behavioral disability

Just a little reminder that Autism Speaks supports the Judge Rotenberg Center

The JRC does horrible, inhumane things to autistic people in the name of “treatment”. Don’t be fooled by their “success” stories. Their “success stories” are people who have been brutalized and tortured into looking neurotypical and they live the rest of their lives in a nightmare.

This is what REALLY goes on inside the JRC
Trigger Warning: This is beyond abuse, THIS IS TORTURE.


Reblog to make this known.


requested by anon(s)

(en) funktionsnedsättning - disability

att vara funktionsnedsatt - to be disabled

psykiskt - mentally

fysiskt - physically

döv - deaf

synskadad - visually impaired

blind - blind

språk och talterapeut - language and speech therapist 

(en) beteendestörning - behavioral disorder

inlärningssvårigheter - learning disabilities

syndrom - syndrome

neoropsykiatrisk - neuropsychiatric

störning - derangement

socialt - social

härdsmälta - meltdown

sensorisk överbelastning - sensory overload

icke-verbal - nonverbal

Ableist hostility disguised as friendliness

Some people relate to people with disabilities in a dangerous and confusing way. They see themselves as helpers, and at first they seem to really like the person. Then the helper suddenly become aggressively hostile, and angry about the disabled person’s limitations or personality (even though they have not changed in any significant way since they started spending time together). Often, this is because the helper expected their wonderful attention to erase all of the person’s limitations, and they get angry when it doesn’t.

The logic works something like this:

  • The helper thinks that they’re looking past the disability and seeing the “real person” underneath.
  • They expect that their kindness  will allow the “real person” to emerge from the shell of disability.
  • They really like “real person” they think they are seeing, and they’re excited about their future plans for when that person emerges.
  • But the “real person” is actually figment of their imagination.

The disabled person is already real:

  • The helper doesn’t like this already-real disabled person very much
  • The helper ignores most of what the already-real person actually says, does, thinks, and feels.
  • They’re looking past the already-real person, and seeing the ghost of someone they’d like better.

This ends poorly:

  • The already-real person never turns into the ghost the helper is imagining
  • Disability stays important; it doesn’t go away when a helper tries to imagine it out of existence
  • Neither do all of the things the already-real disabled person thinks, feels, believes, and decides
  • They are who they are; the helper’s wishful thinking doesn’t turn them into someone else
  • The helper eventually notices that the already-real person isn’t becoming the ghost that they’ve been imagining
  • When the helper stop imagining the ghost, they notice that the already-real person is constantly doing, saying, feeling, believing, and deciding things that the helper hates
  • Then the helper gets furious and becomes openly hostile

The helper has actually been hostile to the disabled person the whole time

  • They never wanted to spend time around the already-real disabled person; they wanted someone else
  • (They probably didn’t realize this)
  • At first, they tried to make the already-real disabled person go away by imagining that they were someone else
  • (And by being kind to that imaginary person)
  • When they stop believing in the imaginary person, they become openly hostile to the real person

Tl;dr Sometimes ableist hostility doesn’t look like hostility at first. Sometimes people who are unable or unwilling to respect disabled people seem friendly at first. They try to look past disability, and they interact with an imaginary nondisabled person instead of the real disabled person. They’re kind to the person they’re imagining, even though they find the real person completely unacceptable. Eventually they notice the real person and become openly hostile. The disabled person’s behavior has not changed; the ableist’s perception of it has. When someone does this to you, it can be very confusing — you were open about your disability from the beginning, and it seemed like they were ok with that, until they suddenly weren’t. If this has happened to you, you are not alone.

y'all be like

“don’t ignore invisible disabilities!!!! u r VALID!!!!!! UWU”

*proceeds to belittle people with invisible disabilities for…being disabled*

Ableism. Ableism. Ableism.

