there can be anywhere in society. No matter how united any group of people can be if they were all put on a deserted island where there won't be any "them" to disturb "us" anymore, people will usually end up finding other scapegoats and invent new "us vs. them" paradigms.
       To be honest most of my contact with others on the spectrum is either online or through organizations where I travel out of town to meet with people. I was never part of the "Aspie" subculture though I have nothing against it. It would always be nice to meet more people in a similar predicament to mine, but I don't even live in a large enough metropolitan area for there to be large subcultures. Where I live it is a blue-collar "rust-belt" area where people tend to associate with those they grew up with and where there a clannish mentality. People here as in a lot of other deeply rooted regions seem to draw harsher lines between "acquaintance" and "friend". Northern Pennsylvania was historically settled by New Englanders of Puritan decent before heavy industry changed the demographics in the 1800's. I do still sense a slight vibe of "Yankee stoicism" here and there. I do have a few friends whom I've had for years and a decent amount of casual acquaintances with rather blurry lines between the two categories. I might not always seem to be the most outgoing guy, but ironically I can be more approachable and open to conversation with strangers than many neurotypical people here in the Northeastern US (though it helps when others approach me first and depends on a lot of other things). I do tend to do a lot of things on my own but I'm still lean toward the social end of the spectrum. In general I don't find "neurotypical" people any more or less hard to get along with than other Autistic people and I enjoy working with both on advocacy issues. I prefer dialogue and communication over isolation.
       As to not go too far off on a tangent, the natural aversion many on the Autism spectrum have to the "herd mentality" is a double edged sword in that on one hand it can make group organizing a challenge, but it can also make way for a lot of original ideas and viewpoints that are less affected by bias and group-think.

And of course, cats can cooperate as seen with my friend's cats to the left.

Is modern always better?

       I guess sometimes modern is better, but sometimes not. The following photos I took in Rome, Italy a few years back. Much of what is seen in that city is at least centuries old sometimes quite a few centuries. Yet these places seem to be in better condition than many "modern" buildings that are only decades old. OK the Roman Forum is in ruins but the pillars ate still there and it at least ages with grace.

A trip to space...

     The Pillars of Creation is part of the Eagle Nebula way out in space. Strangely, even though this photo was taken in 1995, this form was destroyed about 6,000 years ago but because of the time it takes for light to travel to our eyes (and light travels pretty fast), we can still see it- with the right telescope of course. This is just another example of how human perception works.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillars_of_Creation

"Pillars of Creation", from the Hubble Telescope, 1995

A volcano in Pennsylvania?

       Not quite, but when I was growing up I always thought this mountain in Northeast Pennsylvania (USA) resembled a volcano. I took this photo of it a few years back:

Disclosing Autism + Self-Advocacy Issues

       There is no hard and fast rule about if or when to reveal one's neurological status to others. There are usually pros and cons to telling people. It takes both logic and intuition to know when to tell people. Many times we need to tell people if they are our employers, doctors... People can become more understanding, at least on the surface, but to many bringing up the subject can come off as self-handicapping, self-pity, or lead to being labeled and treated differently. It can lead to self-fulfilling prophesies based on their assumptions. If our actions or performance later on shatter their assumptions about Autistic people, people will then think we made it all up to be "fashionable". In this blog a writer explains some of their concerns in better words than I can: http://www.journeyswithautism.com/category/self-advocacy/
       Somewhere else on this blog is a section for Autism Myths, further down on this list it mentions that just because someone can blog doesn't mean they are not Autistic. I will add that just because someone can breathe doesn't mean they don't have Asthma.
      
