Episode 1 feedback from an autistic.Summary: So far, the writer and director got everything correctly and there…
By the way:
Apologies for the "feeling normal and superior". I just hate the word "normal" when it comes to autism discussion because "normal" is relative (and in this subject, the majority). But I have to explain what "neurotypical" is without implying that "normal" is "normal".
It has no other meaning other than being the "majority". Think of it this way, if the situation is reversed wherein autistics are the majority of the population, "normal" would mean the autistics.
10. Fascination with one particular subject. In the show, it's whales.This is true. If someone you know is autistic…
Those are very good questions! Sorry this is long too.
> 1. When the little woo recites criminal law - Is it only from her good memory or does she actually understand the meanings behind those words, understand the context?
:: It depends. At least in this show, the character was setup to be a genius. I would assume that even when she was still a kid, she already have a good understanding of the law and how each law relates to other laws.
Not every autistic is a genius but generally, at least according to some papers I've read before, autistics have an IQ considered to be in the genius range. However, the thing with IQ is it does not necessarily translate to actual knowledge.
One may have a high IQ but they're not studying, well, it's wasted. Also, and this is usually ignored, it is natural for IQs to go lower as we age, regardless if one is neurotypical (what is commonly called 'normal') or neurodivergent/neuroatypical/autistic/aspie. Or, the person was not enrolled in a school where the school harnessed the kid's high IQ (in some countries, they don't want to accelerate kids).
So it really depends. At least for our fictional autistic attorney, I would say she was taken cared of and her father did not waste her high IQ, in the end she became an attorney.
I say that also because the interpretation of the law is not black and white. As kid, maybe she still did not have a good grasp of that even though she probably understood the law. For example, her case in episode 1, if she was still a kid, she probably would the same thing as the prosecutor and other attorneys.
But as an adult, whose logic was already trained, she was able to spot things the other attorneys missed. And when things started to slip away from their fingers, she was able to salvage the situation. I would say this was the product of going to school and her thought process further improved.
^_^
> Are they more mature than neurotypical kids of their age? - My guess is they would be, because they are exposed to more information and hence experience and maturity.
This is just me: As kids, generally, I think so. But as an adult, it starts to level. I'm viewing it because autistic kids usually, not always, have a different sent of interests and priorities than most kids.
For example, in my case, at Grade 4, I already read and understood a neurology book (most of it) and I kept reading it from cover to cover. At that same age I was already into chemistry too, and started to study the Periodic Table of Elements. So by high school when I finally got a Chemistry subject, it was easier for me. (As for neurology, unfortunately back in my day, the only way to be a neuroscientist was to study abroad, not an option for us.)
> Does most autistic people have super good memory?
Not really. Speaking from experience, if I get myself into something, I do remember information. But if I have some preferences, like me I hate memorization and remembering numbers, unless I force myself, I don't remember it. I might recall some other time but pulling the information at will? Nope.
For example, I program. I can type programming codes as if I'm speaking a language. But I won't be able to recite to you Section III Paragraph 2 Number 4 Bullet 8 of the Omnibus Code of Some Law. If I read it already, I probably know the spirit of that law but to recite it as it was written, nope, not me.
I would say, at least in the context of the show, the law has become her favourite subject (other than the whales) because there were a lot of criminal law books at home she secretly read when her father was not looking.
> 2. Does autistic people usually have OCD - Like even the little things must be arranged in a perfect manner, cleanliness etc.,
As far as I know and observed, yes. OCD seems to be a part of being autistic. What differs is the degree of being OC; and unlike those who are OCD-only (not autistic), we can overcome our OC-ness (or at least keep it at bay).
Speaking from experience. When I was kid, if there are similar poles along the way, I touch them one by one no matter what. Or if there lines on the pathway, I follow the lines, to h*ll with the crowd (LOLs).
I have one particular OC that I rarely find from other high-functioning autistics and is usually found from "classic autism": when I'm in a department store or supermarket, I must always trace back the path we took around the store, otherwise, it will irritate me to no end. It feels like there is something at my back, some sort of rope that must be untangled.
