Blackjack Was Here
simnationblog:

Get The Sims 2: Ultimate collection for FREE!!!!
Simply go to “Redeem product code” in Origin and enter: I-LOVE-THE-SIMS
It is for 1 week only, so hurry!


Ooh, I’ll have to do this when I get back.

simnationblog:

Get The Sims 2: Ultimate collection for FREE!!!!

Simply go to “Redeem product code” in Origin and enter: I-LOVE-THE-SIMS

It is for 1 week only, so hurry!

Ooh, I’ll have to do this when I get back.

sernacht:

So, I was in the car today and saw someone with the license plate “X0DUS3 5”, so I thought it was like Exodus 3:5 and I looked it up, and do you know what it said?

"Do not come any closer"

Can any Brits help me understand how spaz could be offensive? In the US, it comes from spasm, which are mostly extremely minor, and indicates that someone is "vibrating"--ie, flighty. I know you guys associate it with seizure but you must acknowledge

digbychickenceasar:

blackjackgabbiani:

magicmage:

blackjackgabbiani:

magicmage:

ughsocialjustice:

that even to you it has incredibly innocuous definitions, far more so than the serious one.

From what I’ve been told- in the UK spaz is used like Americans use “retard”.

-the Polish one

In Canada it was also used to mean someone who was “spazzing out” as in like “freaking out”, which is often attributed to a person with any mental/developmental disorder.

How would that have to do with a disorder? People gesticulate wildly when they get hyper, and thus are “spasming”, ergo, spastic. Nothing offensive about it. And it’s my understanding that taking offense is a REALLY recent issue over a mom getting mad at a video game for saying spastic when her son had died of a seizure disorder (which would mean that the association with spasms existed prior to it).

*shrugs* that’s just how I was taught to interpret it here, similar to “retard”.

That’s really weird. It has no intellectual impact, and aside from epilepsy, no disability connotation either.

Like, if my foot has a spasm, it’s being spastic. That’s it.

It’s mainly that spastic came to just refer to disabled people. So when saying to someone ‘you’re a spastic’ you’re basically saying ‘you’re mentally deficient’. In the same way as calling someone a retard is. That’s the connotation.

Yeah, and that’s what I don’t understand. The word and definition don’t seem to have anything to do with each other. I’m asking how it came to be offensive or have anything to do with mental capacity.

Also, I do distinctly remember the case about a game being banned there because a woman whose kid died of a seizure found it offensive, so clearly the spasm connotation exists for you all.

blackwingedrose:

blackjackgabbiani:

blackwingedrose:

blackjackgabbiani:

gryblogs:

firstnametainted:

This is going to make me very unpopular — but I have aspergers and work with autistic individuals for a living. In real life, people don’t cringe at functioning labels. In fact, it’s part of the job/system and no one is trying to box you in or make you something you’re not. Stop jumping all over…

I needed someone who works with a select number of autistic people, not me or anybody I know, to tell me that since “nobody in real life” is upset by functioning labels, that I must be imaginary, or that I was only imagining all those times I was expected to be able to do something I couldn’t because I wasn’t one of “those” autistic people.

Thanks.

That has nothing to do with the labels themselves though, and everything to do with how people wrongly interpret them. A label itself is just a word, and these are meant to describe different stages of the autism spectrum. Being a spectrum, it IS huge and varied, and thus it should be stood to reason that it facilitates understanding to use further terms for clarity.

If someone tries to stereotype you over them, that’s because they’re dipshits and they should be set right. But again, that has nothing to do with the actual terms.

The labels themselves are the problems. No one is misinterpreting them. The labels themselves are stereotypes.

Low-functioning says “you barely function, you can do very little.” It literally defines people by their inabilities. High-functioning does the opposite. It says “well look, you’re basically ‘normal,’ you function so well.” One ignores your abilities, the other ignores your disabilities. That’s what the labels mean. There’s no misinterpretation. You tell me what low-functioning and high-functioning mean. Define them for me. Give me examples. And I’ll be able to pull out bits of myself from both categories. Because I don’t fit either of those labels. Because I’m a person and can’t be put into a box. You can’t say it’s “just a word.” Words mean something. They have power. They matter.

Of course they mean something. But think of the spectrum. Think of what a spectrum IS. When you think of a light spectrum, you think of distinct colors, spread out in a line. No color is better or worse, but they all have specific traits that classify their points on the spectrum. And yes, they all do have things in common with others. But they’re still their own.

And honestly, to say that applying labels to the autism spectrum is inherently stereotypical, that’s like saying that it’s stereotyping colors to establish parameters for what makes red.

That’s how spectrums WORK and we need to focus on the reception people get and how to fix that, not get hung up on an ease-of-use label. People are going to be the same no matter what you use to describe them, and no one seems to want to talk about how to change the views. News flash—labels won’t have any part of it because people assign things that aren’t there, and do so without any labels to begin with. At least labels give us a chance to clarify ranges, just as one clarifies what constitutes yellow.

Oh good god the autism as a straight line color spectrum analogy. I’m done.