[image description: graphic has a black background with diagonal blue stripes on the left side with the word “ableism” repeated over and over in small text. The stripes take up a good ¾ of the background. On top is an illustration of a very artsy colorful looking person. To the right of their head is a yellow artsy speech bubble with black text that reads “What the hell is ableism?” Below the bubble is a yellow/orange arrow pointing downward to the second artsy speech bubble that reads “they said having never heard the word.” “The Word” is in all caps. At the very bottom in the lower right hand corner, in small white text is the URL of the site: ]

Did you just read the word ableism and think to yourself “What the hell is ableism?” Well, you’re in the right place.

Hello and welcome to What Is Ableism: an outreach project dedicated to addressing the disconnect between the disability community and the liberal, progressive and left activist scene. That being said, really anyone who is interested in learning is welcome here.

DISABLED PEOPLE ARE IN THE STRUGGLE TOO. (but a lot of people don’t know that.)

Feel free to navigate this site via the menu on top, but if you aren’t sure where to begin, here are some frequently asked questions to help you decide. (Click on the link to find the answer.)

[image description: The graphic is a blue rectangle with a thick black border around it. Inside the blue area is an artsy yellow variation of the speech bubble shape from the main graphic, with a thick border around the perimeter. Inside the yellow shape, is black text, typewriter style that reads “frequently asked questions”. Shooting out from both sides is a long red rectangle that has two black circles at each end. On the left is a crown-esq shape on top of the circle and on the right circle, the same crown shape is on the bottom. Lastly, in the lower right hand corner of the outer thick black border, is (in white small text), the URL of the site:]

Q: What is Ableism and why is this important to know in these times?

Q: What is “The Disconnect?”

Q: What are some ways I can un-learn ableist behavior & language?

Q: How are disabled people at risk during a Trump Presidency?

Q: I want to make a list of places to donate to. What are some disability orgs/projects that I can add to my list?

Q: Where can I check out other disability related content?

Q: Why is outreach important and do you have any tips?

Q: Do you have any inclusive / intersectional graphics that I can use for my site and/or to print out for events?

Q: Do you have any specific tips for journalists / people in the media?

Q: How can I get involved with the project? Are you looking for volunteers?

Q: How can I contact you?

Yo guys Compliment people’s mobility aids Seriously, I used a motorized shopping cart for the first time last week and I was painfully self-conscious for the first five minutes and felt like someone was about to tell me off for using resources not meant for me, and simultaneously like I was conceding defeat, but it was also a HUGE RELIEF and made shopping fun instead of unpleasant, which is largely because I was with friends who I trusted and who joked about it with me, including that when I sat down and started motoring forward,my friend said “God, I can’t believe you’re the most powerful woman in existence.” and it set the tone for the shopping trip and framed the use of a mobility aid as positive instead of negative, which is whack when you think about it because of COURSE using a mobility aid is positive, it’s an AID, it’s there to AID you. The point I’m trying to make here is that wheelchairs are kind of super cool from an aesthetic point of view and having one is lowkey a real life superpower, bc you can carry lotsa things in it and also you have wheels who doesn’t want wheels, and canes are extremely dapper and also basically weapons you can get away with bringing anywhere, and let’s talk about it more, because it lightens the conversation and normalizes disability and is just generally good behavior.

dustbreather  asked:

what are your favorite space battles from sci fi films?

Without a doubt, the battle above Scarif from Rogue One.

•The scene is set so clearly in 3D space- Two star destroyers on one side, the rebel flagship and a smattering of assorted rebel ships on the other, and the shield gate facility to the lower left of the rebels. This stays this way through the entire scene.

•Shots are held for vast stretches of time, allowing audience to very clearly understand where the ship is and what it is doing

•Lighting is consistent, shadows of ships are cast onto other ships and stark, as if from a star and not from a stage light

•Sound design is incredible, realistic physics be damned

•Com chatter correlates to what we see on screen, adding to the understanding of the battle strategies taken by the rebel fleet (see ion bombing below)

•The stark white coloring of the ships against the gorgeous bright cyan-blue water with the green and tan islands and Imperial facilities straight below

•very clear understanding of how objects behave in space, debris continues on in frictionless space and x-wings take far sharper turns (no air resistance), the behavior of the disabled star destroyer (which was down because of an ion bombing ordered by the admiral very early on, bombing run shown in one shot only) and Hammer-head Corvette hasn’t been shown in any space battle I can think of. I’ve seen ships colliding, but only in a similar fashion to a plane or boat would collide with the ground or another ship. It shows the real fragility of ships like that in space when it comes to force and momentum, not lasers.