As I grew up, I learned ways to keep it at bay, like focusing on something to distract myself. Or if I'm with someone, I talk a lot. Another way is listening to music or ambient sounds (like the character's whale sounds; but I prefer forests and water flowing).
Is my OC gone? Nope, not really. Even as an adult, that particular OC-ness sometimes get the best of me and I must trace back my steps otherwise I'll be drained and/or irritated the rest of the day.
OC-ness is a common trait but in varying degrees. And as we grow older, we find ways to cope up with it.
> 3. I find the mannerisms (echolalia, the handshake, a lot of other things) of woo and other autistic people very cute. Does other people find it like that? Is it offensive to say this to an autistic person?
For "echolalia", I actually only learned about that word in this drama's subtitles. I just call it "echo". Is it offending to use "echolalia"? Or to do echolalia to an autistic when your are neurotypical? I'd say it depends.
For neurotypicals, most find it rude. But for neuroatypicals/neurodivergents, it does not make sense for it be rude because repeating an information helps in reminding oneself. Believe it or not, in most schools teachers do teach repetition to help with remembering things … and then when you're older, repetition is suddenly rude. =)) (That's why it doesn't make sense for it to be rude.)
Maybe there are neuroatypicals who will also find it rude, especially the more high-functioning autistic they are (usually these are those who doesn't want to accept they're autistic [for whatever reason] or simply undiagnosed).
For handshakes, touching, hugs. If it is forced or unasked for, it's more of irritating than offensive. Again, it will depend on what is the particular reason of an autistic why s/he doesn't want to be touched.
Some doesn't want to because they set boundaries on things, even at home. This is similar to neurotypical kids "this is mine, this yours, in the middle is a line" thing. But for an autistic, take it seriously.
Some autistics doesn't want to because they have sensitivity to touch. If unasked for, it flares their sensitivity and if they fail in keeping it under their control, they might meltdown.
Some doesn't want to because they have sensitivity to transferring bacteria and germs. Not necessarily you giving them germs, but also the other way around, them transferring to you. (My younger brother is like this; sometimes I teased him about it [even though I know why but you know, siblings].)
Me, as an adult? I learned to live with it. Handshakes, people suddenly hugging you. What I still find a challenge is people touching me at the back as if we're close. That still irritates me a lot to this day. I'm fine with hugging but not that. Haha, it doesn't make sense, right?
Do I find it cute? Still depends per person. I did not find echolalia as "cute" but I did find it funny in the show because of how the characters reacted, especially that scene at the court when the judge answered back and then he reacted when he realized what just happened. That one was hilarious for me.
> 4. I didn't understand why she couldn't answer present when the judge asked. Is there a non-obvious reason?
The app they used called "SignalGram" was deleted from the Google Play App Store.
If the app they showed in this episode was the real "SignalGram" then it means it was based on the "Signal" app itself (the official one). Also, if you look closely, there the word "Signal" is actually at the bottom of the phone screen.
The show is correct as far as security and privacy is concerned, "Signal" is one of the top notch end-to-end-encrypted (e2ee) application available today.
The only catch with Signal is it requires a mobile number. It does provide a very good encryption which is good for security and privacy, but it is not for anonymity (which is good for whistleblowers and similar).
Not all women with autism are the same actually. Crazy, I know.
No issue there. Just updating / additional information. ^_^
These psychologists separated aspergers at some time in the early years. Then a few years ago, they merged the two again under "Autism Spectrum".
In any case, yeah, they're just one and the same. Just varying levels of "functioning" but it is confusing if one was diagnosed during the years when the two were separate.
Tysm for this! I also wanted to ask, if it would be okay, your opinion on casting a neurotypical actor for this…
Good question!
It depends. Hiring someone in the autism spectrum to play a role of an autistic character will surely add authenticity to the character. At the same time, hiring a good actor who can act properly as an autistic, is not bad either.
From an audience standpoint, it's not a big factor for me.
