Leah Libresco writes on the topic of human touch and how the sexual revolution has robbed us of the ability to touch each other without it being sexual. But for the autistic, either high functioning or low functioning, Sensory Perception Disorder often robs us of the same joy. I used to say I only had two emotions, angry and happy. A large part of that is the SPD I experience in my skin- it wasn't until Christopher was born and I experienced, in my "Daddy nappies" the ability to just hold another human being. And at times, that can be itchy or even painful if I'm in sensory overload to begin with.
This is a real danger to the autistic community- craving touch, fearing touch, and acting inappropriately because of the push-pull of human touch. I don't have a solution this time, I'm just identifying the problem.
I'm Outside the Autistic Asylum!
RSS Feed link
The crazy stuff I can't post anyplace else
Introduction to Wonko the Sane and Outside the Asylum, which this blog is named after.
5 comments:
Two comments:
it is wrong for homosexuals to force the person they claim to love to never procreate.
Then is it not also wrong for the Catholic Church to force priests and nuns never to procreate?
I know at least four heterosexual couples who have gotten divorced over infertility issues.
Heterosexuals marry, in general, knowing that procreation is an option. Homosexuals, on the other hand, go into marriage knowing that this is impossible. So I would expect that non-fertility would tend to be less of an issue for homosexuals than for heterosexuals.
How, on the other hand, to you account for the success of heterosexual marriages in which procreation is not or ceases to be possible?
"it is wrong for homosexuals to force the person they claim to love to never procreate." They are both adults consenting to the marriage. They may or may not have already discussed as a couple whether they would pursue shared future parenthood through medical means (IVF, donor egg, surrogacy, adoption). Additionally, they may already be parenting each others' children from a former relationship.
Do you really think you are the first person to be thinking about the issue of children and parenting??
No one is forcing anyone to do anything. Your so-called philosophical conundrum is something easily dismissed in the first hour of a first-year philosophy class.
"They are both adults consenting to the marriage. "
I take it you're fine with consensual slavery as well.
Or any of the other strange relationships people call "consent".
The fact of the matter is, consent isn't real. It's a nice face on what is essentially a right to harm another person, except in very narrow circumstances- and it isn't love, it is the opposite of love. It is not caring about what is actually best for the other person.
Aleteia had a great article on this just this morning, thanks for reminding me I wanted to blog about it
Again, more 1st year philosophy. There is no such things as consensual slavery. There is only consent when both parties are of equal status. A slaveholder has power and authority over a slave. Stop with your silly games.
As to your babble about "consent isn't real"; I don't know what juvenile riddle this comes from but please stop.
What does consensual mean? I think that is the problem- you are using an essentially meaningless term without defining it.
I don't know what consent means, it seems to mean "whatever I want it to mean to cause the most damage possible to any sort of ordered society".
Post a Comment