User talk:Asmith1992

Regarding the article "Nonverbal Learning Disorder[edit]

Hi. I understand that the wider medical community finds no issue with the term "impaired". However, as a member of the neurodivergent+autism spectrum disorder community, I'd like to hear if you have any suggestions for "clinical" synonyms that are less ableist, or likely to frame the people with the condition as of reduced capacity. I'd just really appreciate the aforementioned word not being on a page intended to inform about the true capabilities of individuals with the disorder.--StellaRover27 (talk) 20:18, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @StellaRover27, I'm sorry for the late reply, I'm not active on Wikipedia so I don't check here often and I just noticed your note. A practical reason to maintain the term "impairment" is that disability antidiscrimination laws in the United States rely on the term "disability," which they define as an "impairment that substantially limits a major life activity" as compared to most people. In order for a member of the neurodivergent+autism spectrum disorder community to be protected from discrimination in the United States on the basis of being neurologically atypical, that atypicality must also be a "disability" as the law defines it. As a member of the neurodivergent+autism spectrum disorder community, no one needs tell you how, without accommodations, your difference (or whatever term you prefer) limits one or more major life activities. (Note that major life activities include learning, thinking, having friends, having a family, working, etc., and "substantially limits" does not mean you cannot do the activity at all, it just means that the activity is significantly harder for you than for most people). With respect to neurological disabilities, there are institutions (like many colleges and universities) and employers and others that seek to deny accommodations based on rather bigoted notion that neurological disabilities are not legitimate "disabilities" as the law defines them--they argue that those conditions are merely differences that need no special protections or rights to accommodations. Asmith1992 (talk) 06:04, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from WikiProject Psychology[edit]

Hi, I noticed you have shown an interest in articles related to psychology.

WikiProject Psychology is a group of experts, students and enthusiasts improving Wikipedia articles with any connection to psychology. We have a noticeboard where you can ask for help, or where your input will be very welcome. To stay in touch, add the WikiProject page to your watchlist (here's how to do this). You might also find these links helpful:

If you make big improvements to a psychology-related article, or small improvements to many, you will earn our lasting gratitude, or even a Barnstar. I hope you enjoy your time on Wikipedia.

Xurizuri (talk) 22:27, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022[edit]

Hello, I'm Cassiopeia. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Genital modification and mutilation—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Cassiopeia talk 05:05, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:03, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Diffs supporting block: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:08, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Asmith1992 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

All of my edits have been done in good faith and I'm not aware of any evidence to the contrary.

Decline reason:

The edits pointed out by the blocking admin are indeed sufficient for your block; simply calling other editors "racist fuckwads" is enough. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 16:30, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.