"Representation" is more political than art, and for me, acting and storytelling is an art. Political issues and political correctness shouldn't be mixed in it.
Let's say a film is set in Africa. Would it be better to hire a local or paint an American black?
Politically speaking, hire a local. But if we keep politics out, it doesn't matter. It's their production, it's their money, it's their interpretation of their story. However, casting someone local will be greatly appreciated especially if they can find an actor with the talent they need. (So the question turn ethical now: did they even bother to cast a local?)
Of course, representation is good. But the thing is, when talking about representation, their role doesn't have to be related to what they're representing. Using autism as an example, an actor who is autistic doesn't have to be playing a character who is also autistic. A true representation of autistics is casting autistic actors for any roles that they fit.
Think of it this way. If they do not know who is autistic or not, which actors would they choose? Now, if they knew who are autistic and who are not, how would that affect their casting?
Politics and all these political correctness around us aside, as far as art is concerned, I personally do not mind if the actor casted is autistic or not. Again if they did, it will add more authenticity to the acting.
Look for the Western film entitled "Adam". The main character is an aspie (aspergers syndrome) to be exact, but it's part of the autism spectrum. The actor is not autistic but he did well in playing the part that the show was praised. "Adam" is also in many highly recommended list of shows about the autism spectrum.
There are also a lot of actors who were officially diagnosed as autistic and they haven't played roles related to autism.
Another factor to consider is if it is something documentary. In a documentary film, it would be best to cast someone who is, at least in this case.
But again, personally, I don't mind if they cast a neurodivergent or a neurotypical actor for an autistic character. As long as they can portray it correctly, and not make the character look bad as if the character's autism is a plague or something.
10. Fascination with one particular subject. In the show, it's whales.This is true. If someone you know is autistic…
Haha. Yeah, we usually hear that … superpower. But … it's also a "curse". As an example, in my case, when I'm sleeping I hear the little sound a mounted aircon or indoor aircon makes and it is very annoying.
There was also a case when I worked in a contact center BPO, a voice account was positioned beside our account (non-voice). I had multiple sensory overloads before I found a way to tune their noise out. (We can't listen to music even though we're non-voice, it's against the rules.) I also complained about it because whenever I work for a BPO, I make sure there is no voice account anywhere near wherever I will work because … that, sensory overload.
It's a blessing and a curse. ^_^
As for the subject. I varied. Teenage years, my fascination is in symbolical meanings. For example, I can talk about the meanings of flowers, numbers, colours.
You can actually tell a person's personality and current mindset if you know the symbolical meaning behind these. For example, giving flowers to your love ones, how many flowers are there, which colors, and which flowers? Are the flowers real or artificial? Most people dismiss giving of artificial flowers but it actually gives you an insight to the person. ;)
When I was a kid, I knew every country, capital(s), language name, in the world. I also specialized in the history of the "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Norhern Ireland" (official name); Republic of Ireland; and the Commonwealth of Australia.
Today, my fascination is with my own country's history, especially pre-colonial history, ASEAN and its member nations, China, Japan, Korea. As well as programming.
Actually, I would say religion/faith but most people--autistic and non-autistic--are sensitive when it comes to religion/faith discussions … so I avoid it. But once someone starts to engage me in that subject and they welcome my input, then I'll start talking about it. (And if they want to turn it into a debate, I'll make sure I'll win hahahahaha.)
Which ones in particular? I'm autistic myself, so I can probably explain some things that may sound unusual or…
Ahh. Generally, translations are not accurate especially when it comes to translating Asian languages into English. There will always be something lost in translation.
So far as the story of episode 1 goes, it does look alright, especially on the autism part. The explanations are correct. I think it will be in court cases where they might err since legal terms and laws are different, it's not easy to translate something that only applies in Korea into something the International audience can relate to.
Autism is very different in real life. Not all autistic child appears to be as same as lead actress here. I have…
> I am thankful for the understanding of this disease, but it is not like that in real life.
