NTs Are Weird

I got through reading a bunch of comments to a news story, regarding whether or not people with disabilities should be able to be part of society (the “main” society, not some sub-part hidden behind walls). In the end, it was clear: there are two views. The first is that the human race has a duty to everyone to at least try to find a place for people that allows inclusion, not segregation, from society. The second is that this duty only exists while it isn’t upsetting or inconvenient. This second view is often justified on the basis of “safety”.

I am constantly amazed how non-violence acts can be treated as if they were violent, simply because someone says, “Well, they do scare me, and I have a right to not be scared.” Actually, no, you don’t have a right to not be scared. You do have a right to be safe, although that right isn’t a guarantee. Sometimes there is a difference between true safety and the perception of safety (in fact, people confuse “safe” with “familiar” - that is why flying on a plane feels unsafe to some people, why some city people feel uncomfortable in the woods when they hear an animal at night, or why another person might reach up to lock their car door when someone of another skin color is standing on a corner nearby). In other words, we (as people) get this wrong a lot of the time (we probably get it wrong most of the time). Unfortunately we typically can’t see that our own fear may not be based in reality - and so our feelings of fear, rather than an objective measure of safety - become the standard. Ironically, using this standard often misses true danger, while discriminating against people who are not a danger at all.

Listen closely the next time someone wants to keep someone from participating in society - how long does it take before “safety” is brought up, and is safety brought up in a logical, objective way or is it brought up in the context of feelings, stereotypes, and “personal experience” that can’t be argued against without bringing the discussion to a personal (rather than logical) level?  Certainly there are times and places where people must be segregated, but I’ll bet that the next time you hear this in the context of disability, you’ll see feelings of safety, not real safety, as the real issue.

And note: I’m not confusing “participating in society” with “participating exactly the same way as others do in society”. Clearly that wouldn’t be any more acceptable than the things I’m talking about here.

I had a pretty happy moment a a couple of weeks ago:

The mobile home I used to own is now someone else’s.

For some reason, this was just incredibly hard for me to get rid of. But, as of now, it is no longer mine. The new owner is thrilled with the trailer - it is better than where she moved from and she’s getting it fixed up a bit to be more energy efficient with new windows.

Regular readers of this blog will know how good it feels for me to have gotten rid of this trailer. I no longer own any property I can’t personally move.

Right now, you can watch almost any Olympic sport on TV. But there’s one thing you can’t watch: the Paralympics, at least if you are in the USA. Strange that I can watch Rhythmic Gymnastics, for instance, but I cannot watch Goalball.

The strnage thing is…I’d bet more people would be interested in watching Goalball than in watching Goalball than Rhythmic Gymnastics (no disrespect intended for the athletes or fans of Rhythmic Gymnastics - that is certainly not an easy sport).

So, here’s the questions to the readers: When and where are the Paralympics? Can you watch any Paralympic sport (preferably live) in your country? Which sport? How would you watch it?

There’s also an assignment for the readers: let whatever station is broadcasting the Olympics in your area know that you would also like to watch the Paralympics. In the USA, that’s NBC. If you’re in the US, you might remind them that, in the US, the Government has placed the number of people with a disability at about 19.3% (PDF file), excluding people in institutions.

As an unrelated aside, the source I gave for the 19.3% statistic has an interesting map of disability rates in the US. I find the similarity to this poverty map striking - not 100% overlap by any means, but it does track extremly closely. Perhaps that’s why we have such a hard time getting listened to, and perhaps that’s why NBC and others don’t think our money is worth much. Not only are most disabled people not wealthy, we don’t even live anywhere near wealthy people.

Self-injury can be very disconcerting and upsetting to watch. Nobody likes to see someone else causing themselves physical pain, and there are very frequent questions about “How do I stop this” from parents and friends of people who self-injure. Self-injury also seems to justify nearly any treatment and enable the bypass of ethical standards, in the name of treatment - I obviously don’t agree with this, even some unethical treatment does stop self-injury.

