Inasmuch as they all agree about it, the existing science is Allistic, the existing picture of Humanity and Human Nature is Allistic, and the existing origin stories, the Story of Man, we used to say, is Allistic, and as such, it’s all true enough – for the Allistic.
Sure, some stuff was probably imagined by Autistics, but as I said, if the majority agrees, it’s Allistic. What you think is dependent upon the sort of brain you have.
From prehistory forward, since perhaps what we call the Neolithic Revolutions, the Story of Humanity is only the story of the Allistic Human, told by, for, and to Allistics, and understood by Allistics. “Nature,” in these contexts, as in “Human Nature,” refers to one’s biases, one’s tendencies, one’s expectations, the way one understands and deals with the world – in a word, one’s neurotype. So “Human Nature,” in current, Allistic science and current, Allistic life is the basic version of the Allistic personality.
Neurotype and Nature precede one’s science, as mentioned above. The Nature of the brain doing the thinking must be part of one’s calculations, and the first part, Order of Operations. Full disclosure, this is a self-diagnosed Autist talking to you here.
Riane Eisler told the story of the ascendance of Homo Allistic in The Chalice and the Blade, I believe. I have some timing issues, I’m not sure she had it happening quite so far back as the Neolithic revolutions, but it’s a process, it’s not creation, it didn’t happen all at once, in fact it looks a little like it happened to much of the world only five hundred years ago, reading my theories into The Dawn of Everything, in some senses.
Eisler called it the Patriarchy, I believe, and that is surely true, but I think the patriarchy is Allism, one name for Allism, the patriarchy is Allism in terms of organization of society by gender, and as Eisler points out, it’s associated with conflict and war, and I think the more direct connection is that Allism is something very like the human warrior caste, that sexism is part of a setup where everyone is subservient to the warrior caste and class.
For a word, what do we call the Age of Allistic dominance? I won’t correct you if you say the Patriarchy, but perhaps I would rename the Anthropocene the Allistocene, after all, there were people and men before the trouble started, the existence of anthros is not what changed – it was their Natures, their neurotypes. The Patriarchy is still good for me, because maybe there didn’t used to be patriarchs, and then there were, it references a change within men, so to speak. It’s obviously not that there were suddenly men in the world.
Some OG feminist remind me, please? Did Eisler suggest why the change occurred? It seems to me that would have been important and I would have remembered that, but not if I disagreed, sometimes I don’t. But I surely would have remembered by now if she had referenced Neurotype and/or Allism which barely existed when that book was published. I hope I would have hatched on the spot!
It seems a distinction without a difference, I suppose, Human Nature vs the Nature of 80% of Humans. But the Devil, rather Lucifer, as in the inquisitive mind irrespective of authority, is in the details, isn’t it. You said “Human Nature,” and you weren’t fuzzy about it, you meant everybody, so that’s not 80% correct, that is 100% an incorrect statement of universality.
You don’t get points for “mostly universal,” I’m sorry.
And that is very much the point, the false statement of universality. That, in itself, breaks the world. It erases real people and real possibilities, specifically all the ones where we actually change anything and where we don’t simply drive the Earth off the cliff, sure that nothing can change.
And with other possibilities, now we can ask, how to have them?
I’m trying not to follow my usual gravity, I refuse to go to my usual talking points here, honestly, I’ll be ecstatic if anyone follows me this far. But the other, smaller percentage exists, other neurotypes exist, and so the possibilities do, and not only as possibilities either, but proven by their actual existence.
Really, you must believe there are other possibilities, and you must believe that what you do matters, it’s hard for the other possibilities to happen when you don’t.
Jeff
June 20th., 2024
My own commentary from social media:
I’m just giving orders, same as everybody else 😂
“You MUST believe X,” LOL
I suppose one could expand about the Chalice and the Blade, that as I do recall it, the reason in the book was what I said, the mere existence of men, which is always not a minority meme in the feminist movement, I spent most of my life agreeing with it myself.
But it is perhaps part of that conversation to posit Eisler as likely Allistic, and that it comes easier for the Allistic than it does to my sort, to accept another’s mere existence or “Nature,” as causative of things changing, things getting worse.
After all, that book sold more copies than there Are Autistics, I think. The world generally, inasmuch as they were not misogynist males, accepted it, as I did too, in a tentative, pending new information way. I always held the Allistic knowledge in a buffer, even before I had my own thoughts to replace it with.
But to spell it out, read the Chalice and the Blade, but think about Neurotype, they describe the Allistic takeover of a formerly diverse human world.
THAT is the true prehistory of humanity, according to non-Allistic people, of course I welcome any Allistic person to see it and agree.
But, #ActuallyAutistc , @actuallyautistic , THIS is what you’re supposed to believe, like back in the day, the book was what a good feminist was supposed to believe, according to me.
THIS is Autistic Genesis.
I’m not sure this is my superpower, only that if it’s not, I do not have one.
Thank you and apologies.
Jeff
June 22nd., 2024
Here’s the first part:
Abuse with an Excuse 