A Little Something on Recent DSM-V Revisions on Autism

By now most of you know that Asperger's Syndrome will no longer be known by that name, but be confined into Autism Spectrum Disorder.  Ok, so what's the problem?

Well, according to some the rewording of what constitutes as ASD eliminates some that need this diagnosis, because they don't quite fit what the new DSM might deem as ASD.

How will this affect those that already are diagnosed with Asperger's and those that are getting benefits such as Social Security and Medicaid/Medicare?  From what I understand, once you are considered disabled, unless the doctor thinks you really can work and that is all between you and your doctor.  A doctor is not going to change whether you still qualify as disabled unless he and you truly see that you can work and that there are no obstacles in your way.  Your benefits stay.

How does this affect those that may need the diagnosis, because they haven't gotten one and are in need of services either to get into the work force or that they just can't get or keep work, because of the problems Asperger's causes them to have?  Again I'm going to have to go with the fact that this is between you and your doctor.  It's what he thinks.  As far as I can tell the DSM is a guide.  He decides whether you fit the criteria.  He decides if you fit the symptoms and he decides whether or not you need the diagnosis.  It's nothing but a guide and it's not whether you fit them exactly.  If you need it for benefits and he or she feels that you are disabled enough to get some kind of diagnosis, he/she is going to give you one that fits.  Likely it will be ASD.  The book is there to help the doctor, but the doctor has the ultimate say in the matter.  The DSM is not exactly law.  It's not worded to be precise.  So again it is up to the doctor whether it is needed.

So should you be worried about the changes to DSM-V?  Probably not.  If you feel it necessary to bring up to your doctor or someone higher up that might have to do with this manual, by all means do that, but I really don't think this changes anything, really.

Can You Hear Me, Now? *Silence*

"If a tree falls in the woods, does it make a sound?"

Sure it does.  But if no one can hear it, then how does anyone know, right?  What if no one was there to hear it? What if no one could hear you?  What if you couldn't communicate online, because sites didn't off you the ability to post anything, because they were afraid you'd use their site to display copyright infringing material and ultimately get blacked out?

Keep in mind I have my doubts that SOPA will go through, but what if it did?  That's what many sites are trying to tell all of us.  Wikipedia has gone black for the day to show what it would be like.  They're doing this to let people know that they want people to raise their voice about the issue.  Let's speak up.

Want to see what your friend's favorite moment in "Family Guy" on the last episode?  Tough!  He'll have to tell you in his own words.  Doesn't have the same effect, does it?  Nope.  Not at all.  It may sound funny, but you won't get the same effect.  Plus there are some things that just don't translate into words so well.  That's probably the smallest nitpick I'd have about it.  I could talk about the evils of uploading copyrighted material, but I'm guilty enough for watching those clips as I said before.  Besides unless it is a full episode, it just seems that the media is kinda of anal about it.

Take a look at You Tube.  People abuse the heck out of it.  I'm guilty of watching the illegally pirated clips, but I don't upload them.  Google doesn't exactly have the man power to take them all down, let alone even know about every single one that gets put up.  That puts Google in jeopardy of being blacked out by the media.  Bye bye, You Tube.  This goes for any website where you can post even text.  What's stopping someone from putting up a link to a foreign site to download illegal movies from?  Nothing, but the law.  But there are soooo many of us and compared to the media.  It's "the few of them versus the lot of us."  Or in this case "their money vs. our empty pockets."

Money talks in politics.  No lie.  Everyone knows it.  They have tried before to trample on our rights and in some cases have been successful.

I'd like to see how DVD and music sales go after this to be honest.  I would end up saying "the hell with all of you." and just cancel Netflix.  Learn how to cloak myself online the best I can and pirate things under cover.  Why should they get my money if they don't deserve it?

"Well technically they do deserve it since they worked hard on what you stole."
Are you talking to me?  Don't forget they stole something much more valuable from everyone else than their precious movies.

Open your hearts, minds and spirits and empty your wallets, media corporations of America.  Without us, you're nothing.  It's our money that got you where you are today.  Start showing the little guy some damn respect.  You didn't get to where you are today without us.

Invisible Disablities

So recently PA is starting to crack down on people that have over $2000 in savings and taking their benefits from them.  That's great, because it cracks down on potential fraud of the disability system.  What happened after the article was posted were comments that were aimed mostly at people who they figure can work, but don't.  Which is right.  They should be happy.  The people committing these frauds shouldn't be getting disability.  Some of them pointed to signs that they aren't disabled such as them having a Wii or a Playstation 3 and new furnature and shopping for things all the time.  I suppose those are obvious signs if they're getting them all the time, but as far as the gaming systems go, disabled people need to have something to do besides read (which some have an aversion to.  Me for instance, but I do like to read non-fiction that pertains to me.) and listening to music all the time doesn't quite cut it either.  TV?  Why would someone want to do that all the time.  It's passive entertainment.  What I'm saying is that they need to have SOMETHING to do, if they can't work.

So why can't they work and they can do that?  Here's the thing.  First of all when a person is disabled and someone complains that "Oh, they can work," or like "They're getting free money, just lazing around doing things for fun."  Well, yeah, some of them should at least do something like volunteer.  But some people can't even do that.  People where masks.  That's the biggest thing.  They try to pretend to be normal, because they don't want you to know that you have a mental disability and that you don't feel ok or perhaps that there are other things that employers see that keep you from getting a job.  Why can't you see it and an employer can?  Employers are trained to see your weaknesses and they do not hire you because you are weak in areas they want you to be strong in.  That's the big problem.  We can't get a job, because we are turned down, because they see right through us.  They think "OK, you aren't good for this job, but you probably are capable at some other job."  And then we get a job somewhere and days later, they ask us to quit or be fired.  I've been through ALL of this.

