loyalty to the party

I would never have the confidence to throw a party, nor feel socially placed so to do. But I don't feel raging envy of the NTs who can do it, I feel concern, that it is quite perilous for them too and too easy to backfire in a world where social meannness exists.

Yesterday I was at a new home celebration, that only turned out to be described as a party when actually there. The hosts were churchy folks, whose company is far more sensible, so you would imagine nicer, than the laddish type of folks whose parties aspies would generally keep a wide radius away from. Yet they were still not totally lucky in avoiding receiving gratuitous meanness for their effort in holding the occasion.

As soon as one of the hosts' sister arrived, she said "Your party's really bombing." "Oh shut up." I thought to throw in "You can make it bomb some more."

I have seen it happen before. Instant flashback to a time when I was in an anti-fascist campaign who were supposed to be really into inclusion and obviously campaigning for it, yet one set of flatmates liked to keep throwing parties and one of their regular guests liked to keep saying "This party's flagging." Repeteadly and labouring the point.

Why does anyone ever hold parties in a world where that can happen? I never would. Is it just to look or feel stronger for doing it? Yet in order to suffer the least amount of visible hurt from it they have to treat the experience like a joke and outwardly just proceed as if it is not true. But how can they be sure it is not true, think of the anxiety whether it is true that could be sown? to hang oppressively over every conversational pause, making it more tense. Yes NTs do actually have conversational pauses, no topic is inexhaustible.

Maurice Frank

A milestone to prize

One of the childhood disasters that has quite commonly happened to aspies is to be involved with the gifted children movement. Isolated spikes of special ability in an aspie's focal interests may be overoptimistically misconstrued as meaning a high educational ability.

Some progress in an answer just received from the National Association for Gifted Children is of enough interest to need recording fron the reference of anyone who experienced the gifted movement being totally on the side of unchecked teacher authority. They now realise the term "gifted and talented" has impacted some lives badly and they want to call it "high learning potential", okay that could still be dangerous, and they state the objective of " personal success ie what they want to achieve." Now that is seriously progress. As recently as 1998 supporters of New Labour's high pressure policy were openly on radio 4 praising the prospect of "making" the kids work very hard.

And they have now said they are into "developing a children's Bill of Rights" "to help prevent issues of this nature." It is a milestone shift that has come 40 years overdue. Their whole scene needs holding to it.

Maurice Frank