# Social activities for retarded people? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 17, 2001, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893 "2001-02-17T17:23:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2001, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893/21 "2001-02-18T21:24:56Z")
I doubt that any among us relish the idea of being reduced to a single adjective. I would find it decidedly tiresome to only have activities with folks with whom I share a single characteristic (yea, let’s have a bunch of short people hang out together, after all, we can commiserate about how rough it is to go shopping and reach things on shelves). And this is what you seem to be doing when deciding to ‘find retarded’ friends for this person. I agree that there are groups that have some benefit. but the presumption that such groups should be the main source of companionship reduces people to a common denominator, something that is rarely benificial, let alone kind. ---
**Author:** ![Moe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moe/32/2972_2.png) [@Moe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moe)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2001, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893/22 "2001-02-18T23:45:53Z")
I can’t believe, what just happened. I’ve spent over a fucking hour replying and AOL just kicked me off. I’ll try to get back to it when I’m a little less angry. ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2001, 7:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893/23 "2001-02-19T07:49:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Duck Duck Goose \* > \*\*OH, goodie. Moved to GD. 😃 > **Astro:** > > > [@](#): > > > > Your personal inclination may be to consider it insulting and condescending to do any other than mainstream “Forrest Gump” type folks. While this may make you feel better I doubt it is necessarily the best thing to do in all situations. If all I could socialize with was people with comparative 240 IQ’s I might think it would be pretty groovy to find someone like myself to hang with. > > Conversation has nothing to do with IQ. Conversation is about “ideas”. Having a higher or lower IQ has nothing to do with your ideas on the weather, or death. People with low IQs can have some startling insights into both subjects. People with high IQs can sometimes be startlingly clueless. Conversation, however, DOES have to do with “age”, with “maturity”. The kind of conversation you have with a 3-year-old is vastly different from the kind of conversation you have with a 14-year-old, because a Three has vastly different “ideas” than a Fourteen. The difference between the kind of conversation I would have with a member of Mensa and the kind of conversation I would have with Steve would be due to the difference between talking to an adult and talking to a teenager, not because one was “smarter” than the other. And actually, given that Steve is in his 30’s, I would expect to have a sort of “old teenager” conversation with him, on the weather, or death. As retarded people get older, they may not acquire any more IQ points, but they sure do acquire “street smarts”, “life knowledge”, same as anybody else. > \*\* With all due respect this is abject nonsense. Interesting conversation has a lot to do with the relative intelligence of the participants. While conversational topics will certainly differ by age cohorts, the type of involved conversation I would have with a Forrest Gump level intellect will involve a much more limited span of topics and conceptual breath than I would have with a group of reasonably intelligent teenagers. Insofar as (which you noted) conversation is about “ideas”, people who are highly intelligent _are_ generally going to have wider ranging, deeper and more complex conversations about the topics they pursue (weather and death included) than less intelligent people. “Life knowledge” will only take you so far. In this context, at some point as conversational topics are developed, points pursued, challenged, explained, defended etc. people have to be able to keep up their end of the conversation or it becomes a pointless, didactic exercise. Per your assertion that “Conversation has nothing to do with IQ” you are trying way too hard to be PC to the point that your arguments are losing coherence. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2001, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893/24 "2001-02-19T12:30:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Jess \* > I imagine that’ll change as she gets older. And I know her perception of her _extreme and overwhelming uniqueness_ will! That perception is called a “personal fable” and it is a stage we all pass through. \*\* My god, I hope she doesn’t! Frankly, I hope I don’t! My extreme and overwhelming uniqueness is a pillar of strength to the kneedipper geek canuck half-deaf femme faggot that I am. If I were really just one of the herd I don’t think I would really feel like surviving, if you want to know the truth. I actually find it kind of insulting and troubling to hear a sense of individuality treated as a “fable” and a “phase” that a person will grow out of. