Asperger's to Tourette's: British PM's "jibe" divides online community

Summary: Ridiculing a significant minority of a society can fragment and fracture a nation. While the UK spearheads equality, the prime minister's comments mocking a disability negate our positive cultural shift.

Ridicule comes from a lack of understanding. A lack of understanding comes from an unwillingness to learn.

Each time someone in the street belittles another based on a fact of life one cannot control, it fragments society that little bit further. When a leader of a nation does so, the top-level down effects can be felt for an immeasurable period of time.

In an interview with the Sunday Telegraph, British prime minister David Cameron compared the UK's opposition treasury minister, who suffers from a stammer, as "like having someone with Tourette's sitting opposite you".

The comments were on par with President Obama's remarks about his bowling skill being "like the Special Olympics", or former prime minister Gordon Brown's "bigoted woman" remarks which arguably led to his party and him losing the election.

But the backlash has been minimal, in what has been a week of high-profile political gaffes in the country.

Cameron apologised on BBC television, saying it was an "off the cuff" remark.

Tourette's syndrome is a neurological condition characterised by different kinds of ‘tics', from involuntary vocal actions through to full-blown limb shaking.

I suffer -- and I use the term carefully -- with the condition on a daily basis.

It is not the first time Cameron has made an "off the cuff" remark. Early last year, he mimicked a phrase in a popular British television advert, calling on one opposition member of Parliament to, "calm down, dear", in what was seen as a sexist remark. He apologised shortly after for causing any offence.

Considering this is the man who leads what is seemingly one of the most culturally aware nations in the world, his comments are not only damaging to his administration, but to the entire nation, for which he represents on the world stage.

But so many ‘hidden' disabilities are entirely misjudged or even ridiculed through lack of understanding and sheer ignorance.

Asperger's for "geeks" vs. Tourette's for the "sweary"

It is likely that the IT industry has the largest percentage of people with Asperger's and other autistic spectrum disorders. Some may not be diagnosed until they are much older and far out of their teenage years.

"Forgive me, I have ADD", one sufferer told me, when they engage with new colleagues at their IT-oriented workplace. Everyone laughs and says, "Yeah, so do I". In some sub-cultures, it is like wearing glasses. It's almost expected of you. At very least, the condition is pre-empted.

But stereotypes come from somewhere. Popular culture can identify common or even less-common markers to identify prominent features to a particular condition, disability, or even a nation of people.

While data is limited, the IT industry may have a higher proportion of those who suffer on the autistic spectrum disorders. But how much of it replies on a stereotype? Hacker News may regularly make reference to autistic spectrum disorders, but in reality, we just don't know how prevalent such conditions are within the community.

Tourette's sufferers have a unique set of symptoms, a similar characteristic to Asperger's. Only one in ten suffer from the ‘swearing' tic, known as coprolalia. From 1988's Rain Man to "Tourette's Guy" on YouTube, these stereotypes remain at the front of our view of certain disabilities, disorders and conditions. Within society, most conditions to the wider public are mostly misunderstood.

Autistic spectrum disorders are one of the most misunderstood conditions. Many experts are still investigating the causation and the vast array of symptoms. There is no one "scale' that anyone can seem to agree on. You can have highly functioning Asperger's combined with ADD (attention deficit disorder), or pure ADD with a different level of functionality. We only know so much about the human brain, and we are only now beginning to understand how previously unknown parts of the brain works.

Clinically to socially, flippantly comparing one inequality to another is careless, vacuous and downright discriminatory. Disabilities or religions, sexuality or any other dimension of difference, should not be compared. One disability is no more difficult to cope with than another. It is individualised and personalised to that singular entity of human flesh and bone.

Our disability can be part of our identity, and with that identity, Cameron has without thought devalued an aspect to many of our lives. ZDNet's Violet Blue considers the ‘tech connection' to Asperger's and other mental health factors in the technology community.

Any generalisations of a widely misunderstood condition continues to perpetuate the stereotype.

The Anglo-American cultural divide

After spending a lot of time in the United States, most Americans I encountered do not see 'hidden' disabilities like Tourette's. It is not as though they are ignorant of such conditions, but simply do not see it. I can tic, shout out the most offensive words, twitch visibly within someone's sights, and yet receive no physical or verbal response.

To this day, I do not know why.

Many within my own culture will engage in full-on mockery and cruelty. Some enjoy pointing, laughing and acting in a way that would make most others feel sick to the stomach.

Cameron's comments, though made outside Parliament and against a minority of collective disabled people and sufferers of all conditions in the UK, will affect all disabled people. What is the difference in mocking one subset of society, yet not equally mocking those in wheelchairs, or with Asperger's, or with Down's syndrome, for example? Why is Tourette's ‘fair game' for mockery and humour?