A lot of the issue with self-injury is understanding why it is occurring. I suspect everyone who self-injures is a bit different, and has different reasons, but I do think there are some trends, and, even more importantly, I think self-injury shows that something is very wrong in someone’s life. Just getting them to stop, for instance, biting their hand or hitting their head, isn’t necessarily addressing the problems.

One child I know, who goes by the nickname “Storm” (he thought the name up), does a lot of mild self-injurious stuff, such as hitting himself fairly hard in the head with his fists. I’ve seen both more severe and milder self-injury, but I believe, for many, the source is the same. Watching him, it is clear that this behavior is much more common when he is frustrated about not being able to communicate something, around a bad situation he has no ability to fix (another form of frustration), or frustrated that the world is changing too fast for him to keep up.

For some reason, some parents are very offended when I suggest looking at the environment, and ways of changing that - yet don’t get offended when some other parent suggests high-powered drugs and experimental treatments. I don’t quite get that, so I’m not going to be able to help there - but I will say that a very effective way of minimizing the self-harm for Storm has been to help him find ways of communicating, especially ways of communicating frustration. Of course how Storm begins to communicate frustration is going to be different than how someone else might, and there are no magic formulas here (perhaps that is why inappropriate medication and experimental treatments look so good to many) - everyone is different, and it is going to take a lot of work.

Some other things that have helped Storm have been alternative ways of showing frustration (hit something other than yourself when you want to hit yourself) and giving him more power over his environment (it is okay to take a walk if you need to, anytime that you would otherwise hit yourself). It is clearly hard on the people who love Storm, but they seem to recognize that when these times come, and Storm tries to communicate even what might seem like a minor annoyance rather than major frustration, that it is important to listen - he might only get one chance at communicating it before words leave him and his only other way of coping is to start hitting himself. Learning other ways of coping helps him, but this alone, without changing the environment, isn’t quite enough on its own.

Something else that is important to understand is that self-injury is typically not suicidal behavior. In the US, where the standard to lock someone into “residential” psychiatric care is “likely to harm to self or others,” self-injury has been used as justification to commit people to care. But, only in the rarest of cases is that appropriate. Of course self-injury is bad - but it is typically not suicidal, either. Self-injury happens when someone is trying to find another way to live with something that is very difficult for them, and other ways of coping aren’t available. Rather than picking up a gun, for example, someone who self-injures is doing something else, in some cases to keep from picking up a gun. That’s not a bad thing - we should be encouraging people to not see suicide as the only option, not locking them up for it. Yes, there may be other ways of dealing with whatever it is that is making the person suicidal, but that needs to be done while recognizing that self-harm is a coping technique, not just a behavior to be eliminated, and that it even serves a purpose, albeit that a way of coping that doesn’t harm at all would be preferable.

So, in short, if it is a coping technique, there are two ways of approaching the problem. The first, the one everyone seems to think of immediately, is to redirect self-harm to something else. For instance, as in Storm’s case, hitting a pillow instead of hitting his head. That may not be enough, as the pillow is unlikely to provide the endorphin release that pain would, but it may satisfy the need to “do something” when frustrated. (And there are ways of causing pain without likely causing major damage, too, that might be good places to redirect self-harm urges towards) But, it is also a coping mechanism. A lot of inappropriate behaviors become appropriate in a bad enough situation. For example, someone being physically attacked who choses to bite their attacker, in defense, is not doing anything wrong - even though biting is very much disapproved by society, generally. Self-harm can come out of abusive situations or even non-abusive (and very loving) situations where someone simply can’t handle the demands placed on them. In the case of abusive situations, the solution is obvious: modify the environment. In other words, get the victim away from the abuser. In non-abusive situations, the solution may be less obvious, but it is important to remember that, like it or not, not everyone can cope exactly the same. A sound that doesn’t bother one person at all may terrify another - and someone who is terrified is, even if the terror is misplaced, not going to be able to always behave in “socially acceptable” ways.