       Now for part 2 of this post, "Self-Advocacy". This is another fashionable sounding yet controversial word. The term has roots related to other Developmental Differences. As Autism awareness has become faddish, part of the jaded backlash I have been getting whiff of is a "rolled-eyes" attitude toward self-advocates. The first thing that I think of is "I'm one of those self-advocates.". I'd like to clear up some of the misunderstandings about this term and most of all explain the "self" part of the word. No one is perfect, but when I self-advocate I try my best to be fair, inclusive, yet I also mention that I only speak for myself. There are many gifted Autistic people who unknowingly assume that their  issues and experience is universal for everyone on the spectrum. Not all self-advocates are alike and we are not all part of one monolithic organization. There are controversies and division in the Autistic community and everyone has different views. Their are some self-advocates who feel that the professional community is trying to cure them and would rather be accepted and then left alone. They have a right to their opinion but remember they are not the entire Autistic community. Another place where there can be a divide is between professionals and self-advocates, and between parents with Autistic children and self-advocates.
       As far as the professionals many are receptive on the surface but get hot under the collar when they hear self-advocates thinking they are not qualifies to give advice on the topic without the appropriate title after their name. This can turn into elitism, but notice on this blog how I put a mini-disclaimer saying that my intention is to not give medical advice. If some people had their way it would be illegal to advise someone to share a family recipe without proper credentials in the culinary industry. Although I have both life experience, work experience, educational experience, and years of my own research on Developmental Differences I graduated with a BA with no post graduate credentials. I also know that BA's in Social/Behavioral Sciences are a dime-a-dozen and I understand that I don't always know more than the professionals. I do my best to respect people's professionalism but I also have a lot to say and only ask that people hear me out. If I am wrong about something I am open to correction but there are ways to correct without totally discrediting or belittling someone.
       On the issue of parents. I understand how some parents with severely Autistic children feel that self-advocates trivialize what they are going through. While anything is possible many parents are worried about how to keep their kids safe and are trying to accept that their child may never talk or become the next Dr. Temple Grandin. I like working with parents, but realize that I am sometimes on this ice and can easily say the wrong thing. Many times self-advocates can get defensive with others in the Autism community whenever someone else makes a faux-pas or a comment that they take exception to. Usually the parents involved love their children (some parents may be on the spectrum themselves) and no one wants to be called a bad parent. We all have to accept that everyone will put their foot in their mouth at times and to keep their eyes on the big picture. Not all self-advocates are the same and remember that just because somebody talks doesn't mean they are not on the spectrum and just faking it. Also remember that Autism self-advocates are...Autistic and don't always realize how they're coming off- me included.
       In my experience as an advocate I have had mixed receptions ranging from warm enthusiasm to rolled eyes and subtle cynicism. Everyone seems to be supportive and receptive on the surface, after all Autism is in vogue at the moment. I don't get any overt hostility toward what I'm doing but I can sense jadedness and cynicism from a mile away. To many people I appear perfectly normal on the surface, others can tell I have Autism or something long before I tell them. Many times the pendulum swings like crazy, people will be very curious about what I have to say and most appreciative toward what I share, and then others others seem to get nauseous thinking I don't know what I'm talking about and I am using Autism to get attention, pity, and unmerited credibility. I am not self-diagnosed and my neurological status is well documented dating back before Autism/Aspergers became fashionable. Those close to me know I'm not making this us to excuse my faults and weaknesses. Also nobody is going to want to argue with me about this because they know I will politely defend myself and nobody wants to appear insensitive in today's social climate. I do sense my share of passive-aggressive energy however. I also want to note that self-advocacy is not my career nor a major source of income (other than an occasional stipend for a public presentation). This blog for example has no ads and is not monetized. I don't "make a living being Autistic" and no one can say I'm trying to "cash in on the fad". Instead of reacting to people's jaundiced eyes and fiery darts with blind defensiveness (which I can't really defend much since I'm rarely confronted), I try to empathize with why they are so jaded. I mean I can be a cynic at times myself but try my best to temper it with fairness, empathy, and critical thinking.
       There are also different elements of self-advocacy and not all are addressed in all definition. Many use the term "Autism rights" and view it as a civil rights movement comparable to that of African-Americans and gay rights. (BTW comparing any one movement to another can be playing with fire even if there are some parallels and mutual sympathies.) For me I tend to focus on awareness, acceptance, mutual empathy, neurodiversity, and educating people, learning what I can and sharing whatever I can. I try my best to be patient with people's ignorance without being pedantic, as I may have ignorance of my own. I for example support efforts to help those with Muscular Dystrophy or Parkinson's Disease, but I can't say I know a lot about those conditions (I don't have either.) and therefore I'd want people to be patient with my ignorance. I may sign an occasional petition and I support all aspects of self-advocacy but I'm just saying there is more to it than "Autism rights".