•Upwards orientation of ships actually makes sense, relative to the “down” direction of Scarif below them, and possibly even gravitationally accurate because the facility is locked in place, not in orbit, meaning basically the same G as the surface

•The Death Star- actually conceptualized (not shown unfortunately) to move through hyperspace, justifying a bit of its ridiculousness, the amazing shot of it rising over the horizon paired with light wind instruments rather than the bombastic imperial march highlights its ironic beauty as well as implies the resignation of our heroes to their fate, and then it actually is shown with the weapon facing the target, not just a shot of the firing and then cutting to the laser hitting its target, and then the hyper-realistic nuclear-like blast it causes when it fires

All these tiny little factors just make me excited about this entire movie. Its characters are weak, but its not about the individuals, its about the Rebellion as a whole, and we truly feel that through scenes like this.

Attention to specifics and detail like this can immerse an audience completely and there’s really no excuse at this point in special effects progress to skip on making sure your audience can map out the battlefield and events that go on within it. Going back and watching the original trilogy, the nonsensical gaudy monstrosities shown in space are forgivable, and even enjoyable given the special effects of the time (and even the advancements they catalyzed), but the prequels? Forget it. Horrendously ugly, overblown, nonsensical, disorienting, and honestly unforgivable, given the technology they had access to.

I was telling my friend more stories that my Professor told my class (this is my second semester with him). And I just have to put this one that I remembered here. It’s so unbelievable, a year later after hearing it and I’m still shocked. 

So, my Professor used to be a regular teacher at a middle school. He taught ESE classes meaning classes specifically for children with behavioral issues and disabilities. So he told us that he had this 14-year old kid in his class (let’s call him John for story sake). He told us how John was really set on going through puberty already and getting facial hair and all that. But he just couldn’t grow anything since he was too young I suppose. 

And so one day a girl in my Prof’s class goes up to him after school and tells him how someone put something on her shoulder the other day, and when she saw what it was she like freaked cuz it looked like a pubic hair. And John sits behind her so it had to be him. My Professor said that he was like wtf?? And didn’t really believe her since this girl had a very bad lying problem but didn’t dismiss it completely. A week passed and several girls started going to him saying that John just kept throwing pubic hair all over them on the bus and in class. And my Professor was dreading his life because he was going to have to talk to this kid about freaking pubes and didn’t know how to handle the situation.

After class the next week he talks to John in private and tells him “So I’ve been hearing some bad stuff about you lately. Anything you want to tell me?” And he doesn’t say anything about the pubic hair but just wants to see what John is gonna say. And John starts sticking his hands in his pockets and won’t look him in the eyes and my Prof sees a clear ziploc bag popping out from one of the pockets and he asks John to take it out so he can see. And John does and it’s legit a plastic bag FILLED with freaking pubic hair. And my Prof told me that he had to try so hard not to laugh cuz he couldn’t believe that that was actually freaking happening. He had no idea what to do about the situation so he sent John to the principal to talk to her since he felt that she’d know what to do. And whatever, my Prof tells ALL his teacher friends about everything and all of them get people to watch their classes so they can go to the office and see how tf the principal is going to handle/deal with this freaking incident. And so the principal is OUTRAGED. And she’s screaming at John in the middle of the office with everyone hearing, telling him how inappropriate his actions were and all that. And my Prof said how John looked hella nervous and his shoulders were slumped forward and everything until suddenly, mid-lecture the kid stood up correctly with so much confidence and straight up told the principal IN FRONT OF EVERYONE:

“Some kids collect Pokemon cards. I collect pubic hair. AND IT’S ALL MINE AND ALL NATURAL BABY.”

