By now you've probably, possibly, heard of Michael Savage's remarks calling autism the "illness du jour" and claiming that "99 percent" of autism cases are "a brat who hasn't been told to cut the act out". The ensuing controversy led Slate to publish an article explaining how autism is actually diagnosed. And as a result, until recently the number one most e-mailed story (and still appearing on the list) on Slate had been... Gregg Easterbrook's report on a Cornell study suggesting a link between television viewing and autism. From 2006.
There have been a lot of proposed theories about the cause of the rise in autism diagnoses over the decades. Chemicals in vaccines were being loudly trumpeted until they were banned and autism diagnoses kept rising (and it was, in retrospect, kind of ridiculous anyway). Some people attribute increased awareness of autism's existence; others attribute the constantly broadening definitions of autism. Myself, I was turned on by a teacher I had in high school to what might be called the "Darwinist" theory, which probably explains some of my neuroses, both because the idea informs the neuroses and because the neuroses inform the idea: in the information age, so many of the jobs out there require logical processing skills, which autistics tend to naturally possess, so they tend to thrive and reproduce, whereas before they were too socially awkward to get laid. Asperger's syndrome is the future "norm" of the human race! Get used to it! (Would it be too conceited for me to refer to myself as homo superior?)
The Cornell study, though, is especially interesting to me (protests in the comments and general part of a blame-television tradition aside) not just on its own terms, but even more so because of Easterbrook's explanation of it. Easterbrook, who had hypothesized a television-autism link even before learning of the study, further hypothesized that for millenia, the human race had been raised on three-dimensional images. Once infants to two-year-olds started being raised on the two-dimensional images of the television set, it warped their minds in who knows what ways.
I would carry this one step further and suggest that autistics literally see the world differently - not merely process the same images differently, but literally see a different picture than a non-autistic. I can see out of my right eye, but I'm somewhat convinced it sort of "turns off" or at least runs on low power when my left eye is open. I can only wink my right eye - even when I think I'm winking my left eye it's the right eye that closes - and when both eyes are closed I similarly can only open my left eye without using my hands to hold the left eye closed. (I don't know how normal this is.) I also don't really see any difference in objects with depth when seeing with one or two eyes; similar to a painting that can give an illusion of depth, proportions and general shapes, not to mention lighting, can make the existence of depth clear even with no depth perception to speak of.
Regardless, autistics serve a valuable role in society if their quirks and talents are properly nurtured and exploited, which is why I'm offended that the WWE is teaming up with Jenny McCarthy's Generation Rescue charity, whose slogan is "autism is reversible" and which still believes in the rather-discredited mercury-in-the-vaccines and germ theories, and which supports giving "biomedical intervention" to kids as a means of fighting autism (including the "gluten-free diet" approach, which when tried on me, made my problems worse in the short term). By their own admission, "the cause of this epidemic of NDs is extremely controversial", and much that is on their web site is familiar blame-corporate-America rhetoric and based on questionable research, yet the WWE seems to be treating it as though it's as uncontroversial as the United Way or Salvation Army. (It doesn't help that WWE is advertising that McCarthy will be "stepping into the ring to fight autism" as though autism were on the level of cancer or AIDS.)
(Oh, and don't ask me how I found out about this in the first place when there is shockingly little controversy about it, okay?)
The real "disease" of autism lies with everyone who doesn't have it, in assuming that everyone fits a certain mold of the "ideal" or "normal" person until it's too late, and well thereafter. (Which is why I use my "about me" posts to give advice to people trying to deal with me, especially in real life.) Let's try and keep the uniqueness and talents of those with autism and related "disorders" instead of trying to get everyone to march in lockstep and become just like everyone else.
Showing posts with label wrestling. Show all posts
Showing posts with label wrestling. Show all posts
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
The Strange Case of Chris Benoit
WWE wrestler Chris Benoit was found dead alongside his wife Nancy and son Daniel on Monday, and all three deaths appear to be the work of Benoit himself.
The reaction to which has led to some interesting insights on human nature, or at least American culture. It seems that people's revulsion to murder outweighs their sorrow for a figure that, up until his death, was rather well-respected in the wrestling community.