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2001, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893/25 "2001-02-19T15:15:36Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by astro \* > \*\*With all due respect this is abject nonsense. Interesting conversation has a lot to do with the relative intelligence of the participants. While conversational topics will certainly differ by age cohorts, the type of involved conversation I would have with a Forrest Gump level intellect will involve a much more limited span of topics and conceptual breath than I would have with a group of reasonably intelligent teenagers. > > Insofar as (which you noted) conversation is about “ideas”, people who are highly intelligent _are_ generally going to have wider ranging, deeper and more complex conversations about the topics they pursue (weather and death included) than less intelligent people. “Life knowledge” will only take you so far. In this context, at some point as conversational topics are developed, points pursued, challenged, explained, defended etc. people have to be able to keep up their end of the conversation or it becomes a pointless, didactic exercise. > > Per your assertion that “Conversation has nothing to do with IQ” you are trying way too hard to be PC to the point that your arguments are losing coherence. \*\* With all due respect, Astro, it appears to me that you’re so focussed on trying to prove how overly politically correct _ **I** _ am, that you’re missing my central point about the essence of good conversation. 😉 What you say may be true, that “people with high IQs can have more _complex_ ideas than people with low IQs”. And if your sole criterion for what makes good conversation is “complexity of ideas”, then yeah, I suppose you’ll have a more satisfying conversation with a member of Mensa than with Steve. But what if you have other criteria for what makes good conversation? How about the “interestingness” of the ideas? (Yes, it’s a word, it’s in Roget. It means “interest, appeal, fascination, piquancy, color, glamour, spicery, succulence, zest, salt, spice, savor.”) Do you find “glamour” in a discussion of the Bush/Gore election and the American Political Process? Or is it merely “complex”? How about gun control? Piquant, zesty? Or merely complex? The existence of God? Repeal of estate taxes? Legalization of drugs? Abortion? All definitely complex topics, but succulent? Not IMO. 😃 Now what about the Cruise/Kidman breakup? Complex? Not really. Succulent? Absolutely. 😉 How about the moon landings, hoax or not, or the existence of skunk apes? Ah, now, there’s a couple of topics that can be as complex as you want, and as savory. See my point? It depends on what you expect out of a conversation. Personally I’d rather talk to Steve about skunk apes than a member of Mensa about estate taxes. And actually, I don’t see why Steve couldn’t participate perfectly well in a topic like gun control. “Should people be allowed to keep guns in their homes? Why or why not?” Does the fact that he may not have particularly complex ideas on the subject mean that he’d be a dull conversationalist? Only if you’re judging his conversation by “complexity of ideas”. ---
**Author:** ![slortar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6bbea6/32.png) [@slortar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slortar)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2001, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893/26 "2001-02-19T18:47:39Z")
Line dancing would be a good candidate. ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2001, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893/27 "2001-02-19T18:55:08Z")
I dunno, I’d say the analogy to being gay works in this context. If I didn’t have any gay friends I’d go pretty nuts after a while. But I’ll also agree that, if it’s what he wants, finding people with _comparable_ disadvantages would be key - hanging out with people worse off than him wouldn’t help, and he obviously already has access to “normal” (for lack of a better term) people such as you and your brother and your friends who treat him like, well, a friend. But finding people very similar to him, IMHO, would probably do him a world of good (again, if it’s something that he wants - being good-hearted is nice and all, but these things almost always backfire, kind of like setting people up on blind dates). As for me, I don’t think I could find anyone much more gay than I am to hang out with, so… 😉 Esprix ---
**Author:** ![Moe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moe/32/2972_2.png) [@Moe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moe)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2001, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893/28 "2001-02-19T23:18:42Z")
Even though I’m still so angry that I lost everything I put so much effort into saying yesterday. First off, thank you very much **Jess** and **Green Bean** for that info on ARC. I’ve only glanced at the site briefly but I’m looking forward to reading it more at length. It looks very much like what I had in mind. 