I know I’ve greatly simplified the problems of self-injury. It’s very complex, and very difficult for loved ones to understand. And, of course, everyone would prefer a world where nobody got hurt, not even by themselves. But it is complex, and needs to be treated as the complex problem that it is, rather than just treated as a behavior with no connection to the world around the person.

As happened in my most recent post, lots of people assume that a social model of disability is incompatible with the idea that there are ways of helping people interact with the world as a whole, without necessarily changing the entire world. I believe this this was expressed by telling me that I only believe in “being nice to [autistics] and bringing [autistics] comfortable surroundings” - a common, but wrong, view of what the social model of disability says.

I’ll mention a few things that can help many autistic people - really help, not just act as a placebo for a parent or, worse, cause harm. I won’t be mentioning things that require 40 hours of work for a child or any therapy intended to counter “toxicity”, as these have plenty of scientific and ethical issues - and are likely to either do nothing or, too often, cause harm. Fortunately, there are plenty of blogs in the autism world on why these things are useless or harmful, so I won’t repeat that here.

So, here’s some quick thoughts I had:

Communication: One of the biggest keys to an autistic person getting the life they want is for that autistic person to be able to express, in a way that allows the largest number of people to understand, their own desires and thoughts. This is sometimes speech, but oftentimes it isn’t. It can be AAC (alternative & augmentative communication) systems, language therapy (I’m not a huge fan of speech therapy without language work), and environmental modification (it’s hard to learn to talk when in pain, for instance - so if something is making an autistic react badly, it probably shouldn’t be around, if possible, when an autistic is learning language). Particular concern should be given to the possibility of complex echolalia - that is, the idea that someone might just be repeating back whole phrases, not just words, and that real communication might not be occurring with the voice.

Social Skills: Here, I believe mentors have the highest chance of success. Find someone that the autistic person admires. Be careful, many autistics will figure out pretty quickly if the person is “faking” their skills or abilities! The relationship with that person can become a great way of teaching someone how to interact with the world, in a non-threating way that is meaningful to the autistic person. None of us learn when we aren’t interested - that’s the power of the mentor idea. If we’re interested in the person and what they do, we’re more likely to listen to their explanations. Other means of helping with social skills, like social stories and pictorial sequences also have their place (but don’t over-use them!). What doesn’t have its’ place is platitudes such as “don’t hit” (you should hit when your life is in danger), “if you follow this process, you’ll get a date”, or “here’s how you greet new people” (we can’t hide the complexities of real life and expect autistics to just pick up on them).

Activities of Daily Living: First, I don’t believe it’s bad to need some help. Lots of people do, and staff may be something many of us appreciate having available. It’s not a “failing” to need help. That said, routines, schedules, pictures, prompting techniques, and ways of breaking out of “perfection loops” are ideas to help someone handle “routine” tasks, and help with the problem areas of these tasks (sequencing and remembering all the parts). There are also some simplified materials available, like the cookbook I use (designed for adults with cognitive disabilities, but containing real recipes, not stuff you only do in elementary school). Other changes, like clothes that don’t insult sensory systems (no tags rubbing against skin, maybe no elastic, have good fit) can help with problems like removing clothes inappropriately (everyone will do something to their clothes if they cause tremendous pain). There are plenty of shoes and other clothes that are simpler to get on and off, for people with trouble doing that. Personally, I don’t see shoes with velcro as that huge of a deal (I’m shocked at how important shoe tying is to many) - chances are, nobody will even notice, outside of parents and educational professionals.