So, that's an invisible disability.  It's a disability that people who are not doctors, nor are employers looking critically at you, can not see.  If you are neither of these people, you can should not judge nor can you make the call that a person is "getting a free ride."

The ones with disabilities need to do what I do and what others I know with disabilities do.  They go to a group or seek counseling.

Some of us even want to work.  I have a college degree in computers.  You'd think I could find something.  In my experience, I can't.  I've been doing this for years.  I've been holding on to an idea of going into work for myself, but I don't have the know how to do all the tax and accounting work for myself.  I also don't have the money to invest in such a thing.  My resources are limited.

So as you can see, I understand the frustration of the worker, but people need to see our side of things and walk in our shoes for a bit.  It's not as easy as it looks.

I'm Ready For "Final Fantasy XIII-2."

It's funny how action games, especially people and their fighting games and their shooters, make people tense when they play them.  It just seems strange that I play those and I don't get real intense.

So, The last few bosses from the end of Chapter 11 through 13 made me tense up so much that my legs felt funny and I'd walk funny for a short time.  I'd get headaches.  It's things like that.  But Orphan's first form made me so tense that it invoked a lot of anxiety the first time I tried to beat him.  I tried so many times that night that I couldn't sleep well that night and I take anxiety medications like Xanax.  The pill didn't help that night.  I didn't think I'd beat him even after reading how some of the moves that Orphan pulls can nearly kill you and if you don't have a way to get rid of the debuffs that are put on you that keep you from using magic or if you don't change paradigms to healing in time, you're screwed.  And if he casts an instant death spell on your main, you're screwed there, too.  There was this item that if you had 3 of them on it would make the chance of resisting it 66% at best.

I upped my stats on the Crystalium (sp?) all the way for all the characters and I did finally beat it.  I did die the first time after doing that.  It was strange that it was the instant death and there was only a 34% chance that that could happen on my main character with those items equipped.  I had items that took off the debuffs that affected me badly.  Anyways, you have to beat Orphan a second time within a time limit, but that's the easy part.  It's so easy you can't lose unless you don't try.

But anyway that has been the most intense game as far as trying to beat the bosses, especially for an RPG.  RPGs don't do this to me usually.  They're the ones you sit down to relax with.  It's so strange.

I can't wait for "Final Fantasy XIII-2."  They didn't change the fighting for the most part.  They did tweak it a little and add to it, i read.  There's more to explore.  Bigger areas.  There is so much more to the next one that I really really want this next one so bad.

Living in an area with a small population can have its downsides

I live in a rural area.  Small population.  The town I'm outside of is really small.  Even the closest cities aren't that big.  Don't get me wrong.  I love the solitude and the peacefulness of where I live, but if I could at least live closer to really big places that'd be great.

Around this area and even in the small cities surrounding, it is a lot of country folk.  They don't care much about anime. They don't care so much about scifi.  They don't go around touting the newest technology or geeking out at the latest RPG.  Sure there are the few, but they are so hard to find.

There are no anime, comic book, scifi, horror, cons nearby.  There are no geekery clubs to hang around people with my like mind.  It feels so desolate sometimes trying to find even one person I can feel anything in common with.

I've tried so hard to find people in this area even using the internet for this very reason and I can not even find one person.  There are the few that I know and that's very few.  I want to hang out with more people like me.  I want to find a girlfriend that shares these interests.  It's just so lonely here not having much in common with the people I have grown in the same area with.

I hate to rant on and on about this, but it is a shame that people can not give any interest into the things I love most.  People just stick to what is popular.  They don't go searching for things that are different.  Things that are a little less common.  That's why a place with a bigger population would be nice to be closer to.  The chances of running into someone with the same interests would be bigger.  There would be anime stores or store with anime sections.  Places that hold my interest more than just these tiny little unheard of places that do not have any of the good stuff even if it might be related.

3 Movie Suggestions for Christmas!

Friends With Benefits? That Makes No Sense.

"Friends with benefits" is a concept that I can't fathom as an aspie or even just as a human being.  (I guess I don't need to just be an aspie not to understand.)  How can someone have sex with someone who is just a friend.  Wouldn't there have to be something there for them to have sex?  I understand it's probably lust or just the burning desire to have it.

Everyone has that, but when you're doing it the other person is seeing you bare, not physically, but emotionally and everything.  They're seeing you almost as a whole.  There is a lot more to sex than just mechanical and biological desires.  You're putting everything out on the line when you're having sex for the first time.  You're showing and giving your all to someone.  

Why do I see it this way?  Why not?  I can barely handle a hug from some people, especially from someone I barely know.  I feel uncomfortable with physical affections like hugs or kisses.  So that's the aspie part of me. Aspies, we have a hard time with connections to people.  That's why this concept of "sex without emotion or little emotion" doesn't seem to make sense to me.  I would have to be terribly comfortable with someone to do that with someone.  That's why sex isn't all "I'm horny, so I've got to do something about it."  I get desires like anyone else, but it doesn't make sense to do this without knowing what you're getting into.  The questions you'd have to ask are "How is this going to affect the relationship I'm in?"  "How will this make me feel?"  "How will this make my partner feel?"  "Will it break things?"  "Will it make things?"  "How do I feel?"