Under UK law, there is no statute to govern how those with disabilities are treated in everyday society.

The House of Commons is an archaic, bloated, sluggish device. Comedy for a politician often does not come naturally, and is more like ‘having a crack' than anything else. While members of the House of Commons are enjoy parliamentary privilege to say as they please without fear of legal retribution -- even towards one another -- rules of society should be adhered to, whether as social convention or in written law.

The law makes it: "unlawful to discriminate against a person on the grounds of disability in the areas of employment, provision of goods, facilities and services and buying or renting land or property". Outside these realms, legal case law and set precedence, for which the UK's legal system is based upon, is weak at best.

It is against UK law to discriminate against a gender in a workplace, as it is to discriminate against someone with a disability in the same setting. Yet, it is a criminal public order offence to cause "aggravated harassment, alarm of distress" based on religion or race.

But hot on the minds of recent events in the UK, someone can be arrested and charged for racially abusing a footballer on Twitter, yet it is wholly unfair that a member of the public, let alone the prime minister, can use "abusive or insulting" language -- as per section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 -- about someone's disability.

Cameron's comments are not only unpunishable by law, but he also enjoys a lack of direct accountability unlike the vast majority in society. He cannot be fired. Despite his ‘accountability to the electorate', his words arguably do not ‘matter' enough to be a resigning issue. The prime minister, whoever may hold the position of any political affiliation, is almost untouchable. The position suffers little to no retribution.

While the comments may stem from thoughtlessness rather than maliciousness, it can still give others the technical authority to follow suit.

The prime minister is in a position of 'ultimate authority', but more than that he is the person who needs to set a positive example in terms of the way others' behave on behalf of the nation.

Social media reacts, with mixed results

Politics aside, Cameron's words will have impact on the disabled community. His comments have given carte blanche to those with prejudice to act in a way that is widely believed to be socially unacceptable.

While Cameron's comments mark only a minority of society, a significant number of web users nevertheless take it upon themselves to use the focus for their own humour.

But the context in which the word is used in brings it back into common usage. Twitter, Facebook, and the wider online community reacted to Cameron's tasteless remark, often bringing the validity and reality of the condition into disrepute.

While at the time of writing this, many tweets focused on Cameron's comments negatively, others are taking the opportunity to bandwagon the term for their own points of ridicule.

But because Cameron has focused on Tourette's, it spirals the social media-enabled web to then reintroduce it into further negativity.

Because social media is borderless, one man's comments can be spread globally in a matter of seconds. A UK-made comments becomes a worldwide outcry, as seen with many other instances of poor judgement and tasteless remarks. The discussion and mockery reaches a wider audience, and therefore cements the stereotype.

The problem we face in society is how such comments are regulated. There is no perfect solution, nor is there an algorithmic or equitable solution as to when a joke can be made, or when comments will be taken entirely out of context, or simply cause offence. This is one of the major let downs, yet equally beautiful features of our human evolution.

And, arguably, written verse no matter how well it is portrayed, can only invoke often polarised perspectives: either a "for" the comment, or "against" the comment.

One flicker of the eye, a one-sided raise of the lips to form a cheeky smile, or even the way one's voice slips through a darker, deeper tone, are many of the millions of combinations that enable us to read through these kinds of comments.

Humour and comedy can either come from a good place or a bad place. In fairness to Cameron, we do not know under what conditions or what context the comments were made, or what was singled out by the newspaper in which these comments were made.

And while many others and I with a disability can see the bright side and the positives of such conditions, through learning processes and coping mechanisms, particularly with conditions like Tourette's, it does not give others the right to mock us in return.

Image source: Flickr.

Related:

Topic: CXO

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

30 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • RE: Asperger's to Tourette's: British PM's 'jibe' divides online community

    The PM's remark was indefensible. The problem with "off the cuff remarks" is they show what you REALLY think, and that might not jive too well with your public image.

    Perhaps the PM would do well to find out a little more about conditions like these, and meet people who have them. Maybe then he'd be less dismissive of them, and see past his prejudices to the people behind these labels.
    jeremychappell
    • RE: Asperger's to Tourette's: British PM's 'jibe' divides online community

      @jeremychappell and all,
      It seems that as society gets more and more puffed up with itself, particularly in what is said, that the only solution is to stop talking and use mental telepathy. It that is what it takes please guess what I think about all your pomposity? I will give you a couple of hints. First it is definately directed personally at many of you, and second it may be acted out by putting walnuts in your lap and doing a bunch of hip thrusts. If you are not getting the message I am telling you, you are f-ing nuts.
      MikeBytes@...
      • RE: Asperger's to Tourette's: British PM's 'jibe' divides online community

        @MikeBytes@... Did you have a point or was the point to be insulting?