People have overcome their sadness and disbelief and switched to anger at Benoit. Many people are now upset with WWE for dedicating last night's "Monday Night Raw" to Benoit's death. (The show was originally to be a memorial service to the fictionally-dead Vince McMahon, but that storyline appears to be dead.) "World Wrestling Entertainment owner Vince McMahon opened tonight’s Extreme Championship Wrestling episode by saying that Chris Benoit’s name would not be mentioned at any other point during the telecast because of the revelations that have surfaced about the murder/suicide since a Benoit ntribute show aired on last night’s episode of Monday Night Raw."
Um... what? So a guy (as it is likely to turn out) goes a little insane and kills his family and then kills himself and we focus on the murders? Don't get me wrong, murder is bad, but does it change all the accomplishments of Benoit's life? (Okay, I guess it does.) Can anyone really blame WWE for showing a tribute to one of its greatest wrestlers, especially since the "murderer" news hadn't come out at the time?
Meanwhile, various news outlets are already speculating about the possible role of steroids in Benoit's rampage, and the whole story is likely to result in a lot of renewed attention towards wrestling that it really doesn't need...
The reaction to which has led to some interesting insights on human nature, or at least American culture. It seems that people's revulsion to murder outweighs their sorrow for a figure that, up until his death, was rather well-respected in the wrestling community.
People have overcome their sadness and disbelief and switched to anger at Benoit. Many people are now upset with WWE for dedicating last night's "Monday Night Raw" to Benoit's death. (The show was originally to be a memorial service to the fictionally-dead Vince McMahon, but that storyline appears to be dead.) "World Wrestling Entertainment owner Vince McMahon opened tonight’s Extreme Championship Wrestling episode by saying that Chris Benoit’s name would not be mentioned at any other point during the telecast because of the revelations that have surfaced about the murder/suicide since a Benoit ntribute show aired on last night’s episode of Monday Night Raw."
Um... what? So a guy (as it is likely to turn out) goes a little insane and kills his family and then kills himself and we focus on the murders? Don't get me wrong, murder is bad, but does it change all the accomplishments of Benoit's life? (Okay, I guess it does.) Can anyone really blame WWE for showing a tribute to one of its greatest wrestlers, especially since the "murderer" news hadn't come out at the time?
Meanwhile, various news outlets are already speculating about the possible role of steroids in Benoit's rampage, and the whole story is likely to result in a lot of renewed attention towards wrestling that it really doesn't need...
Labels:
human nature,
my comments on the news,
wrestling
Friday, April 13, 2007
Sports Watcher for the weekend of 4/14-15
All times PDT.
Saturday
1-3 PM: MISL Soccer, Detroit at Milwaukee (VS.). Did you know the Detroit Ignition are an expansion team? You wouldn't be so impressed if you knew four teams make the playoffs... out of a six-team league.
4-6:30 PM: NHL Hockey, Tampa Bay at New Jersey (CBC). Folks in Canada are incenced the game between the Pittsburgh Penguins (w/Sid the Kid) and Ottawa Senators (only Canadian team in the Eastern Conference Playoffs) is not in prime time, and they have to watch an all-American game on CBC, solely to appease NBC. But the worst part is, the game CBC is airing isn't available nationally in the States! Personally, I blame NBC for not showing any hockey in primetime other than the Finals. If you really want to grow the game so much in the States by force-feeding us Sidney Crosby, would it really hurt to put it in primetime on by far the weakest night of the week, which the Big Four hardly bother to program anyway?
(Before you think "Is that a sign they're adding insult to injury by throwing CBC a game no one on either side of the border cares about?" consider that the game on Versus pits the 8-seed Islanders "versus" the 1-seed Sabres. Talk about a squash.)
(Incidentially, while CBC recently locked up a long-term deal with the NHL, NBC only re-upped for one more year with an option for a second... which at first glance appears to be a retread of the previous deal, which was similar, until you note that this coming year is also the last year of the NBA on ABC.)
Sunday
10:30-3 PM: NASCAR Racing, Samsung 500 (FOX). Three drivers have over 900 points out of five with 800. It's lonely at the top of NASCAR.
5-8 PM: MLB Baseball, San Diego @ Los Angeles (ESPN). It's Jackie Robinson Day in MLB and Bud Selig is allowing any player to wear his number; the Dodgers, the team that first put him in the big leagues, is one of a few teams doing it for everybody (Mike Cameron is the only one for the Padres). Expect more 42's than even Douglas Adams could have ever dreamed. Clearly that day will be the day our planet is obliterated for a freeway bypass.