You need to increase your knowledge and understanding. You calling autism a "disease" is a clear sign you don't know anything nor do you understand what autism is.
> Autism, may results into high IQ but it lacks in almost all other aspects, you will never see a autistic child like this in real world.
Where the heck did you get that assumption? As an autistic, I am deeply offended.
> The most realistic example of an autistic child in drama was when they cast a real actress in Our Blues. Also when a child has autism, they never look like this, you can see how a child with autism is, in series I mentioned above.
Our Blues? That is NOT autism, that is Down Syndrome. Down Syndrome and autism are totally two different things and has absolutely nothing whatsoever that connects them.
Autism is our brain is wired differently. We think differently. We process things differently. We express things differently.
Down Syndrome is caused by an extra chromosome.
For someone claiming to have an understanding of autism, your comment clearly shows you don't have any.
From someone who is autistic, I'm guessing the sound helps her stay calm which led to her learning more and more about whales until it became her favourite subject and an expert at it.
Each of us autistics have at least 1 subject where we know a lot and can talk about it endlessly. Sometimes when making analogies, we also use that subject. Or if we're trying to articulate something going on in our mind, we use that subject. Like how she did in episode 1.
Not all women with autism are the same actually. Crazy, I know.
Not at all. There are people like her. There is no formula to what traits an autistic/aspie should have. Whoever gave you that idea doesn't know anything about us autistics.
As I've said earlier in this thread, think of autism not as a spectrum but as a cyclinder. You add the common traits found in most autistics; then add traits that are not common. Then each trait have varying degrees.
Examples: - Common trait: OCD. But it has varying degrees per austistic. One shows a high degree of OCD while another doesn't. When I was a kid, I had high OCD; when I grew up, I learned ways to "keep it a bay" (but it's not gone, it's still there).
- Common trait: sensory sensitivity/overload. Same thing, varying degrees. Some autistics have sensory sensitivity to touch; some to light; some to sound/noise. Some autistics have sensitivity to all; but there is yet to be an autistic without a sensory sensitivity. The degree is just lower for some to the point that it was usually mistaken as "doesn't exist" but when analyzed properly, it's still there.
- Uncommon trait: love to meet and talk with people
Not all women with autism are the same actually. Crazy, I know.
> "autists", just use "autistics" it's the proper word ever since and to this day.
> high IQ are considered as high functioning"
No.
High Functioning simply means people with autism but can function in society. It has nothing to do with IQ.
"Classic autism" is also called, in professional circles, as "low functioning". If your definition is correct that it has to do with IQ, then you are claiming that "classic autism" are dumb people.
That kind of mindset is typical of someone influenced by the media and showbiz. ;) It's wrong. It's incorrect. It's false. There are many in "classic autism" who have a high IQ; and there are also many in "high functioning" with low IQ.
Lastly, IQ is not consistent. When people age, our IQ tends to go lower. And it doesn't mean you are getting dumber.
Not all women with autism are the same actually. Crazy, I know.
> And as far as I am aware no where in the show has it said that she has aspergers.
It really doesn't matter if a person (real life or fictional) is an aspie or autistic. In the grand scheme of things, aspergers is part of the same autism spectrum, that's how it was originally and a few years back we returned to that same categorisation after many years of separating the two.
To make it simpler to explain, think of a line from left to right. - Left most is "classic autism" is the one most commonly depicted, sensationalized, in shows, and usually exaggerated too. - To the right of "classic autism" is "high functioning autism".
Under the high functioning autism" (again left to right): - Asperger's Syndrome (aspie) - HFA (high functioning autism) - PDD-NOD (Pervasive Developmental Disorder - Not Otherwise Specified)
Of course, explaining it as a line from left to right is simplifying it too much. Personally, I explain it as a cylinder. You add the common traits, then add other not common traits. Then each trait have varying degrees.
So for example, some autistics/aspies have a strong level or degree of OCD (obsessive compulsive disorder). Some don't.
The word "spectrum" itself is misleading. Autism, aspergers, it's all the same. We all have common and uncommon traits, and each of those traits have varying degrees.