🙂 **DDG** I appreciate you putting so much effort into this, and I’ll try to respond to where our points of view differ. BTW, I certainly never intended this to turn into a GD, but here we are. > [@](#): > > The problem is that mental retardation is such a hazy area. How do you define it? What’s the difference between “retarded” and merely “slow”? That’s my point–that you shouldn’t try to find him “retarded” friends, because everybody draws the line in a different place. Maybe he doesn’t think of himself as “retarded”, or maybe the people you’re going to chat up as potential “retarded” friends for your “retarded” friend don’t think of themselves as retarded, either. It is a hazy area but I don’t think it’s as hazy as you would like to believe. Being “retarded” does have a technical definition based on IQ (IIRC, 60-80 = mild, 40-60 = moderate, below 40 = profound). I am generally critical of the validity of IQ tests and the way they are often used, but I think in this case they are valid to an acceptable degree. I believe that being “retarded” is part of the same continuum that we speak of when we use the word “slow” to describe someone. I don’t really want to play a game of semantics here. Yes, the way you worded your sentences quoted above, with the word “retard” being used as some kind of category (“retard” as opposed to “normal”) it sounds offensive. I don’t think I’m retarded but I’ve certainly hung in groups of people that have made me feel damn slow. If you really believe that people who are “retarded” don’t think of themselves as slower than most, then, as someone said, you are trying too hard to be pc. > [@](#): > > Also, being “retarded” is different from something like being blind or deaf. If your thread title said, “Social activities for blind people”, it would be a sensible question. There is a need for special activities for blind people. They have to be organized in a particular way. However, this is not true for the mentally retarded. When you take a group of retarded people bowling, you don’t need to make special arrangements ahead of time with the bowling alley. Bullshit. You wouldn’t organize activities differently for 5 year olds than 10? than 15? As anyone whose ever been a camp counselor knows, myself included, there are huge differences in activities. Yeah, sure we could all go bowling, but most 10 year olds wouldn’t enjoy a chess tournament, much in the same way that I would get no enjoyment playing chess against the latest Russian chess prodigy. > [@](#): > > So, the closest I could come to a parallel would be “gay”. Like mental retardation, it’s not an illness. It’s not something you can take medication for. It’s not something that’s “going to get better”. It’s something you’re born with. It’s something you can’t do anything about. It’s something that isn’t immediately obvious to people you meet on the street. It’s something that eludes strict definition–are you gay or are you bisexual? Does having one homosexual experience make you “gay”? Do you refer to yourself as “gay”? Just how “gay” are you? I don’t think this analogy works at all. Mental retardation is readily apparent in most after a few minutes of conversation. Homosexuality is a sexual/romantic/emotional orientation. Being gay never even needs to be known in a friend to friend relationship. It is only relevant in romantic or sexual relationships, and it has absolutely nothing to do with your ability to function in the world (socially and other ways). Also, as I’ve said, there _are_ degrees of MR. This is apples and oranges. Of course it sounds silly when you try to qualify the degree to which someone is gay. > [@](#): > > . If all I could socialize with was people with comparative 240 IQ’s I might think it would be pretty groovy to find someone like myself to hang with. Thank you **Astro**. Exactly. > [@](#): > > _from Zette_ Moe, the best thing for Steve is to simply ASK him what he wants. If he prefers to be around other people who have mental disabilities, then pursue that route. Chances are, he wants to hang around with anyone, disabled or not. > [@](#): > > _from DDG_ And one more thing to address: Why do you feel compelled to find him some friends in the first place? …How do you know he isn’t perfectly happy? … Yes, these are very important points. I guess I should mention that I’m really doing this all on behalf of my friend Dan (Steve’s brother). I haven’t asked Steve anything of the sort. But Dan said straight out that: “Steve has no real friends… I want him to have a social life… Sure he likes hanging out with us but he knows he’s different…” along with other things I may have said in this thread. I don’t know if Steve explicitly communicated this to Dan but I’d have to think that Dan has some concrete reason for bringing this up. Dan asked me for help so I came here, and I have to therefore assume that Dan has already answered the questions you put forth. > [@](#): > > So, don’t assume that just because two people share a particular physical condition, like being blind, or retarded, or gay, or their age, they’re going to be friends. I never did. I think you, and perhaps others, are taking my OP to an extreme that was never intended. I never said I think Steve should be pulled out of this world and put on some distant island inhabited exclusively by retarded people. > [@](#): > > I doubt that any among us relish the idea of being reduced to a single adjective. I would find it decidedly tiresome to only have activities with folks with whom I share a single characteristic (yea, let’s have a bunch of short people hang