        It seems far more likely that standards have slipped, that we no longer consider the feelings or rights of others. An increasing number of people feel they have the right to say whatever they want, that disrespect of others should just be accepted, that this is "free speech". It is not.

        However, in all the cases Zack cites the person holds public office, and with the honour of public office comes additional responsibilities. We have a right to hold such people to a higher standard.
        jeremychappell
      • jeremychappell: Call them Boors' Rights

        Apparently, some people consider them to be as sacred as some of the other dubious "rights" that have been asserted over the past half century.<br><br>Do you realize that some people go as far as to avoid others just because they exercise their fundemental right to be rude? People have even been known to turn their radio dials because of the discourtesy of the announcers (a definite free speech violation). Maybe we should instead excuse and possibly even celebrate discourtesy on the theory that rude people can't help themselves (maybe it's a genetic condition).<br><br>Reply to jeremychappell:<br><br>I probably should have labeled the post as sarcasm, which it definitely was. Here's a hint: when people assert a supposed right to be rude, they don't call it that.<br><br>Also, people claim all sorts of rights that have no basis in law, which is not a problem because a right is a moral entitlement, not necessarily a legal one, which is why "Boors' Privileges" doesn't sound nearly as moralistic as "Boors' Rights" (of course boors have rights, just not the ones they think they do). What is a problem is that "rights" are sometimes asserted that few people would think of as moral entitlements.<br><br>As long as I'm discussing rhetorical tricks, let me note one more time that one of the most effective ones is to deliberately confuse moral entitlements (properly called "rights") with legal entitlements (properly called "privileges"). The use of the term "intellectual property rights" is a prime example, but there are many others. This is why I'm very careful about what I call a "right".
        John L. Ries
      • RE: Asperger's to Tourette's: British PM's 'jibe' divides online community

        @John L. Ries Rudeness is not a right, rudeness is an affront to human dignity. Someone with Tourette's isn't being rude. I'm amazed you can't see the difference. In short, rudeness is a choice, having Tourette's is an affliction. Many of us will suffer some affliction at some point in our lives, we still deserve respect and compassion at that point, that is our right.

        It seems amazing that the right of "free speech" is so misunderstood. Free speech is about being able to express a point of view, not being able to express it in a deliberately offensive and provocative manner.

        If I abuse a fellow passenger on a bus for their dress, religion, or race - are calls for me to stop that a "violation of free speech"? Isn't what I'm doing just harassment? It seems often talk about free speech is just a "hot button" to stifle proper debate about how we treat one another (which when you think about it, is ironic, as this is clearly the exact opposite of what the US Constitution's intent was).
        jeremychappell
  • RE: Asperger's to Tourette's: British PM's 'jibe' divides online community

    Zack, if you are going to springboard off the PM's "Tourette's" comment to generalize about Aspergers and other conditions, you would do well to become informed about them. Your comments reinforce the common stereotype that fails to distinguish between Aspergers and ADD. One of the things that people with Aspergers struggle against is being misdiagnosed as ADD or ADHD or being lumped together with those who have the latter, resulting in academic settings and treatment options that are inappropriate. Your piece doesn't help.
    renns
    • RE: Asperger's to Tourette's: British PM's 'jibe' divides online community

      @renns, if someone has a particular condition, they generally learn about their condition as much as possible. But as pointed out, doctors can easily misdiagnose and they are supposed to be the well educated people who know what each condition is. Obviously his piece isn't about how to distinguish various conditions, but then seeing the obvious is like common sense, not common.
      grayknight-22253692004129760887070084760051
  • RE: Asperger's to Tourette's: British PM's 'jibe' divides online community

    I too have spent my life divided between UK and North America, and I feel I can comment on the apparent blindness of Americans to Tourettes/Asbergers symptoms you mention.

    It is just my opinion, but I think it is that the multicultural nature of North America as a whole that is different. Americans, and even more particularly Canadians are very accepting about minor personal differences between people.

    In the UK (which I view as the anomolous culture - but it may really be the norm) is very unforgiving of any kind of difference. For example, immigrants in the UK quickly take on local regional accents. In North America, not so. I think there is intense social pressure in the UK to conform culturally, to a very high degree. People in the UK conform to very subtle social signals that other cultures are blind to, and those in the UK who do not pick these up are treated very poorly, and frequently made the butt of jokes.