Episode 1 feedback from an autistic.Summary: So far, the writer and director got everything correctly and there…
10. Fascination with one particular subject. In the show, it's whales.
This is true. If someone you know is autistic (diagnosed; not diagnosed; unknown) fascination with one particular subject is a very common trait. We know almost everything about a subject we focus on. In the show, the autistic attorney's favourite subject are whales.
So … if you are non-autistic, understand this trait.
---
I'll end with #10, there are more but it's too long now.
1 
Summary: Like in episode 1, this was a well done episode. No exaggeration. No sensationalized portrayal. No stereotyping.
Detailed feedback: (see individual comments below)
Apologies for the "feeling normal and superior". I just hate the word "normal" when it comes to autism discussion because "normal" is relative (and in this subject, the majority). But I have to explain what "neurotypical" is without implying that "normal" is "normal".
It has no other meaning other than being the "majority". Think of it this way, if the situation is reversed wherein autistics are the majority of the population, "normal" would mean the autistics.
> 1. When the little woo recites criminal law - Is it only from her good memory or does she actually understand the meanings behind those words, understand the context?
:: It depends. At least in this show, the character was setup to be a genius. I would assume that even when she was still a kid, she already have a good understanding of the law and how each law relates to other laws.
Not every autistic is a genius but generally, at least according to some papers I've read before, autistics have an IQ considered to be in the genius range. However, the thing with IQ is it does not necessarily translate to actual knowledge.
One may have a high IQ but they're not studying, well, it's wasted. Also, and this is usually ignored, it is natural for IQs to go lower as we age, regardless if one is neurotypical (what is commonly called 'normal') or neurodivergent/neuroatypical/autistic/aspie. Or, the person was not enrolled in a school where the school harnessed the kid's high IQ (in some countries, they don't want to accelerate kids).
So it really depends. At least for our fictional autistic attorney, I would say she was taken cared of and her father did not waste her high IQ, in the end she became an attorney.
I say that also because the interpretation of the law is not black and white. As kid, maybe she still did not have a good grasp of that even though she probably understood the law. For example, her case in episode 1, if she was still a kid, she probably would the same thing as the prosecutor and other attorneys.
But as an adult, whose logic was already trained, she was able to spot things the other attorneys missed. And when things started to slip away from their fingers, she was able to salvage the situation. I would say this was the product of going to school and her thought process further improved.
^_^
> Are they more mature than neurotypical kids of their age? - My guess is they would be, because they are exposed to more information and hence experience and maturity.
This is just me: As kids, generally, I think so. But as an adult, it starts to level. I'm viewing it because autistic kids usually, not always, have a different sent of interests and priorities than most kids.
For example, in my case, at Grade 4, I already read and understood a neurology book (most of it) and I kept reading it from cover to cover. At that same age I was already into chemistry too, and started to study the Periodic Table of Elements. So by high school when I finally got a Chemistry subject, it was easier for me. (As for neurology, unfortunately back in my day, the only way to be a neuroscientist was to study abroad, not an option for us.)
> Does most autistic people have super good memory?
Not really. Speaking from experience, if I get myself into something, I do remember information. But if I have some preferences, like me I hate memorization and remembering numbers, unless I force myself, I don't remember it. I might recall some other time but pulling the information at will? Nope.
For example, I program. I can type programming codes as if I'm speaking a language. But I won't be able to recite to you Section III Paragraph 2 Number 4 Bullet 8 of the Omnibus Code of Some Law. If I read it already, I probably know the spirit of that law but to recite it as it was written, nope, not me.
I would say, at least in the context of the show, the law has become her favourite subject (other than the whales) because there were a lot of criminal law books at home she secretly read when her father was not looking.
> 2. Does autistic people usually have OCD - Like even the little things must be arranged in a perfect manner, cleanliness etc.,
As far as I know and observed, yes. OCD seems to be a part of being autistic. What differs is the degree of being OC; and unlike those who are OCD-only (not autistic), we can overcome our OC-ness (or at least keep it at bay).