out together, after all, we can commiserate about how rough it is to go shopping and reach things on shelves). > > And this is what you seem to be doing when deciding to ‘find retarded’ friends for this person. > > I agree that there are groups that have some benefit. but the presumption that such groups should be the main source of companionship reduces people to a common denominator, something that is rarely benificial, let alone kind. Again **Wring** , I said nothing of the sort. When did I presume that I thought such a group should be the main source of companionship? > [@](#): > > Conversation has nothing to do with IQ. Conversation is about “ideas”. Having a higher or lower IQ has nothing to do with your ideas on the weather, or death… **Astro** addressed this so I’ll just go ahead and agree with him. I have many acquantances of many various intellectual, experiential, levels. But in my more meaningful social relationships we talk about more than the weather and death. I am not saying that mentally retarded people are freaks of nature that need to be surrounded by other freaks. I _am_ saying that MR is a disability. I wouldn’t expect a mentally retarded person to be placed in a room of other MR people and become best friends based on their common handicap. But I do think that an organization or activity center with programs and events geared for different people according to their functioning level is a great idea, and I hope ARC, or any other lead I might come across, turns out to be something that Steve finds enjoyable. Thank you everyone who has contributed here. I know you all meant well, even those who disagreed with me, and I appreciate it. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2001, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893/29 "2001-02-19T23:33:36Z")
\*\* > [@](#): > > _originally posted by wring_ I doubt that any among us relish the idea of being reduced to a single adjective. I would find it decidedly tiresome to only have activities with folks with whom I share a single characteristic (yea, let’s have a bunch of short people hang out together, after all, we can commiserate about how rough it is to go shopping and reach things on shelves). > > And this is what you seem to be doing when deciding to ‘find retarded’ friends for this person. to which \*\*Moe replied: > [@](#): > > Again **Wring** , I said nothing of the sort. When did I presume that I thought such a group should be the main source of companionship? oddly enough, I got that idea from the OP which you posted. In it, you described your friend’s brother as ‘high functioning’ “mildly retarded”, and went on to say > [@](#): > > but he really needs some friends who are like him. You can see why we’d leap to that assumption, right? ---
**Author:** ![ENugent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/4af34b/32.png) [@ENugent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ENugent)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2001, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893/30 "2001-02-20T00:14:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by wring \* > Quoting **Moe** : > > > [@](#): > > > > Again **Wring** , I said nothing of the sort. When did I presume that I thought such a group should be the main source of companionship? > > oddly enough, I got that idea from the OP which you posted. In it, you described your friend’s brother as ‘high functioning’ “mildly retarded”, and went on to say > > > [@](#): > > > > but he really needs some friends who are like him. > > You can see why we’d leap to that assumption, right? Actually, no. I saw **Moe** ask for information on how Steve could find some _more_ friends, and several others respond as if he were asking for information on how Steve could find some _substitute_ friends. It also seemed to me that **DDG** assumed that **Moe** had taken it upon himself to “help” Steve. I read the same OP and assumed that Steve’s brother had asked for help, maybe because **Moe** was a friend who knew how to find stuff on the Internet. And while it may well be that the brother is butting in with advice that Steve doesn’t want, family gets that kind of privilege. (My brother and sister-in-law send me attachment parenting books, and I don’t even have kids yet. This might be an insult from casual friends; from family, it means you put the books on a shelf and say you’re hoping to get around to it soon if they ask whether you’ve read them yet). Maybe Steve’s brother will pass on the information, and Steve will ask “why are you telling me this? I already have friends!” Maybe he’ll go to a support group meeting and like it. Maybe he’ll go to a support group meeting and hate it. But I don’t see why **Moe** shouldn’t ask whether there are support groups around without getting a lecture on why they’re a bad idea. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2001, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893/31 "2001-02-20T00:26:53Z")
'scuse me? He asked “why do you assume I only want to find retarded people for him to be friends with” and I quote **his own words** that say exactly that, and \*\*I’m \*\* the one out of line? He asked, not how to find people who would enjoy the same music as Steve, (something he mentioned about him), but ‘how to find friends who are like him’. And several people interpreted that to mean, people who are also retarded, and it seems, since he only expressed interest in the ARC, that we were correct in that assumption. Several took issue with the concept of assuming that some one with a specific disability would somehow find it more enjoyable to be surrounded by ‘people like them’. And, in fact, in the OP, \*\*Moe’s \*\* friend comments that Steve **likes** being around the brother’s friends. I’ll admit that he posted originally in General Questions, but now it’s in Great Debates. He didn’t ask for info on ‘support groups’ (which are a totally different item), but ways to find Steve friends (beating the dead horse here) ‘like him’. ---