    On a personal level, I find myself needing to apologise for frequently taking you to task, mostly because I found your grammar lacking or awkward to comprehend. This is now perhaps partly explained by your condition which I was previously unaware of. So - if you have read any of my comments I apologise for being hard on you.
    dimonic
    • RE: Asperger's to Tourette's: British PM's 'jibe' divides online community

      @dimonic that seems fairly likely. There are areas in North America that expect more social conformity, but there are more areas with an overwhelming variety of cultures and in these areas people are aware of differences and expect them.
      grayknight-22253692004129760887070084760051
  • But really, Zack

    what can one expect of David William Donald Cameron ? I shan't use the four-letter term for people like him which first comes to comes to mind when I read this and many other of his pronuciamentos and which both begins and ends with a 't', but neither shall I be surprised if with his policies, his cronies, and his utter lack of understanding and empathy for others (outside his own privileged class), he doesn't manage to render the United Kingdom much less united in a couple of years, with Scotland choosing to strike out on its own....<br><br>Henri
    mhenriday
    • RE: Asperger's to Tourette's: British PM's 'jibe' divides online community

      @mhenriday Aw, OK... since you won't use the term, I shall (and I'm supposedly a polite Canadian)
      He's a twit. And an upper-class twit at that. (viz. Monty Python).
      Claude Balloune
      • RE: Asperger's to Tourette's: British PM's 'jibe' divides online community

        @Claude Balloune: I think you got the vowel wrong, it's an "a", not a "i".
        mutotom@...
  • nice analysis. although i would prefer that reporters refrain from judgment

    concerning anyone's motive for their views of conditions.
    i have always had ADHD.
    it's not caused by my activities as a computer programmer.
    but it could have been caused by tv radiation back in the sixties.
    i don't have a problem with friendly jest about it.
    i'm not that sensitive i guess.
    i do have the movie "The Tic-Code" and think it's a great story.
    i wish the library would accept several dvd copies of my vcr tape for loaning.
    i'd be glad to burn a few.
    education is the key.

    :)
    .
    wessonjoe
  • Cameron's comment was actually malicious

    There was a documentary on the BBC only a few weeks ago about stammering, and it featured Ed Balls explaining to kids who suffered that he had managed to overcome a stammer. It was very inspiring. So for a few weeks later for Cameron to mock him shows that he is either extremely ignorant - did no-one tell him about Balls' stammer? or malicious.

    The truth is that it makes it harder for the teachers in our country to teach the kids to be tolerant of differences in sex, sexuality, ethnicity and capability (a much better word than disability).

    And all he does is trot out an insincere apology, just like NOTW, and think that is the end of it.
    tony@...
    • RE: Asperger's to Tourette's: British PM's 'jibe' divides online community

      @tony@... Thank you for bringing the subject back to stuttering/stammering. As a lifelong stutterer, one of the biggest challenges has been people assuming/treating you as if you had a mental disorder or were mentally impaired. The cartoonist Scott Adams developed a neurological condition that affected his speech. He wrote about how he came to dread going out to eat (even though he owns a restaurant) because, as he bluntly put it, the moment he tried to speak his order he would be given the "retard look". People begin speaking very slowly to you (or loudly, for some reason) as if you were incapable of understanding multi-syllable words. I've had more than one person ask "What country are you from?" and "What's your native language?". An oblivious recruiter on a phone call told me that "There must be something wrong with our connection, because it sounds like there's long pauses between some of your words and some of them are repeated." That was so humiliating I remember getting off the call quickly then blocking the number on my phone just so I'd never have to speak to her again.

      Our intelligence or sanity is not affected. We are NOT "nervous" and don't need to be told to relax or calm down. That's why you stutter, not us. We don't need to know about your friend's friend who used to stutter but then it went away; stutters that persist into adulthood have almost a zero percent chance of "cure" and there is no simple treatment or solution, merely ways of coping. Attempts to finish our words or sentences may be motivated out of sympathy, but generally make us feel inferior and are not desired. Stress makes the stuttering worse, and this often adds pressure on us to try to get out what we want to say before you say it for us, making the stuttering worse, increasing the stress, and a "death spiral" results.