And my Prof said that everyone in that damn office LOST THEIR MINDS.

John ended up getting a week suspension. But omg. Yeah. I will never forget that story. 

"Attention seeking behaviors"

Autistic people and other people with cognitive disabilities are often interpreted as doing things for attention, whether or not that explanation is plausible.

For example:

  • Alice is autistic. She flaps her hands.
  • Hand flapping is part of Alice’s body language. She moves her hands to express a large range of thoughts and feelings, just like some people move their facial muscles to express a broad range of thoughts and feelings
  • Alice also sometimes flaps her hands to calm down when she is overloaded
  • Bernice is a behaviorist. She is distressed about the fact that Alice flaps her hands.
  • Whenever Alice flaps her hands, Bernice stares at her, and pays intense attention to the fact that she is flapping her hands
  • Bernice notices that every time Alice flaps her hands, Bernice pays attention to her
  • Bernice concludes that her attention is reinforcing Alice’s flapping behavior
  • Bernice concludes that Alice’s hand flapping is an attention-seeking behavior
  • Bernice puts Alice on a behavior plan based on ignoring her whenever she flaps her hands

Behaviorists and others make this mistake a lot. They very, very frequently assume that the fact that they are paying attention to something means that it is being done to get their attention. It doesn’t. It just means they’re paying attention.

Starting at someone whenever they do something doesn’t mean that they’re doing it because they like being stared at. It just means that you’re staring at them.

tl;dr Stop calling everything attention seeking behavior. The fact that you’re paying attention to something doesn’t mean that someone is doing it because they want your attention. Not everything a person who has a developmental disability does is about you.

Fun fact: If you say “This behavior won’t fly in the real world.” to your kid for any consistent mistakes/fuckups they make, it doesn’t make them want to do better, it makes them NEVER WANT TO FUCKING ENTER THAT “REAL WORLD!”

Fun fact also: If that kid finds out later that all those behaviors you said that about and generally told them were all their fault were actually related to his mental disability/disorder (Like, say, my memory; visual and verbal processing problems and my executive dysfunction), it’s probably going to make them deeply resent you for that and make them even less motivated to enter what you call “the real world”

Fun fact the third: If you still keep saying this “Get in the real world” crap to your kid, refusing to change anything about your behavior when the disability-related origins of these behaviors are brought up and keep acting like they’re “making excuses” when they try to explain it with those/work within those limits, then you hate non-neurotypical people despite any other claims you make otherwise.

Professionalism as a system is built to be ableist.

Most of the stuff they are trying to weed out with professional behavior is related to disability or illness.  People who aren’t “dependable” or “reliable”, people who will bring their issues into the workplace, etc.

There’s a side to it where it’s about boundaries between people, and that is fine and good.  Not everything about professionalism is bad.

But even then, these codified boundaries can be interpreted as mostly a way to insulate abled people from disabled people’s problems.

Cellphone Camera Safety

Most people don’t know this but when you take a photo with your cellphone your camera app will record your GPS coordinates in the image file. That information will be shared with that file if you then chose to upload that image to social media unless that information is scrubbed at some point along the way.

This is super dangerous because a stalker who follows you on your social media accounts can download your pictures and extract the GPS coordinates that are recorded as part of the file. They can then build a map of not only where you live but of your normal day-to-day movements.

To disable this behavior in the default Android camera app:

  • Open the camera app
  • Open the app’s menu (three horizontal bars in the upper left corner)
  • Select ‘Settings’
  • Turn off the setting ‘Save location’

If you have the latest version of Android you can also make sure that this behavior isn’t inadvertently turned back on:

  • Open the system settings (swipe down and press the ‘gear’ icon)
  • Select ‘Apps’
  • Select the camera app you use
  • Select ‘Permissions’
  • Turn off the setting ‘Location’

You will no longer be embedding GPS information in your photographs, though this won’t delete existing GPS data from photos you’ve already taken. If you want to purge that you’re going to need an EXIF editor which is, unfortunately, beyond the scope of this post.