Medical Care: I fully believe in appropriate medical care, and think we rarely get it. It’s hard to figure out what is wrong with someone who can’t explain the problem (yet we do it every day with animals and infants - it is too bad that many physicians don’t have similar ways of figuring out what is wrong with people older than 2 or 3 years old). Someone who has severe tooth pain, for instance, is going to have a hard time learning to dress themselves. Note however that when I say I believe in appropriate medical care, I am not saying it is okay to do anything that claims to be medical. Gluten doesn’t need to be eliminated from the diet for the majority of autistic people, and treating “heavy metal poisoning” is not going to fix autism (and, darn it, true metal poisoning will NOT be confused with autism, by any doctor - the symptoms aren’t even close to similar). For adults, scheduled routine checkups aren’t a bad thing, nor are tests that don’t rely as heavily on self-reporting. Even verbal adults may not be able to help a doctor figure out what hurts or be able to initiate communications such as, “That tooth still hurts even after you did the work on it last week.”

I’ll stop here - these are the things I have the most problems managing, so they are the things I can talk about easiest. One thing I’ve found is that as I find solutions for one area (for instance, having a communication device handy, even if I don’t use it all the time), these solutions lower my anxiety, and make formerly impossible things (properly grooming myself in the morning) much easier to manage. Everything is connected when it comes to stress and anxiety (that’s also why I’m opposed to “treatment” which increases stress or anxiety load - it is likely to have an opposite effect, and, contrary to what people who believe in those treatments say, displaying evidence of severe stress and anxiety are not necessary components to “treatment” or proof that the treatment is “working” - yep, people say exactly this with some of the more bizarre diets and “biochemical” treatments).

I’ve seen lots of writing lately about the horrors of the anti-vaccine crowd and scientifically bogus autism treatments. While I am also against these things, I may not be against them for the same reason as others - and I think we are creating a dangerous situation if our primary problem with the anti-vaccine crowd and other scientifically bogus treatment promoters is the unscientific nature of their work.

Sure, the unscientific nature is an issue. And we are right to speak against that.

But we better be careful. There very well could be scientifically valid “treatments” one day that still demean the person with autism - or maybe the treatments make us “indistinguishable”, and actually do that, but at great personal cost. I don’t think that’s what any of us want (at least not if you generally enjoy reading this blog).

Not every scientifically correct treatment or idea is going to be ethical - and ethics are what we need to be careful to be talking about, not just scientific correctness, lest the unethical, but scientifically-correct treatment be encouraged by our very opposition to the anti-vax crowd!

For instance, let’s say an autism “treatment” was proven to meet the treatment’s stated goal of “indistinguishability”. It may have met very stringent scientific standards, may have been studied via experiments with excellent design, and had the results of these experiments analyzed with the proper application of statistics. That doesn’t mean that the treatment should be used, only that it does what it says it will do.

So, the next question would become, “Is the goal a good one?” And the other question that must be asked, “So, does the good outweigh the bad?” Nearly every “treatment” is going to have negatives (for instance, everyone recognizes many drugs are good for treating infections, but we also recognize that those drugs have side-effects). Science doesn’t make value judgments about “goodness” or “badness”, but only makes judgments about whether or not claims are plausible. A plausible claim isn’t necessarily the same as a “good” goal. The answers to these would tell us whether or not the treatment was ethical.

I’m worried even about some people associated with “our side” in the blogosphere and internet as a whole - as I read their writings and talk to them, I find that they may be less concerned with neurodiversity and disability rights than scientific correctness - that they wouldn’t be opposed to what I, and many other autistics, would consider “unethical treatment” if that treatment’s development met the requirements of rigorous scientific work. Such “friends” are no friends of mine.

Martin Luther King Jr. said it well: “Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men.”

I noticed something very strange when I went to Autreat this year: it was fairly easy, and not very overloading.

There are a few reasons for this - first, I didn’t do quite as much as I usually do at Autreat. But that’s not enough to explain why I felt I almost always had energy to participate and interact with others, while in the past, for large chunks of time, I did not have this energy.

It was held in a very nice location, very well suited to my particular type of autism, but, once again, that isn’t enough to explain it either, as the other venues suited me well too.