Speaking from experience. When I was kid, if there are similar poles along the way, I touch them one by one no matter what. Or if there lines on the pathway, I follow the lines, to h*ll with the crowd (LOLs).
I have one particular OC that I rarely find from other high-functioning autistics and is usually found from "classic autism": when I'm in a department store or supermarket, I must always trace back the path we took around the store, otherwise, it will irritate me to no end. It feels like there is something at my back, some sort of rope that must be untangled.
As I grew up, I learned ways to keep it at bay, like focusing on something to distract myself. Or if I'm with someone, I talk a lot. Another way is listening to music or ambient sounds (like the character's whale sounds; but I prefer forests and water flowing).
Is my OC gone? Nope, not really. Even as an adult, that particular OC-ness sometimes get the best of me and I must trace back my steps otherwise I'll be drained and/or irritated the rest of the day.
OC-ness is a common trait but in varying degrees. And as we grow older, we find ways to cope up with it.
> 3. I find the mannerisms (echolalia, the handshake, a lot of other things) of woo and other autistic people very cute. Does other people find it like that? Is it offensive to say this to an autistic person?
For "echolalia", I actually only learned about that word in this drama's subtitles. I just call it "echo". Is it offending to use "echolalia"? Or to do echolalia to an autistic when your are neurotypical? I'd say it depends.
For neurotypicals, most find it rude. But for neuroatypicals/neurodivergents, it does not make sense for it be rude because repeating an information helps in reminding oneself. Believe it or not, in most schools teachers do teach repetition to help with remembering things … and then when you're older, repetition is suddenly rude. =)) (That's why it doesn't make sense for it to be rude.)
Maybe there are neuroatypicals who will also find it rude, especially the more high-functioning autistic they are (usually these are those who doesn't want to accept they're autistic [for whatever reason] or simply undiagnosed).
For handshakes, touching, hugs. If it is forced or unasked for, it's more of irritating than offensive. Again, it will depend on what is the particular reason of an autistic why s/he doesn't want to be touched.
Some doesn't want to because they set boundaries on things, even at home. This is similar to neurotypical kids "this is mine, this yours, in the middle is a line" thing. But for an autistic, take it seriously.
Some autistics doesn't want to because they have sensitivity to touch. If unasked for, it flares their sensitivity and if they fail in keeping it under their control, they might meltdown.
Some doesn't want to because they have sensitivity to transferring bacteria and germs. Not necessarily you giving them germs, but also the other way around, them transferring to you. (My younger brother is like this; sometimes I teased him about it [even though I know why but you know, siblings].)
Me, as an adult? I learned to live with it. Handshakes, people suddenly hugging you. What I still find a challenge is people touching me at the back as if we're close. That still irritates me a lot to this day. I'm fine with hugging but not that. Haha, it doesn't make sense, right?
Do I find it cute? Still depends per person. I did not find echolalia as "cute" but I did find it funny in the show because of how the characters reacted, especially that scene at the court when the judge answered back and then he reacted when he realized what just happened. That one was hilarious for me.
> 4. I didn't understand why she couldn't answer present when the judge asked. Is there a non-obvious reason?
Apologies, I think the question was cut short?
The app they used called "SignalGram" was deleted from the Google Play App Store.
If the app they showed in this episode was the real "SignalGram" then it means it was based on the "Signal" app itself (the official one). Also, if you look closely, there the word "Signal" is actually at the bottom of the phone screen.
The show is correct as far as security and privacy is concerned, "Signal" is one of the top notch end-to-end-encrypted (e2ee) application available today.
The only catch with Signal is it requires a mobile number. It does provide a very good encryption which is good for security and privacy, but it is not for anonymity (which is good for whistleblowers and similar).
These psychologists separated aspergers at some time in the early years. Then a few years ago, they merged the two again under "Autism Spectrum".
In any case, yeah, they're just one and the same. Just varying levels of "functioning" but it is confusing if one was diagnosed during the years when the two were separate.