Natural Light Therapy

       One way to get "light therapy" in the winter besides the expensive LED gadgets is to just go outside when the sun is out as I did this afternoon. Personally I don't buy much into the wives-tale that the cold makes you "catcha-cold" or "catcha-pneumonia" as long as one dresses appropriately. There are probably more health benefits to just putting on a winter coat and taking in the free Vitamin D. Also on cold, crisp Winter days the air tends to be more clear making it better for taking photos:

Northeast Pennsylvania, January 15, 2012 (LJ)

A brief history of M.L.K. Day:

Happy Birthday to Martin Luther King Jr! http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1872501,00.html

Clearing up some confusion...

This is an essay by the author: William Stillman (whom I have mentioned before) that discusses some of the confusion and hype over Autism: http://www.williamstillman.com/archive/whats-all-the-confusion-about-autism.html

Social Networking and Autistic People

       This article discusses the pros and cons of social networking sites for people with Asperger Syndrome: http://www.aspergersboardingschools.com/networking.html For the most part I agree with this but I would like to add my 2 cents. Facebook is a tool like fire, which can warm a home or burn it down. Facebook, for example, is an excellent way to connect with people and open up doors. It is also a tool that can be used to help us get jobs or even raise awareness to important causes. It does on the other hand, have a learning curve and is full of unwritten rules (which Autistic people can have a hard time with). It is very easy to put one's foot in their mouth on Facebook and for those who don't know the ropes, a single faux-pas can ruin a person's life in irreversible ways. On top of that it only takes a few seconds of lapsed social judgment to make such a faux-pas. Always remember the "www" in Internet addresses. The "World Wide Web" is just that, world wide.
       Now I would like to presume intellect here and give those on the spectrum credit here. Autistic people are not necessarily naive and are capable of learning the more obvious unwritten rules such as: Not giving out personal information; remembering that what you post can be viewed by both peers, employers, as well as nosy, judgmental relatives; knowing that posts about religion or politics can be playing with fire (even if you think everyone on your friends list agrees with you), the importance of managing your privacy settings, not to gossip, not to post racy photos of oneself, not to complain about your job, not to brag about a fun party one attended at a time they called off work "sick"... There are other factors here that are more elusive. People need to remember than when typing on the net to people you are both close to or not very close to, it is easy to take things out of context. One needs to be able to picture how what they are posting will look on someone Else's Facebook. It is harder to know a person's tone when you can't hear each other's voice. This makes things like punctuation and clarity very important. Joking and sarcasm can come off in strange ways to another person. Also if one does want to make a strong political statement that most people agree with and seems safe, it is still important to make it clear which side your on and not assume that people will give the benefit of the doubt. When posting a link to a strong/emotional topic (I almost learned this the hard way.) it is important to put something in the description indicating which side your on. There are few things worse than being alienated from people who share your values simply because you made a statement that came off to them as the total opposite. Yes one can edit a post but once people read it, take it the wrong way, and block you, it may be impossible to clarify something or take it back. Another thing to be mindful of is if one is visiting a site about something personal- lets say constipation, it can be easy (esp. on a mobile device) to accidentally click the like button and have everyone know what you are reading. Knowing which friends to accept is also a gray area. Many times there are people we don't want to say no to but we have reservations. There are now ways to accept people in a restricted way. I know I'm hardly a snob or a judgmental person, but I also know that "guilt by association" can be brutal on Facebook and many times, unfair. We also may want to restrict posts from friends who may post something on our walls we don't want others to see. One may not care about a friend posting about their "adventures" at some party they went to but we might not want our grandparents or employers to know we are "hanging out" with such characters even if that person is just a very casual acquaintance who we never met. Another thing is that just because one's peers are saying all kinds of stupid things on their public wall and everyone finds it amusing doesn't mean that others should get too comfortable and let their guard down. It is important for teens on the Autistic spectrum to accept early on that there are a lot of crazy things that other people tend to get away with and of they said or did the same thing, it would be considered a "behavior" and might not be forgiven. There are also many technological faux-pas that anyone can make. If one is not familiar with the site and let's say they want to send a cute, romantic message to a special someone, but because they weren't careful they end up sending it to their entire friends list including same-sex acquaintances who happen to be heterosexual. That might be hilarious in a comedy movie but could be devastating in real life.
       It is also important to not overanalyze things on social networking sites. The fast pace can be overwhelming for anyone. One has to remember that a refused friend request or lack of a response could have many reasons sometimes as simple as the person in question rarely goes online. It is also good to remember when one sees something strange that others may have made a faux-pas also- perhaps they sent a message to the wrong person.
       I don't say any of this to discourage people from allowing Autistic teens online or thinking that they need be be babysat. I also don't want to encourage shyness or social anxiety. I'm just trying to help people avoid potential problems by pointing out -some- of the unwritten rules (or at least share the ones that I'm aware of).