I certainly came to Autreat a bit less stressed than I had in the past, as my life situation is fairly stable. But, once again, that isn’t enough to explain this either.

Nor is the combination of these things enough to explain why I had an easier time.

So, that leaves the final reason: I went with my girlfriend. There seems to be some people (not just my girlfriend) that being around is actually less taxing and tiring than being alone. Maybe someone will take my autism license away, but I note that I’m not the only one for whom this is true - several others brought support workers, and I assume that those workers increased the ability for people to cope. Others came with a parent, and seemed genuinely to have a better time at Autreat because of doing so (I can’t imagine that with my parents - they add to my stress, but it is nice to see that isn’t the way of every family).

Certainly, I can hear “your girlfriend doesn’t provide the same sorts of services that a support worker provides.” That might be true - but it might not be, too. She doesn’t help me with the traditional “activities of daily living”. Rather, the help we mutually provided each other was emotional support, usually just by being around, no by “doing”. Many autistic people, myself included, have a huge amount of anxiety. In fact, this is the one are of how my brain functions that I have considered seeking medical help to deal with, as the anxiety keeps me from doing many things I know I’d enjoy doing, and also keeps me from doing many things that I need to do - and leaving undone due to anxiety only causes more anxiety (it is a pretty ugly cycle). Having a familiar, kind, and, very importantly, compatible person nearby truly helps. Not all kind and familiar people are compatible - that’s not a character flaw in anyone, but it is reality, and an incompatible kind and familiar person is far more stressful to be around than being alone would be! So it has to be the right person! This person doesn’t necessarily “do” anything consciously to help me cope, but simply being around the person is help. When they are around, I can do more, not less.

I know a lot of us like to be alone. I’m no exception here. There are very few people that actually reduce my anxiety when I’m around them, but there are a few - and I’m very lucky to have found these people who make my life easier and better. And, typically, being around these people is better than being alone! I know that’s hard to believe, especially if you don’t have someone like that in your life (I didn’t believe it for a long time), but it is true.

It is because of this type of effect that we, as a community, need to encourage people to see emotional support animals as a necessary part of some people’s interaction with the world. Currently, many people consider an “emotional support” animal to be something other than a service animal, and thus not worthy of protection under the law. In other words, “Sure, you can bring a guide dog into this place, but don’t even think about bringing an animal in that just serves the purpose of lowering your anxiety enough to be able to interact with the world.” If you examine the argument a little more, you find a hidden prejudice in it: anxiety can’t be a disability.

Anxiety most certainly is a disability for many people, not just autistic people. For me, it is the biggest hinderance in my interaction with the world, and the one thing about my autism I would gladly give up (but not at the expense of the rest of who I am). And an animal that lets someone like me walk into a building (one of my greatest anxieties is entering an unfamiliar building for the first time) is something that is necessary and should be encouraged, not denied, as, sadly, is often done today.

Certainly there needs to be some rules and a framework around allowing an animal into a public place, when animals wouldn’t normally be allowed in those places. The animal needs to be clean (for health reasons), properly trained, properly socialized, and have a very good temperament. In other words, it’s just like any other kind of service animal, and it is a bit more complex than just taking the family dog with you! The animal needs to follow the rules of society for service animals. But an animal who’s only assistance to someone is to reduce their anxiety is very likely providing just as much help to someone as a guide dog would to someone who is blind. The issue is “access” - does this animal help the person access the various parts of society? If the animal does, it is providing a key service.

Unfortunately, emotional disabilities are among the least recognized in society. Someone who has high anxiety, which limits their access to society, is considered “weak” rather than “disabled”. It’s time we change that. Part of that is recognizing the supports that these people need are every bit as important as the speech device or wheelchair someone might use.

I know having support for my disability made a world of difference.

My girlfriend and I recently returned from a two week roadtrip, including several days at Autreat.

