Posts contents list

You know how important facts are sometimes unpublishable ? A quote to remember all your life: “There is no greater agony than bearing an untold story inside you.” – Maya Angelou.

  • Hans Asperger controversy by affecting wellbeing so deeply ethically, requires discussing only in an uncorrupted unbullied scene, and to make that possible exactly requires upholding this site’s mission !
  • a definitive call from a survivor, that you are needed more than you may know, to support anyone who you see a group rejection happen to. Defines this site’s point. Record it, always remember it, always be impressed.
  • Wikipediocracy: participative site exposing Wikipedia and giving a forum outlet to everyone hurt by its infighting, frequently unfair administrating, and telling participants they are not entitled to anything. v Wikipedia Sucks, a new forum that thinks the ‘ocracy has undermined itself by letting ‘pedia admins in to join its debate.
  • The “don’t understand” Trick a particularly nasty human behaviour, often by groups. Important to be aware that anyone trying to get heard about fairness is up against this trick. The Emperor’s New Clothes reinterpreted pessimistically.

These items are tops and need to stick out at the top.
Okay, here is the site contents:

! Stories shared on unfairness in autistic and ADHD groups and sites:

! Posts about troubles in other groups or services affecting autistic folks:

! Posts about other fairness issues to do with the autistic spectrum:

! Some items that just came across as part of the ongoing picture of struggling with unfairnesses: items that could easily impact on autistic spectrumites’ lives, so it seems within the spirit of a fairness watch to share them:

The British law on adult vulnerability, against exploiting or taking advantage of us, imposes on the autism scene, its self-organised groups and its services, that in order not to take risks with suicidality they may never break the standard of integrity upon anyone. All aspie groups hàve to look out for each other keeping uncorrupted, aided by this law’s citability, so that they can be in any position to hold autism services and charities to uncorrupted fairness. It means, for example, that to follow the vulnerability law:

  • everyone is entitled to have their crisis issues agreed to matter, a group can’t decide it has grown bored with having individuals singly raise issues from their service problems and no longer wants to bother with them,
  • everyone who suffers any hostile accusation is entitled to the presumption of innocence, and nobody can ever declare that their last word to anyone is a refusal to undo an action breaching that,
  • breaching of these red lines of integrity is always aggressive, and it’s always corrupt to instead call it aggressive for the affected person to keep saying it has to be put it right.

As is flagged up in Bittersweet On the Autism Spectrum (Jessica Kingsley, 2017), p215: when there is a nationally linked up aspie scene, knowing the vulnerability law applies to it, then whenever one group goes bad, the rest of the scene is a failsafe and back-up for the affected group’s members. Autism Network Scotland‘s free-issued book An Ordinary Life Too also covers the duty under the vulnerability law for no group to stop having integrity about fairness: and that book’s existence is intended to help to keep the rest of the scene and services responsible to react and support affected folks whenever any piece of the autism scene goes wrong.

These works and developments point to a logical conclusion, that to comply with the vulnerability law, some types of answer that officials give us all the time can never be given. It’s great for democracy, and should be popular, to say that officials can never give the following toxic types of answer. But it’s not only officials who can never give them, ordinary aspies running local groups can never do the following to each other either:

  • Use the word “unfortunately” or synonyms of it. It has become a hurtful weapon for asserting that unfairnesses shall happen.
  • Be noncommittal.
  • Declare any matter of personal fairness closed, or unilaterally close down contact on it, before its entire content has been fairly answered, and at a stage preventing this from being ascertained from logical scrutiny of answers given.
  • Deny that they should do anything or answer substantively until an indefinitely deferrable eventuality.
  • Ignore, or omit to answer, any of the entire content of the evidence available from the person being answered.

These things also serve as practice models in countries lacking an explicit vulnerability law – they evidence practices that impact and worsen vulnerability, and there is always the responsibility not to risk causing suicides, to force compliance with these standards. It is always an act of toxic bullying, guilty of that improper risk, and breaking the vulnerability law wherever it exists, for the holders of leading offices in any group ever to declare a last word refusal to take a fair position, and ever to accuse of harrassment their own victim for pursuing them for a fair outcome. Remember that any of us who commit that calculated wrong, and crime of corruption, gift to every malevolent bureaucrat a basis to copy it. The entire safe and ethical autism scene in the world is defined by uncorrupted compliance with this standard.