Something that might NOT cause Autism:

       In no way would I ever imply that smoking is anything but bad and in no way does the article I am linking to here imply that either (Nor is my posting any link indicative of whether I accept it as Gospel truth. I'm not a scientist anyway.). http://www.newswise.com/articles/no-link-found-between-prenatal-exposure-to-tobacco-smoke-and-autism My concern here is how there is much speculation on what causes Autism (which is understandable). There is naturally going to be a lot of attempts to use such speculation as propaganda for causes both good and not-so-good. I just don't want to see a mindset where people use such information for finger pointing or blame. Autism is enough of a challenge for parents to adjust to I wouldn't want to see more stress put on people from others wondering "What did they do to cause this?".
       A better example of this would be the adds by PETA linking Autism with dairy consumption. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMoodNews/story?id=5923337&page=1 Unlike smoking however, milk is something healthy (at least for most people).

It's Friday the 13th:

       I thought an appropriate way to celebrate Friday the 13th is to show some images of the "real" Transylvania. Yes, I know the "Dracula" novel had nothing to do with the "Friday the 13th" movie but still, this blog didn't exist last Halloween so I'll use today as an excuse:
This is Sibiu, Romania:

Sibiu, Romania with Negoiu Peak, by: Chamil Ghircoias, 2006


Brasov, Romania- Wikimedia Commons, 2006


Brasov Black Church, by: Benjamin Gantikow, 2006
(In the above 2 photos, the landscape and continental climate of Transylvania has some resemblance to where I am in PENNsylvania. The only thing is that these medieval towns found in the Old World have a certain charm or mystique that more modern development just can't seem to capture.)


Bran Castle- Wikimedia Commons, 2004
(Above is the original "Dracula's Castle")

For those not familiar here's a description of this historic region: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transylvania
And of course there is another famous "resident" to this region and he's far more likable than Dracula: http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Count_von_Count

Progress made in 2011:

       This link reviews the progress made in 2011 in Autism research. It's nice to have something positive to read now and then: http://www.examiner.com/la-in-los-angeles/looking-back-on-autism-2011

Articles to be read with care:

       I have emphasized before that Autism has nothing to do with being "cold". Now to be fair I don't think this article is implying that, but people who don't read carefully may easily misunderstand it: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/love-drug-oxytocin-cuddle-chemical-scientists-makes-mothers/story?id=15330910
       Oxytocin is almost like a "cuteness" hormone. Even some of the toughest people will show a softer side in the presence of a baby or a puppy. Perhaps this hormone is one of the things that help parents (both human and non-human) persevere in caring for their young and to be more tolerant of mischief (and other stresses of parenting). my concern here is that this hormone is referred to as a love drug and then the article suggests that this could be relevant in the treatment of Autism. I guess anything is possible so I'm not refuting the article. (I'm not a scientist anyway.) I just don't want people to think that this implies the common misconception that Autistic people are unfeeling or devoid of empathy. (See my post from earlier this week on Cognitive vs. Affective Empathy.) Also, if you read the above article carefully there is also a flip side to Oxytocin or if one wants to say, a "dark side".
       Remember too when reading about such studies and discoveries, these don't necessarily mean that they will be put into practical use on the general public anytime soon. I know right now anything involving the word "hormones" is hot button right now with all the panic over milk and meat. I don't want people to jump to conclusions thinking that Autistic children are going to be given hormones starting tomorrow. I also like to emphasize the difference between a "cure" and a "treatment", people use these words interchangeably and it causes a lot of misunderstandings. It is good however to keep an eye on the research pipeline.
       Now here's a different article on the same thing but not written as carefully- at least not the first paragraph: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2085266/Love-hormone-makes-mothers-kinder-help-treat-autism.html Autism is not a psychiatric disorder. I'm not a "chip-on-the-shoulder" type who has knee jerk reactions to everything about Autism that is not "politically correct". Maybe the author just wasn't thinking and I know I've misspoken many a time, but I do like to clarify any potential misunderstandings whenever I can. I noticed the article comes from the UK so it is possible the standards of classifying things are different than here.