I’ve been going to Autreat for several years. I couldn’t quite explain why I enjoy it so much - there is certainly imperfections about it, like any gathering, but I finally figured out that it must be the group of people that attend and how comfortable I feel in that group. My girlfriend, who attended for the first time this year, also enjoyed herself, saying that she really felt part of a group of people for the first time in her life.

We spent a lot of time talking about it on the way home from Autreat, trying to figure out the right words to describe it. I still don’t know them, but I think the words “family reunion” come closest to describing what it is like to spend a few days with your own people!

It was a lot of fun seeing friends again. It was also truly a lot of fun to see my girlfriend experience what it is like to be in a place where people are generally accepted as they are. I forgot what a unique feeling that can be.

Oh, did I mention that my girlfriend and I are still in love after living with each other for two weeks continually? We’re taking that as a good sign!

In a previous blog post, I referenced employment being denied to people without prior job experience, as an example when a negative outcome may not be the result of prejudice towards disability, but something else (in this case, something that would have happened whether or not the person was disabled). Some comments asked, “How do people get jobs if everything requires experience?”

The short answer is: It is hard, but not everything requires experience either.

I’ll explain how I got to my current position, in the computer field, but I don’t want readers to lose track of two keys: persistence and luck. I have applied for dozens of jobs I didn’t get, especially early in my career when I was willing to do almost anything computer-related. Heck, it probably took me 30 tries to get a dishwashing job before I did computer work, and those jobs are supposedly easy to get. Unfortunately, when it comes to seeking employment, the odds are that you won’t get a given job, no matter how qualified you are or the amount of effort you are willing to expend, so you can’t give up after a rejection, or even after a few dozen rejections. Know that this happens to neurotypicals, too, not just autistic people (a recent job I hired had over 80 applicants - that means over 80 got rejected since I had only one opening). The other key is luck: there is a lot about a job which isn’t discussed in a job posting. I’ll talk more about this one later.

My first computer job was strictly volunteer. I spent the day reformatting Word documents (something I was good at - probably due to the autistic attention to detail). Over time, I did more and more computer work, and was entrusted with more important tasks. All of the computer tasks were easy for me, and my level of expertise was far greater than needed for that job. But it helped me get “in the door”. Eventually, the non-profit applied and received a grant to employ a disabled or disadvantaged teenager full-time during the summer. I was hired into that position (I remember thinking, “How can they call me disabled?!”).

Over that summer, I learned what work was like, and I learned not computer skills but rather work skills. I actually had to be taught how to answer the phone politely, what questions not to ask coworkers (because they are too personal), how to keep track of what I need to do, etc. The great thing (this is part of the luck I’ve had) is that this organization was willing to do that. Perhaps it was because I was making minimum wage, and thus the expectations weren’t as high as if I was making the normal rate for a computer system administrator, but I think the people there were simply enjoying seeing me learn to fit into an office. These skills are important - probably not important in landing a job, but vital in keeping it. Few employers would have been this patient with me.

After that job, I did some dishwashing jobs (lots and lots of rejection before I got one). Then, I went to college. During this time, I did some consulting work at $20/hour for one of the organizations I volunteered for previously. It turns out that they ran into a bind once I left and decided that paying me $20/hour was way better than paying someone with years of experience $200/hour! So, I earned a great wage for a few hours a week of work, while also gaining more experience. Over time, friends learned of my consulting gig, and talked to others about it.

I also sold computers during this time, to friends and coworkers of my parents. I charged $100 or $200 per hour (depending on how much work it was going to be) to scour different computer deals and help people determine which computer was best for them. It’s amazing how many people will pay $100 for you to tell them what to buy, and it was something I enjoyed.

During the summer of my first year of college, I sought and worked an internship. The internship was at the company my father worked at, and was normally menial labor. One of the perks the company provided to employees was to hire their kids during the summer as temporary help, usually menial labor. One of the people I helped to buy a computer happened to work there, as well. This person, when he found out I applied for the normally menial labor internship, told the director of IT (Information Technology) that I would be a really good fit in that group. So, I was hired as an intern in the IT department, and spent my days doing the tasks others didn’t particularly want to do, such as inventorying software on PCs (to make sure we were legally licensed on all software).