Reading the synopsis, it's about autism/aspergers. Is the writer in the spectrum too or they like writing about autism in general?
It depends. Hiring someone in the autism spectrum to play a role of an autistic character will surely add authenticity to the character. At the same time, hiring a good actor who can act properly as an autistic, is not bad either.
From an audience standpoint, it's not a big factor for me.
"Representation" is more political than art, and for me, acting and storytelling is an art. Political issues and political correctness shouldn't be mixed in it.
Let's say a film is set in Africa. Would it be better to hire a local or paint an American black?
Politically speaking, hire a local. But if we keep politics out, it doesn't matter. It's their production, it's their money, it's their interpretation of their story. However, casting someone local will be greatly appreciated especially if they can find an actor with the talent they need. (So the question turn ethical now: did they even bother to cast a local?)
Of course, representation is good. But the thing is, when talking about representation, their role doesn't have to be related to what they're representing. Using autism as an example, an actor who is autistic doesn't have to be playing a character who is also autistic. A true representation of autistics is casting autistic actors for any roles that they fit.
Think of it this way. If they do not know who is autistic or not, which actors would they choose? Now, if they knew who are autistic and who are not, how would that affect their casting?
Politics and all these political correctness around us aside, as far as art is concerned, I personally do not mind if the actor casted is autistic or not. Again if they did, it will add more authenticity to the acting.
Look for the Western film entitled "Adam". The main character is an aspie (aspergers syndrome) to be exact, but it's part of the autism spectrum. The actor is not autistic but he did well in playing the part that the show was praised. "Adam" is also in many highly recommended list of shows about the autism spectrum.
There are also a lot of actors who were officially diagnosed as autistic and they haven't played roles related to autism.
Another factor to consider is if it is something documentary. In a documentary film, it would be best to cast someone who is, at least in this case.
But again, personally, I don't mind if they cast a neurodivergent or a neurotypical actor for an autistic character. As long as they can portray it correctly, and not make the character look bad as if the character's autism is a plague or something.
^_^
LOLs, I think I was going in circles there. ^^;
There was also a case when I worked in a contact center BPO, a voice account was positioned beside our account (non-voice). I had multiple sensory overloads before I found a way to tune their noise out. (We can't listen to music even though we're non-voice, it's against the rules.) I also complained about it because whenever I work for a BPO, I make sure there is no voice account anywhere near wherever I will work because … that, sensory overload.
It's a blessing and a curse. ^_^
As for the subject. I varied. Teenage years, my fascination is in symbolical meanings. For example, I can talk about the meanings of flowers, numbers, colours.
You can actually tell a person's personality and current mindset if you know the symbolical meaning behind these. For example, giving flowers to your love ones, how many flowers are there, which colors, and which flowers? Are the flowers real or artificial? Most people dismiss giving of artificial flowers but it actually gives you an insight to the person. ;)
When I was a kid, I knew every country, capital(s), language name, in the world. I also specialized in the history of the "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Norhern Ireland" (official name); Republic of Ireland; and the Commonwealth of Australia.
Today, my fascination is with my own country's history, especially pre-colonial history, ASEAN and its member nations, China, Japan, Korea. As well as programming.
Actually, I would say religion/faith but most people--autistic and non-autistic--are sensitive when it comes to religion/faith discussions … so I avoid it. But once someone starts to engage me in that subject and they welcome my input, then I'll start talking about it. (And if they want to turn it into a debate, I'll make sure I'll win hahahahaha.)
So far as the story of episode 1 goes, it does look alright, especially on the autism part. The explanations are correct. I think it will be in court cases where they might err since legal terms and laws are different, it's not easy to translate something that only applies in Korea into something the International audience can relate to.
You need to increase your knowledge and understanding. You calling autism a "disease" is a clear sign you don't know anything nor do you understand what autism is.
> Autism, may results into high IQ but it lacks in almost all other aspects, you will never see a autistic child like this in real world.