      How DO we want to be treated? As a teenager I attended a symposium on stuttering with a speech pathologist. There was a registration table and as it was finally my turn in line and I was asked my name, I began stuttering and couldn't do it. As it turns out, the man at the registration table was stuttering performer (!) Irving Burton. He looked me in the eye (don't get that too often), and told me "You see that line behind you? Many of those people stutter, and so do I. You just take all the time in the world you need, and I'll be here, even if it takes all night. I'm not going anywhere." That was probably 25 years ago, but it was still one of the most empowering moments of my life.
      One other event, about 20 years ago, and a server at a cafeteria exhibited similar patience as I struggled out what I wanted to eat (at that point in my life, I'd often taken to pointing or choosing whatever was at hand just to avoid embarrassment). The server waited patiently and then told me that I had a beautiful voice, it was the extra time for her to hear it, and that I shouldn't be afraid to share it. Again, a very uplifting message at a very low point.

      In short: patience and respect (eye contact rather than looking at one's watch or finishing our words) is what we hope for and reduces our dread of speaking immensely. This is quite the opposite of how the PM behaved.
      jgm@...
      • RE: Asperger's to Tourette's: British PM's 'jibe' divides online community

        @jgm@... Thanks for the uplifting moments. Your comments made me think what it is like being in a country where I don't speak the language and they don't understand the languages I speak. It must be incredibly frustrating. Yet it can happen to us at any time - a stroke (and strokes happen not just to old people) can deprive us of speech. Having just watched the 70th birthday of Stephen Hawkins, it is a timely reminder as you say that intelligence is definitely not affected.
        tony@...
  • RE: Asperger's to Tourette's: British PM's 'jibe' divides online community

    Zach, I agree that the PM's crack was sad example of another politician's attempt at humor at the expense of those afflicted with Asberger's, Tourette's, etv. but who otherwise function quite well in their daily lives. You noted that we Yanks seem pleasantly oblivious to these conditions and it could be that British political correctness has bred contempt and alienation for things we hold in rational perspective despite our nearly unlimited freedom of expression. Yet there are those here who want to impose speech codes for the theoretical protection of those who seek no special treatment. One can only hope that we avoid the stifling European propriety that in the end amounts to band-aids on festering sores of bigotry. MikeMcE
    mjmce
    • RE: Asperger's to Tourette's: British PM's 'jibe' divides online community

      @mjmce You're not going to turn this into an argument for the right to be nasty, are you? The term "political correctness" was invented by old white people who suddenly found they couldn't use the n-word in polite conversation anymore. There is no "political" correctness; there is only correctness. Prefixing correctness with the adjective "political" mocks the idea of treating people with dignity and respect.<br><br>I was at college in 1990 when there was a murder mystery program. Two students asked for and received the props from the event when it was done and they used it to decorate their dorm room. They also marked a body outline in tape on their floor. To complete their new decor, they also used tape to write the F-word (the 3 letter one) in the body outline. <br>There was no air conditioning in the dorm so people routinely left their doors open in warmer weather. Across the hall from this room was a gay student. He had to look out his door and see the body outline and slur and complained to the school who asked the students to remove it. A campus journalist then took to the school paper with the cries of "Political correctness!" to the degree that the school agreed to temporarily at least reverse its position and allow the threatening decoration to return. And that's all "political correctness" is: an attempt to mock or twist the idea of being considerate into some sort of oppression of the oppressor, the way the U.S. Catholic Bishops' conference statement about their religious rights being trampled by gay marriage and civil union and civil rights protection laws being passed in America (apparently their "rights" to take away other people's rights, discriminate in hiring, etc. are threatened). The whole concept is ridiculous. There is also no "special treatment"; all anyone ever wants is the right to be treated just like everyone else. This is a variation on the "special rights" buzzword that goes hand-in-hand with "political correctness", as if people's asking to not be discriminated against, to be able to marry, to serve in the military, etc. were "special" rights.
      jgm@...
      • Two points

        @jgm@... <br>1. A distinction should be made between what people are and what people do. It's become a neat rhetorical trick over the past 40 years to conflate the two. Like all rhetorical tricks, it's fundamentally dishonest.<br><br>2. I agree that use of the term "politically correct" has become a means of asserting the right to be rude and obnoxious to one's fellow human beings and that is never justified (even if one disapproves of another's conduct). Unfortunately, however, we like to use euphemisms to replace customary and accurate labels that have for whatever reason come to be seen in a negative way (but were not generally seen as derisive). This too is dishonest, distorts the language, and tends to become a never ending cycle.<br><br>I think a couple of good rules are:<br><br>1. If you wouldn't talk that way about people you actually cared about, then don't talk that way about anyone else.<br><br>2. Don't take offense unless you have good reason to believe that the offense was intentional (and maybe even then you should blow it off).
        John L. Ries
  • RE: Asperger's to Tourette's: British PM's 'jibe' divides online community

    Maybe this lack of self censorship is because Mr Cameron is a high functioning autist.
    DarthCyclist