**Author:** ![ENugent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/4af34b/32.png) [@ENugent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ENugent)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2001, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893/32 "2001-02-20T00:59:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by wring \* > 'scuse me? > > He asked “why do you assume I only want to find retarded people for him to be friends with” and I quote **his own words** that say exactly that, and \*\*I’m \*\* the one out of line? First, that’s not what he asked. The question you are paraphrasing was “When did I presume that I thought such a group should be the main source of companionship?” Of course he wants to find retarded people for Steve to be friends with - that was the point of the OP. But that’s not the same thing as saying that that’s the only kind of person Steve would want to be friends with. So, I thought you had misunderstood his intent in the OP. But not nearly as much as I think you misunderstood his last post and mine. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2001, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893/33 "2001-02-20T01:21:57Z")
He said in the OP : > [@](#): > > a really great person, positive and friendly all the time. He is certainly not low functioning enough to benefit from living in a group home but he is low enough to be aware of the fact that he is different. He hangs out with us at parties amd we see concerts together (he loves Chick Corea and Bela Fleck which should tell you just how cool he is) but he really needs some friends who are like him He followed it up with this thanks for the reference to the ARC > [@](#): > > . It looks very much like what I had in mind. Now, the first one tells us some things about Steve, what a great and fun guy he is to hang out with, but the OP is perplexed. Why? Apparently, not because Steve doesn’t have enough friends, but that, in his own words, Steve doesn’t have “friends who are like him”. Sorry, I find it difficult to assume that it means anything **BUT** what it says, “I’m looking for some retarded friends for Steve”. And, especially since he follows it up with the second posting, thanking folks with the link to ARC, which (again in his own words) is “very much like what I had in mind”. So, he didn’t stop that person and say, no, jeepers, I was looking for groups that might be of more interest to Steve and his love of music. Or Steve and his interest in baseball (if he had one). Nope. Another group with folks who are ‘retarded’. Now, don’t get me wrong - I’m familiar with the ARC, and think it’s a dandy organization. However, my original comments were about reducing people to a single adjective and looking for companionship based on that one shared characteristic is neither kind nor beneficial. And I stand by them. You obviously disagree. I didn’t ‘interpret’ his words, I quoted them. I’m fairly certain that **Moe** didn’t intend how it sounded, but it does seem clear that his intent **was** in fact to find a group of folks who had developmental disabilities for his friend’s brother to join. He sounds uncomfortable with it layed out so barely, but, they were his words, not mine. If, again, the intent was for Steve to net work and find supportive services for the blantent hypocrisy and prejudice I’m sure he faces everyday, the ARC is one of the places that I’d have suggested too. But the expressed intent was to find friends for the guy. ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2001, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893/34 "2001-02-20T02:36:09Z")
Moe, ``` There is an organization in Central Jersey, called Citizens for Independent Living, which provides housing and transportation for "high-functioning" mentally handicapped people. They also do some social activities. They are based near Princeton - I can probably find the phone number if you need it. ``` ---
**Author:** ![Moe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moe/32/2972_2.png) [@Moe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moe)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2001, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893/35 "2001-02-20T02:45:54Z")
**Andy** , thanks a lot! I’ll search for their info, but if you have the number handy I’d appreciate it. If not, it’s OK, I can find it I’m sure. In any case, it’s probably not a good idea to post it, but send me an email if you’d like. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-activities-for-retarded-people/54893.md?page=1)