Baseball and hockey pre-empt boxing, TNA wrestling, and BodogFight MMA from the Watcher, but I did find out that my local cable system now shows exactly THREE PPV channels (outside the porn-only channels), which show porno in lighter hours than you'd think. Is "on demand" creating a new world, one which could force boxing, wrestling, and MMA to re-think their strategies as they increasingly become the only reason for PPV's existence (alongside porn, but that might be headed for "on demand" as well once parental controls are advanced enough to allow it)? Spike TV will carry UFC 70 for free in the States next week in what could be the most watched (by network executives) and most pivotal sports event on television in recent memory. It could be a test that could establish, once and for all, the viability and popularity of MMA, could be a "test of the waters" for boxing and MMA, to determine if cable is financially viable, to determine if it's time to come out of the PPV shelter and possibly on the road to respectability, and if that part's successful, it could be one final nail in the coffin for PPV. (What it would do to professional wrestling, for which PPV is an integral part of the business model to the point where a "big event" happens once a month, not once a year, is anyone's guess.)
Saturday
1-3 PM: MISL Soccer, Detroit at Milwaukee (VS.). Did you know the Detroit Ignition are an expansion team? You wouldn't be so impressed if you knew four teams make the playoffs... out of a six-team league.
4-6:30 PM: NHL Hockey, Tampa Bay at New Jersey (CBC). Folks in Canada are incenced the game between the Pittsburgh Penguins (w/Sid the Kid) and Ottawa Senators (only Canadian team in the Eastern Conference Playoffs) is not in prime time, and they have to watch an all-American game on CBC, solely to appease NBC. But the worst part is, the game CBC is airing isn't available nationally in the States! Personally, I blame NBC for not showing any hockey in primetime other than the Finals. If you really want to grow the game so much in the States by force-feeding us Sidney Crosby, would it really hurt to put it in primetime on by far the weakest night of the week, which the Big Four hardly bother to program anyway?
(Before you think "Is that a sign they're adding insult to injury by throwing CBC a game no one on either side of the border cares about?" consider that the game on Versus pits the 8-seed Islanders "versus" the 1-seed Sabres. Talk about a squash.)
(Incidentially, while CBC recently locked up a long-term deal with the NHL, NBC only re-upped for one more year with an option for a second... which at first glance appears to be a retread of the previous deal, which was similar, until you note that this coming year is also the last year of the NBA on ABC.)
Sunday
10:30-3 PM: NASCAR Racing, Samsung 500 (FOX). Three drivers have over 900 points out of five with 800. It's lonely at the top of NASCAR.
5-8 PM: MLB Baseball, San Diego @ Los Angeles (ESPN). It's Jackie Robinson Day in MLB and Bud Selig is allowing any player to wear his number; the Dodgers, the team that first put him in the big leagues, is one of a few teams doing it for everybody (Mike Cameron is the only one for the Padres). Expect more 42's than even Douglas Adams could have ever dreamed. Clearly that day will be the day our planet is obliterated for a freeway bypass.
Baseball and hockey pre-empt boxing, TNA wrestling, and BodogFight MMA from the Watcher, but I did find out that my local cable system now shows exactly THREE PPV channels (outside the porn-only channels), which show porno in lighter hours than you'd think. Is "on demand" creating a new world, one which could force boxing, wrestling, and MMA to re-think their strategies as they increasingly become the only reason for PPV's existence (alongside porn, but that might be headed for "on demand" as well once parental controls are advanced enough to allow it)? Spike TV will carry UFC 70 for free in the States next week in what could be the most watched (by network executives) and most pivotal sports event on television in recent memory. It could be a test that could establish, once and for all, the viability and popularity of MMA, could be a "test of the waters" for boxing and MMA, to determine if cable is financially viable, to determine if it's time to come out of the PPV shelter and possibly on the road to respectability, and if that part's successful, it could be one final nail in the coffin for PPV. (What it would do to professional wrestling, for which PPV is an integral part of the business model to the point where a "big event" happens once a month, not once a year, is anyone's guess.)
Labels:
auto racing,
baseball,
boxing,
classic da blog,
misl,
nhl,
sports watcher,
ufc,
wrestling
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)