Where the heck did you get that assumption? As an autistic, I am deeply offended.
> The most realistic example of an autistic child in drama was when they cast a real actress in Our Blues. Also when a child has autism, they never look like this, you can see how a child with autism is, in series I mentioned above.
Our Blues? That is NOT autism, that is Down Syndrome. Down Syndrome and autism are totally two different things and has absolutely nothing whatsoever that connects them.
Autism is our brain is wired differently. We think differently. We process things differently. We express things differently.
Down Syndrome is caused by an extra chromosome.
For someone claiming to have an understanding of autism, your comment clearly shows you don't have any.
I'm autistic so …
No, it is not. It is just a label Neurotypicals (a.k.a. "feeling normal and superior") use to anyone who is not like them.
If the majority of the world population are autistics, then by your own definition neurotypicals are disabled.
We are just different.
oh gawd.
It's autistic not "living with autism".
It is us. It is who we are. It is not something that we are "living with" and can just drop whenever.
Each of us autistics have at least 1 subject where we know a lot and can talk about it endlessly. Sometimes when making analogies, we also use that subject. Or if we're trying to articulate something going on in our mind, we use that subject. Like how she did in episode 1.
As I've said earlier in this thread, think of autism not as a spectrum but as a cyclinder. You add the common traits found in most autistics; then add traits that are not common. Then each trait have varying degrees.
Examples:
- Common trait: OCD. But it has varying degrees per austistic. One shows a high degree of OCD while another doesn't. When I was a kid, I had high OCD; when I grew up, I learned ways to "keep it a bay" (but it's not gone, it's still there).
- Common trait: sensory sensitivity/overload. Same thing, varying degrees. Some autistics have sensory sensitivity to touch; some to light; some to sound/noise. Some autistics have sensitivity to all; but there is yet to be an autistic without a sensory sensitivity. The degree is just lower for some to the point that it was usually mistaken as "doesn't exist" but when analyzed properly, it's still there.
- Uncommon trait: love to meet and talk with people
- Uncommon trait: fine with standing on stage
And so on.
> high IQ are considered as high functioning"
No.
High Functioning simply means people with autism but can function in society. It has nothing to do with IQ.
"Classic autism" is also called, in professional circles, as "low functioning". If your definition is correct that it has to do with IQ, then you are claiming that "classic autism" are dumb people.
That kind of mindset is typical of someone influenced by the media and showbiz. ;) It's wrong. It's incorrect. It's false. There are many in "classic autism" who have a high IQ; and there are also many in "high functioning" with low IQ.
Lastly, IQ is not consistent. When people age, our IQ tends to go lower. And it doesn't mean you are getting dumber.
It really doesn't matter if a person (real life or fictional) is an aspie or autistic. In the grand scheme of things, aspergers is part of the same autism spectrum, that's how it was originally and a few years back we returned to that same categorisation after many years of separating the two.
To make it simpler to explain, think of a line from left to right.
- Left most is "classic autism" is the one most commonly depicted, sensationalized, in shows, and usually exaggerated too.
- To the right of "classic autism" is "high functioning autism".
Under the high functioning autism" (again left to right):
- Asperger's Syndrome (aspie)
- HFA (high functioning autism)
- PDD-NOD (Pervasive Developmental Disorder - Not Otherwise Specified)
Of course, explaining it as a line from left to right is simplifying it too much. Personally, I explain it as a cylinder. You add the common traits, then add other not common traits. Then each trait have varying degrees.
So for example, some autistics/aspies have a strong level or degree of OCD (obsessive compulsive disorder). Some don't.
The word "spectrum" itself is misleading. Autism, aspergers, it's all the same. We all have common and uncommon traits, and each of those traits have varying degrees.
This is true. If someone you know is autistic (diagnosed; not diagnosed; unknown) fascination with one particular subject is a very common trait. We know almost everything about a subject we focus on. In the show, the autistic attorney's favourite subject are whales.
So … if you are non-autistic, understand this trait.
---
I'll end with #10, there are more but it's too long now.