Back at school, I tried, very unsuccessfully, to find work. After months of trying, and being rejected over and over again, a “friends of a friend” called me up one day and asked, “Do you know how to move a small phone switch to a new building?” Apparently, the cost to move this small 10 phone system was going to run several thousand dollars, if a telephone contracting company was used. I previously learned a little about phones at the internship, and explained that I thought I could do it, and would do it for a pretty low rate. So, they hired me to do it and I spent a few days crawling around an incredibly horrible attic running cables. At the end of the weekend, when the phones all worked properly, the owner of this small web design company came up to me and asked, “Do you know how to program?” I told him that I did, and was offered a job as a programmer on the spot, which I accepted (for minimum wage). It wasn’t great pay, but, finally, I was doing something that required a good understanding of computers.

This job grew, and I eventually became the lead programmer at a spin-off of this company. I was approached one day and asked, “Would you take a huge raise, but move to another community, to be part of the spin-off?” I took the chance, and made the move - it was easy at the time, as I had very few roots in my current community.

While working there, I eventually sought other jobs. I still only had a couple years of experience, so it was hard to find great jobs where I could get in the door. But, I found one eventually, an unusual job in e-commerce fraud detection work. A small startup needed someone to write software to detect fraudulent use of their system, something I had never done previously, but which I felt I could do well. It sounded, for some reason, like a really great job for me, so I thought I’d go a bit further than I usually went when applying for other jobs (and getting rejected!). I think the key to getting that job was to “get noticed”, so after hearing nothing for two weeks, I sent a letter and my resume to them via next-day courier - I knew that this type of package would at least get opened and looked at, because it’s an unusual way of applying for a job. Sure enough, I got a call within two days requesting an interview. This is where the luck comes in: I was told later that I was the first employee hired that wasn’t a former friend or coworker of someone already at the company. The reason they were willing to take a chance on me, apparently, was that I “thought very differently than everyone else we’ve seen.” Over time, I found that they were basically - unknowingly - seeking an autistic person, and every autistic trait I had was seen by them as an asset.

After working there, I had enough experience on my resume for the types of jobs I was seeking, so I’ll leave it there.

As I mentioned, persistence was very important for me. Getting the first job was by far the hardest.
In addition, luck was important - but that isn’t as bad as it sounds. When I don’t get a job (and I don’t, even with experience, get interviews everywhere I send an application), I can now think, “that’s just bad luck,” rather than, “I must be completely unemployable.” I also found how one person I helped when they needed to buy a computer might get my “foot in the door” at a company years later when I am looking for work - and I’ve seen that several times in other ways, my reputation as a good employee has helped me get jobs that I would never have got otherwise. Finally, another key was taking opportunities that were one step closer to my goal whenever I could - being open to something that gets me to my goal, rather than having to get my goal at step 1.

I know that I didn’t give a formula people can follow step-by-step. That’s intentional. Employment is hard for us, and luck has a huge part to play. I’ve seen plenty of very qualified people who can’t find work, simply because of bad luck - they do everything right, but aren’t hired. But it is possible to get work, even without experience, and I thought I’d post this because I felt the questions about “How do I get experience” were legitimate queries, not simply frustration at the work world (although it’s okay to be frustrated about this, too - it is hard, and the system is difficult, even broken). The only way I could answer the question was to describe what worked for me - what works for someone else is likely to look very different. Anyone who has a step-by-step approach to getting a job doesn’t know what they are talking about.

Every year, an Ugly Dog Contest is held.

This year’s pick?  A one-eyed, three-legged dog.

One might ask…what does this say about people’s view of disability? If a dog was picked for this based on what sex the dog was, I suspect it wouldn’t be nearly as funny to many people. Interesting.

That said, personally I think the pick was pretty cute.