Comfortable?

I think so...

I never even heard of this place until a few years ago:

       As much as I love geography this is still a place I never heard of until a few years ago. Kuala Lumpur is the fast growing capital of Malaysia.

Kuala Lumpur City View, by: Alex Tan, 2007


Skyline of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Wikimedia Commons, 2009

"High Functioning"? "Low Functioning"?

       This is an example of how "non-linear" the Autistic spectrum is: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/todd-drezner/autism_b_1195580.html

If your headed to India this week, bring the ski gear along.

       I myself am not into skiing, I tried it once and that was enough. It is interesting how even "tropical" countries can have a few high elevation areas where Winter weather can occur. This past week parts of India are colder than here in the northeastern USA. This article in the Wall Street Journal has some good photos: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204257504577150163002975298.html#slide/1

Comic Relief:

       One thing I have learned in being a Social Science major, having always been concerned with inclusion and progressive causes (depending on how one defines progressive), and coming from a religious and somewhat conservative background is that sometimes socially conscious people (or "do-gooders" as many cynics tend to put it) tend to take themselves way too seriously. When I say socially conscious people I include both "progressives" and "religious right" traditionalists. I'm using a lot of quotation marks here because I don't want to come off as holier-than-thou. I've been there myself and I try to be fair and recognize the good in all sides.
       Have you ever found that it's getting difficult to sit through any mainstream comedy show without being morally outraged by something that is offensive, obscene, politically incorrect, cliche, promoting stereotypes (gasp), promoting bad habits, insensitive, irreverent, inappropriate, unhealthy, biased toward the left or right and so on... Not to say that sometimes people do say things that are damaging and need to be corrected but still, I think one of the side effects of being educated, well-informed, and socially conscious is to over-analyze everything. People then take things out of context, make mountains out of molehills, misunderstanding each other, failing to put things in proper perspective, coming off as sanctimonious, and in the long run hurting our cause. There certainly is negativity in the world that needs intervention, but a light-hearted sense of humor can go a long way in helping us deal with it all without burnout. It also helps to save righteous indignation for when we really need it and even then to leave the ego out of it.
       I think this is partly why cynical comedy shows such as "South Park", "Dennis Miller", and "The Colbert Report" have been so popular in the past decade or so. One example of this (at least on the "progressive" side) is Sheila Broflovski on "South Park": http://southpark.wikia.com/wiki/Sheila_Broflovski To be balanced I'll throw in Ned Flanders from "The Simpsons" as an example of the "religious right" side. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ned_Flanders Not to worry, both these examples I used are more or less likable characters. I'm also not implying that centrists, Autism and other public "awareness" campaigns, non-partisan movements and other "groups" are perfect either as they are all run by human beings. It's not that I don't want to see people stand up for good causes or become cynical to anyone who does; it's quite the opposite. I just think if people took life just a little less seriously there would probably be less to be cynical about.
       Speaking of over-analyzing things, the Social/Behavioral Sciences major in me can't help but to post this excellent and very relevant link as I believe there is at least a touch of OCPD in almost everybody: http://www.ocdonline.com/articlephillipson6.php

We all fall into this every now and then:

       The "South Indian Monkey Trap" is a parable we can all relate to at times. Sometimes, our tendency to be "control freaks" or being too attached to a specific outcome of our goals can have the opposite effect: http://kbgenie.wordpress.com/2008/06/04/the-south-indian-monkey-trap/

Multicausality:

       I don't tend to remember everything in my old college textbooks and most of my most used knowledge comes from life experience, but one word is sticking out. In my first week of "Introduction to Human Services", a course I took well over a decade ago, we were told about the theory of multicausality. In other words something can have many causes. If more people were to remember this, we wouldn't have so many arguments over opposing theories and separating "fact from myth" when discussing the causes of Autism and many other things. I'm not saying everything has multiple causes but it's good to be open to the idea that most things do.

