Sadly, you're wrong. In an older world where most labour was done manually, even severly autistic people could be given simple manual jobs and could provide if not a lot so at least some kind of contribution to the farm's economy.
For the past century or so, that isn't the cae any longer and today an autistic will compete with a lot of no…
Sadly, you're wrong. In an older world where most labour was done manually, even severly autistic people could be given simple manual jobs and could provide if not a lot so at least some kind of contribution to the farm's economy.
For the past century or so, that isn't the cae any longer and today an autistic will compete with a lot of normal humans for what low-income low-requirement jobs there are.
Furthermore, consider what I pointed out: the amount of care and time (i.e. cost) required. That cost will never be recouped, it remains a net loss economically speaking, no matter if you manage to train the autistic to stack shelves in a supermarket or not.
Yes, I do know most people who are born retarded or with other disabilities and handicaps will be a net cost to their family or soceity, that's such a basic fact it can't really be debated. Autistics especially are severly impacted by today's extreme focus on personality and sociability over actual skill, dilligence and getting the job done. An employer simple cannot spare the resources it takes to make a profitable labourer out of an autistic of the kind initially described - especially not when said employer can simply hire someone /without/ those problems. It's not any queerer than that a man with two functioning legs will always beat a one-legged one in a race.
The able autistic is largely a myth, enforced by Hollywood and people who feel better if they in contravention to fact and reality see the disabled, retarded and handicapped as equally abled of only society would make it so. The vast majority of them are mentally retarded with low IQ and low tolerance for stress, add to that hypersensitivity and anxiety disorders cause by their inability to comprehend social interactions on insitinct. A tiny percentage are HFAs (or "Aspies") and it is from that group media and sadly many educators have chosen to creat "the able autistic". While HFAs can be very intelligent in their limited way, they are still socially impaired and have to use their rather mechanistic intelligence to compensate their disabilities, something which causes great emotional stress and anxiety their entire lives.
You see, I used to be a teacher, and have taught and trained HFAs for about 25 years, on and off, of all ages from early teens to young adults. Here in Sweden, unemployment among autistics is close to 85% - that includes the HFAs. It's not discrimination, it's that they simply can't compete: they aren't adaptable enough, they are too specialised, and they have meltdowns and frequently need sick leave, and few can take working full time or the rat-eat-rat mentality of having a career.
It's not a question of -isms, as I initially mentioned: it's sadly and simply the way it is, economically speaking.
> Sadly, you're wrong. In an older world where most labour was done manually, even severly autistic people could be given simple manual jobs and could provide if not a lot so at least some kind of contribution to the farm's economy.
The older world also couldn't afford to give an autistic three full time caretakers.
Of course not. As I said, the middle-class-for-all scenario is only recently technologically possible, so if my stepson were born elsewhere-or-when, things would be very different.
Sadly, you're wrong. In an older world where most labour was done manually, even severly autistic people could be given simple manual jobs and could provide if not a lot so at least some kind of contribution to the farm's economy.
For the past century or so, that isn't the cae any longer and today an autistic will compete with a lot of normal humans for what low-income low-requirement jobs there are.
Furthermore, consider what I pointed out: the amount of care and time (i.e. cost) required. That cost will never be recouped, it remains a net loss economically speaking, no matter if you manage to train the autistic to stack shelves in a supermarket or not.
Yes, I do know most people who are born retarded or with other disabilities and handicaps will be a net cost to their family or soceity, that's such a basic fact it can't really be debated. Autistics especially are severly impacted by today's extreme focus on personality and sociability over actual skill, dilligence and getting the job done. An employer simple cannot spare the resources it takes to make a profitable labourer out of an autistic of the kind initially described - especially not when said employer can simply hire someone /without/ those problems. It's not any queerer than that a man with two functioning legs will always beat a one-legged one in a race.
The able autistic is largely a myth, enforced by Hollywood and people who feel better if they in contravention to fact and reality see the disabled, retarded and handicapped as equally abled of only society would make it so. The vast majority of them are mentally retarded with low IQ and low tolerance for stress, add to that hypersensitivity and anxiety disorders cause by their inability to comprehend social interactions on insitinct. A tiny percentage are HFAs (or "Aspies") and it is from that group media and sadly many educators have chosen to creat "the able autistic". While HFAs can be very intelligent in their limited way, they are still socially impaired and have to use their rather mechanistic intelligence to compensate their disabilities, something which causes great emotional stress and anxiety their entire lives.
You see, I used to be a teacher, and have taught and trained HFAs for about 25 years, on and off, of all ages from early teens to young adults. Here in Sweden, unemployment among autistics is close to 85% - that includes the HFAs. It's not discrimination, it's that they simply can't compete: they aren't adaptable enough, they are too specialised, and they have meltdowns and frequently need sick leave, and few can take working full time or the rat-eat-rat mentality of having a career.
It's not a question of -isms, as I initially mentioned: it's sadly and simply the way it is, economically speaking.
> Sadly, you're wrong. In an older world where most labour was done manually, even severly autistic people could be given simple manual jobs and could provide if not a lot so at least some kind of contribution to the farm's economy.
The older world also couldn't afford to give an autistic three full time caretakers.
Of course not. As I said, the middle-class-for-all scenario is only recently technologically possible, so if my stepson were born elsewhere-or-when, things would be very different.