I recommend that you view the metadata (EXIF data) of a couple of your photographs that you took with your phone to make sure you’re not leaking any sensitive information. Fields to look at, in particular, are ‘Artist’ and ‘Copyright’ if you’re sharing your photographs under an account that you don’t want associated with your real name.

  • Person without any illnesses or disabilities: *says or does something ableist*
  • Me: Hey, I know you probably didn't mean any harm by it, but the ideas you're endorsing through your words and/or behavior are harmful to disabled/neurodivergent people like me, so be mindful of that in the future please.
  • Person without any illnesses or disabilities: WHAT?? I'm not ableist! How dare you call me ableist, you cr*zy ps*cho piece of shit!!!
Inclusion and Acceptance are the Most Effective Autism “Therapies”
The constant need to label and pathologize everything Autistics do is part of what makes people see them and treat them as less than human…
By Nina Fiore

“Most children “eat”, my child “grazed”. Most children “act silly”, my child “stimmed”. Most children “get upset”, my child “had a meltdown”. Most children “misbehave”, my child “has behavioral disabilities”.”

A mother recounts her son’s experience with ABA and describes how pathologizing hurts Autistics.

Content warning for description of ABA therapy and child abuse.

It's ok to watch the same clip over and over

I’ve seen a lot of parents express concern about their kid watching the same clips over and over on YouTube, or watching shows they’ve seen before over and over, or similar.

I think that a lot of people are under the impression that watching the same videos repeatedly is an inherently meaningless activity. It’s not.

Here are some purposes repeated video watching can serve:

Getting oriented:

  • Sometimes the world is very confusing
  • Going back to something familiar can make the world less confusing
  • It can also remind you of feelings that it is possible to have and ways that it is possible to express them
  • For some people, all of this is really important

Focusing or averting overload:

  • Noise can be really overloading or distracting for some people
  • So can silence
  • So can new things
  • Having a familiar video on can be a really effective way for some people to avert overload and/or stay focused
  • This is meaningful and important. It’s important to be able to be comfortable and think clearly.

Noticing new things

  • The video is the same every time, but the person watching it isn’t
  • When you watch it over and over, you see new things
  • It can be conceptual things like coming to interpret the story in a new way
  • Or sensory things like noticing sounds and colors that you never noticed before
  • This kind of repetition and examination is meaningful, and can be a great joy

Receptive and expressive language:

  • People who communicate by repeating words and phrases can get more words and phrases, and more meaning out of the phrases they have, by watching the same video over and over
  • Watching the same video over and over can also be really good for receptive language
  • It can be practice listening to things
  • The meaning stays the same, and watching it over and over can be a way, over time, come to understand the words in it better
  • This is also true of body language - in a video, you can watch the body language over and over and come to understand it
  • There’s also far less pressure to already understand. In interactions with people, you upset them if you don’t get it. Videos don’t need you to understand them – you can try as many times as you need to and take as much time as you need without anything bad happening.

tl;dr It’s not cause for concern if a kid watches the same videos over and over. Adults do it too, and it serves a purpose. Watching the same things over and over can be valuable and important.

I worry about “neurotypical” positing a normal brain, rather than a brain that permits behavior conducive to patriarchy and capitalism. I worry about naturalizing that brain, the one that makes a good cog in a bad machine.

+ I worry about “neurotypical” implying that the same type of brain is preferred in every type of person under these systems, when really the brain capitalism desires in a woman is different from what it desires in a man, the brain that keeps a factory worker productive is different from the brain that keeps a CEO profitable. The desire for personal freedom was typical in a plantation owner but pathologized in a slave, and today a teenager healthily, necessarily testing boundaries is pathologized with a behavioral or learning disability (and criminalized) if they’re Black in America.

Typical feels too neutral, in itself and in its usage. It doesn’t imply the agency of systems that select desirable brains and cast others aside.