Empathizing-Systemizing Theory

       Yes, I know that Wikipedia is not authoritative and is prone to bias but then again so are a lot of more conventional encyclopedias to some degree. This page is pretty good. (Remember however, that articles in this type of encyclopedia are always subject to change and editing.) The following article is just a theory that is more up-to-date than the mind-blindness theory of Autism. This seems to post different viewpoints on the topic. I know I always had reservations about those mind-blindness and the "theory-of-mind" discussions. As for this empathizing-systemizing theory, I'm not saying I totally agree or disagree with it but it does make some good points. If you don't have time to read the whole thing at least read the section on "Cognitive vs. Affective Empathy". This is very important to point out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathizing%E2%80%93systemizing_theory

Teens with Autism learning to drive:

       There is a new study that is trying to see how being on the Autistic spectrum can affect a teens ability to drive. http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/09/4173404/new-study-probes-how-teens-with.html I guess that is understandable, but I sure don't want to see teens refused a license just because they have a diagnosis. I know teens tend to get in more accidents, but I think that has just as much to do with rebellion, peer pressure, and showing off than it does with disabilities or anything else. There is also inexperience, but people have to start somewhere. I'm not saying all Autistic people should be able to drive, some can't, but I feel that should be determined on an individual basis. I've been driving for 18 1/2 years and have a good driving record including driving in several major cities (only if I have to). The only city I really don't care to drive in is Boston- unless it's 4 in the morning. Although I'm on the spectrum I passed my test on my second try and the only difference is that I was a little more cautious than average (which many young people tend to perceive as a fault)
       Perhaps one could make a case that some on the milder end of the Autism spectrum might even be better drivers. Many people with Aspergers for example have logical minds, good memories, are obsessive about following rules (unlike many other teens), are honest about their limitations, and are not big on risk taking. These traits can make a relatively safe driver. (Also if someone comes off as timid about driving at first, it doesn't necessarily mean they are a dangerous or incompetent driver. It's certainly safer than over-confidence.) I'm not saying every one with Aspergers is like this but it is something to think about. People can do studies all they want and that's all great, I just don't want to see people profiled with an overly broad brush.

Coffee and Skyscrapers:

       No, I'm not talking about Seattle. I'm talking about Bogota, Colombia. Being both close to the Equator combined with high mountains makes for a surprisingly comfortable climate:

Skyline of Bogota: by: Matthew Riche, 2007


Bogota in 2005, Wikimedia Commons

Another point of view on the "r-word":

       I can never stress enough how there are more than two diametrically opposed ways to look at an issue therefore I try to present as many sides as I can. Here's a good one on the "r-word" issue I discussed yesterday: Phoebe Holmes "Being Retarded"

Can Christmas lights be a form of therapy?

This lady seems to have a good point: http://www.marionstar.com/article/20120108/LIFESTYLE/201080303/Christmas-tree-stays-up-until-Epiphany?odyssey=nav%7Chead
Also here's more on the use of light therapy or phototherapy: http://www.htrnews.com/article/20120108/MAN0101/201080402/Shedding-light-winter-blues?odyssey=nav%7Chead
This is a description of a new, user-friendly device: http://www.newstrackindia.com/newsdetails/257606
And this is an article from the Mayo Clinic website, which gives more credibility to all this as this site tends to be no-nonsense, ultra-orthodox, and in my opinion not usually sympathetic to complimentary and alternative medicine: http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/light-therapy/MY00195

Do "good guys" need "bad guys"?

