|
>>
|
No. 40680 [Reply & Quote]
>>12091
>>12075
>>12055
>>11153
I can help a little bit in this area... at least I can point you in the right direction that is. I don't think she's autistic, she's too high functioning. There is something related to autism that a cousin of mine has called "Asperger's Syndrome".
My cousin doesn't express emotion, and looks at things and talks about things in an observational way. She speaks in monotone. She'll never be allowed to drive, because she doesn't expect people to break or bend rules. She'll never expect that someone will speed or run a light. She's very high functioning, but she'll almost always need supervision.
From what you guys have said about this girl in the videos, it sounds a lot like my cousin. Look up aspergers, and see if it fits this girl.
Here's what I think is interesting though: if she has aspergers, then someone is taking advantage of this girl, telling her what to do, and asking her to talk about certain things (which she is willing to talk about). If she has aspergers, then she doesn't really have an opinion on it at all. She's doing it willingly, though not willfully, if that makes sense. So does that mean she's still being taken advantage of? If she doesn't care that she's doing what she's doing, she doesn't see anything wrong with it, even though many people "defending" her would... is she allowed to be morally apathetic and act prurient by encouragement and direction from a prurient minded person? Can it be "taking advantage" if she doesn't care that she's doing these things?
Or, would it be any better or worse if a "morally high-minded" person forbade her to engage in sexual activity or date or look at pornography, even though she's morally apathetic and may have a curiosity in those things? Is either direction better or worse, as they both are directing her, one way or the other?
I'll take my answer off the air, thank you.
|