Like, there are ways to describe how someone is autistic and what kind of supports they need without using functioning labels. That’s all we’re saying. No one is saying we’re all 100% exactly alike, just that the current in-use labels are bollocks. Find some new ones.

And new ones will have the same issues. The problem is public perception, and changing words won’t do ANYTHING to change that.


And come on, you should understand visual thinking. I’d wager most people imagine colors when they hear the word spectrum, and it’s a suitable comparison. You say words matter, but you fail to address or even consider that the issue is NOT in the words themselves.

incompleteromance:

TBHshipping - Cyrus/Jupiter

incompleteromance:

TBHshipping - Cyrus/Jupiter

makomaragi:

iT ME!!! PRETTY BIRDY!!! I DO THAT!!!! fennel’s archen
i did this in like 20 minutes it super sloppy and also i haven’t drawn in like 2 months u_u

makomaragi:

iT ME!!! PRETTY BIRDY!!! I DO THAT!!!! fennel’s archen

i did this in like 20 minutes it super sloppy and also i haven’t drawn in like 2 months u_u

miaouler:

{Δ} :  has someone made a godzilla reference yet

miaouler:

{Δ} :  has someone made a godzilla reference yet

blackjackgabbiani:

Holy crap this game is like a bad fanfic

Cyrus wanted to confess his love to me but Jiri interrupted him and now Jiri and I are going out.

OF ALL THE CHARACTERS

AND JIRI AND I GOT MARRIED WTF I AM NOT SURE WHAT I GOING ON HERE AND WHY DO WE LIVE IN OUR OWN APARTMENTS IF WE HAVE A HOUSE

Can any Brits help me understand how spaz could be offensive? In the US, it comes from spasm, which are mostly extremely minor, and indicates that someone is "vibrating"--ie, flighty. I know you guys associate it with seizure but you must acknowledge

magicmage:

blackjackgabbiani:

magicmage:

ughsocialjustice:

that even to you it has incredibly innocuous definitions, far more so than the serious one.

From what I’ve been told- in the UK spaz is used like Americans use “retard”.

-the Polish one

In Canada it was also used to mean someone who was “spazzing out” as in like “freaking out”, which is often attributed to a person with any mental/developmental disorder.

How would that have to do with a disorder? People gesticulate wildly when they get hyper, and thus are “spasming”, ergo, spastic. Nothing offensive about it. And it’s my understanding that taking offense is a REALLY recent issue over a mom getting mad at a video game for saying spastic when her son had died of a seizure disorder (which would mean that the association with spasms existed prior to it).

*shrugs* that’s just how I was taught to interpret it here, similar to “retard”.

That’s really weird. It has no intellectual impact, and aside from epilepsy, no disability connotation either.

Like, if my foot has a spasm, it’s being spastic. That’s it.

blackwingedrose:

blackjackgabbiani:

gryblogs:

firstnametainted:

This is going to make me very unpopular — but I have aspergers and work with autistic individuals for a living. In real life, people don’t cringe at functioning labels. In fact, it’s part of the job/system and no one is trying to box you in or make you something you’re not. Stop jumping all over…

I needed someone who works with a select number of autistic people, not me or anybody I know, to tell me that since “nobody in real life” is upset by functioning labels, that I must be imaginary, or that I was only imagining all those times I was expected to be able to do something I couldn’t because I wasn’t one of “those” autistic people.

Thanks.

That has nothing to do with the labels themselves though, and everything to do with how people wrongly interpret them. A label itself is just a word, and these are meant to describe different stages of the autism spectrum. Being a spectrum, it IS huge and varied, and thus it should be stood to reason that it facilitates understanding to use further terms for clarity.

If someone tries to stereotype you over them, that’s because they’re dipshits and they should be set right. But again, that has nothing to do with the actual terms.

The labels themselves are the problems. No one is misinterpreting them. The labels themselves are stereotypes.

Low-functioning says “you barely function, you can do very little.” It literally defines people by their inabilities. High-functioning does the opposite. It says “well look, you’re basically ‘normal,’ you function so well.” One ignores your abilities, the other ignores your disabilities. That’s what the labels mean. There’s no misinterpretation. You tell me what low-functioning and high-functioning mean. Define them for me. Give me examples. And I’ll be able to pull out bits of myself from both categories. Because I don’t fit either of those labels. Because I’m a person and can’t be put into a box. You can’t say it’s “just a word.” Words mean something. They have power. They matter.

Of course they mean something. But think of the spectrum. Think of what a spectrum IS. When you think of a light spectrum, you think of distinct colors, spread out in a line. No color is better or worse, but they all have specific traits that classify their points on the spectrum. And yes, they all do have things in common with others. But they’re still their own.

And honestly, to say that applying labels to the autism spectrum is inherently stereotypical, that’s like saying that it’s stereotyping colors to establish parameters for what makes red.

That’s how spectrums WORK and we need to focus on the reception people get and how to fix that, not get hung up on an ease-of-use label. People are going to be the same no matter what you use to describe them, and no one seems to want to talk about how to change the views. News flash—labels won’t have any part of it because people assign things that aren’t there, and do so without any labels to begin with. At least labels give us a chance to clarify ranges, just as one clarifies what constitutes yellow.