       The correct answer should always be no, evil is never necessary but sometimes the human ego can make it seem that way. Many times it seems that for there to be a good person there needs to be evil ones be be the foil to their character- or the moral scapegoat. Some bad guys are romanticized by society in subtle ways- depending on who their evil is directed to. On the other hand there are those who are too sloppy to romanticize but instead serve society by making "good guys" and especially "in between guys" feel better about themselves. Actually there are no perfect people and few- if any perfectly evil people so most people fall somewhere in that "in-between" spectrum. When people don't feel they don't have enough "bad guys" close-by to provide some contrast for them, does it mean they have to invent "bogeymen"?
       A character like "Scarface"- even though I'm not even that familiar as I am not a movie person- should be the last one I would quote for words of wisdom but here he has a point:
"Say good night to the bad guy!"
"What you lookin' at? You all a bunch of ******' ********. You know why? You don't have the guts to be what you wanna be? You need people like me. You need people like me so you can point your ******' fingers and say, "That's the bad guy." So... what that make you? Good? You're not good. You just know how to hide, how to lie. Me, I don't have that problem. Me, I always tell the truth. Even when I lie. So say good night to the bad guy!"

       I think most people of Faith can agree that to take any secret pleasure, glee or "schadenfreude" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schadenfreude out of the misdeeds of others would cause us to share in at least some of the guilt- maybe even more of it in a few cases. Yet I think most of us can do this unwittingly at times. Pride is Evil's last weapon against otherwise good people. Do we ever hear of a heinous/ugly crime on the news and feel almost a sense of unity in discussing how despicable that person on TV is? For a brief moment the shortcomings of the average Joe seem trivial.

       The reason I bring this up in this blog has to do with some of the issues I brought up in past posts. One example is in my posts about the "euphemism treadmill". In cases like this the "bad guys" are not always serial killers, sexual deviants, or truly abusive individuals, but perceived "bad guys" who might have put their foot in their mouth, got misunderstood, are naive, are less well informed, or simply have an alternative point of view. I see this same thing in things like animal welfare. Granted I'm an animal lover myself and have great respect for those who advocate for our furry(and not-so-furry) friends even if I don't always agree with them. I do however see differences of opinion, for example on the best way to train a dog, and this back and forth demagoguery between otherwise decent people. I also see a lot of abuse of the word "abuse". I can (unfortunately) expect this stuff from rivaling politicians but among humanitarian oriented people it is counterproductive. It takes the positive (I mean genuine positive not holier-than-thou positive) to defeat the negative.

             

Seasonal Anxiety:

       This link is a good read for the many people who deal with anxiety issues- which includes myself: http://voices.yahoo.com/winter-season-exacerbates-anxiety-panic-attacks-4756712.html I brought up seasonal depression in an older post, but I also want to bring up seasonal anxiety and also panic attacks. (Which are commonly confused with generalized anxiety.) Not everyone hates winter but many people do. The fastest growing regions of the US in the past decades have been in mild climate regions. Few people enjoy being cold or driving in the snow but there are other things that can make Winter depressing such as the amount of daylight and other things no one can seem to put their finger on. Winter seems to be a season where one can feel claustrophobic and agoraphobic at the same time. Luckily where I live, this winter has been milder than average and almost "European" in it's feel, but it is still Winter and this is still northeastern Pennsylvania. Other years we are not so lucky. Another odd thing with Winter is that while most illnesses seem to peak in the colder months, it seems that this occurs in areas with warm Winters as well as colder areas. Flu season is flu season whether one is in Miami, Minneapolis, or Moscow. As far as anxiety there seem to be many things that come together in the Winter to aggravate things, but a lot of it seems to boil down to the feeling of less control over one's environment which the article I linked to above seems to get at.
For more background on Panic Attacks read this: http://www.diagnose-me.com/cond/C345710.html
As for Claustrophobia (which involves more than people think): http://www.pe2000.com/pho-claustro.htm
And Agoraphobia: http://www.adaa.org/understanding-anxiety/panic-disorder-agoraphobia

Ending the "R" word:

       There is currently a movement to discontinue the use of the word "retarded" and replace it with intellectual differences, developmental delays, and others. I'm not a fan of the "r" word myself but I have mixed feelings. I support finding the most positive, respectful, and inclusive language possible in identifying special needs as do most people who work in human services. A problem is that people, including those with special needs themselves don't always agree on what words are most appropriate. I think the context in how a word is used is even more important than the word itself. This is all part of the euphemism treadmill that I discussed in previous posts. I would like to discuss this well-meaning movement (http://www.r-word.org/) and also address some alternative points of view such as this one: http://www.diamondbackonline.com/the-r-word-missing-the-point-1.2044368.
       In the "end the r-word" website there are many good points, though some may be overstated such as classifying the r-word as hate speech. I mean it can be hate speech depending on how it is used but using too much overstatement can hurt the cause and numb people to the term "hate speech". Not long ago the term "mental retardation" was the euphemism of choice to replace the harsher language of the past. Many well meaning people still use this term, especially in a clinical context. I do believe it is good to avoid this term as much as possible, but I don't want to see any well meaning people who can't keep up with this "euphemism treadmill" to end up demonized and humiliated. Perhaps it's not the movement itself I am questioning but more the smug and self-righteous tone some (also well-intentioned) people are taking on. Putting the general public on thin ice is not going to make them more sympathetic. In some ways it seems that yesterdays "good guys" are now today's "bad guys". I also don't like to see division in the humanitarian community caused by constant "moral one-upsmanship". It's not good for morale to have otherwise caring people constantly looking over each others shoulder waiting for that "gotcha" moment where they can catch someone else in a faux-pas (for one thing we all make faux-pas at times). Chips on the shoulder are never good. There are enough "bad guys" in the world and no need to create more. There is also enough hate speech in the world that I wouldn't want to dilute the gravity of the term (hate speech).
       Another thing that needs to be considered is the individual in question. A person with a "disability" may not feel as comfortable with being referred to as "differently abled", while for others it may be the opposite. For people with Autism for example the new term "intellectual disabilities" may be misleading since many Autistic people- including those with more severe cases- even though it is still not as bad as the "r" word. The problem is many on the Autistic spectrum are well advanced intellectually but have other hurdles to deal with. I am skeptical on whether there is a term inclusive enough to include all individuals with special needs. Autism is Autism, Downs-Syndrome is Downs-Syndrome, there are mild "disabilities" and profound. I don't want to see good hearted people become divided on finding the perfect word. Even the word Autism is not perfect as it literally means "self-centered" but I still prefer it over the term Aspergers Syndrome for myself. I am still fine with either term for now. Others on the spectrum call themselves "Aspies" and resent the word "Autistic". "Special Needs" is a very inclusive term though it is so inclusive that one can say everyone has special needs from those with Schizophrenia to an overall successful adult living with Arthritis or Diabetes. Lets also not forget some of the elderly who may suffer cognitive decline but are certainly not intellectually disabled (yet they still have special needs).
       This movement is starting to resemble a fad, but I don't say that to imply that I'm against it or that all fads are bad. I do see a lot of celebrities endorsing it just as they are with "Autism Awareness", "Don't Shop, Adopt", "Brest Cancer Awareness", Livestrong bracelets, "Anti-Bullying", and other cases that have faded such as "AIDS Awareness" in the 1990's, "Say No To Drugs" in the 1980's", and others. All these mentioned are virtues, and it's certainly better to see a virtue become a fad than a vice (such as binge-drinking or hazing). A concern I have with all these positive causes and slogans is that when it becomes a fad it can also become superficial and therefore the results can become superficial. There is also this strange love/hate relationship that our culture has with labels. It's fashionable do shun labels- especially if they come out of someone Else's mouth, but it is also fashionable to come up with new and improved ones as long as they come out of our own mouth. Another thing is that while I strongly condemn the use of the n-word for those of Sub-Saharan African descent, I wish people would stop comparing every negative word to the n-word. The r-word is bad too but all these comparisons are getting overdone. All slurs are bad as well as any good word used with bad intentions but to keep comparing them to each other can over-simplify things. (I'm not alone in feeling this way as you will see in this link: http://newsone.com/entertainment/newsonestaff4/glee-rword-psa-retarded-nword-video/)
       In a nutshell I fully support the goal of this movement and want it to succeed; but for that reason I have concerns about it which I am trying to address. I will never deny that words have power, but I just don't want people to unwittingly give some words more power than they deserve. Here is another link to a good blog article with some insightful comments included on the page: http://englishcowpath.blogspot.com/2011/06/euphemism-treadmill-replacing-r-word.html