Asperger's Conversations

Sensory Struggles: My Kid Makes Kombucha

Kombucha is a fermented drink that is all the rage in my corner of the world.  You can buy several brands in several flavors in our local food coop (e.g., mango, chia, original).  My kid has been making her own homemade Kombucha for the past year...making her own yeast producing "mother" and combining it with black tea and other ingredients.  At first I was turned off by it's vinegeray after-taste but I'm becoming hooked on its strong and refreshing taste.  It's kinda yummy.

Growing up in and around New York I was exposed to a range of foods and tastes.  My mother had learned, for example, to make curry dishes from her Indian roomate in graduate school so leftovers were usually "curried" for the next meal (note: I made up the word "curried").  And in the city we ate lots of different things, some of which I liked and some that I didn't care for.  But the big point is that not only did I try everything, I learned that over time I might "learn to like it" after repeated attempts.

Individuals with strong taste aversions experience initial dislikes of foods as highly punishing and immediately decide not to eat them ever again.  And so, they end up living their food lives within narrow borders, which is really too bad.  As kids get older it's important to talk about this and explain that one's "upper brain" can talk to your "lower brain" and force a kind of exposure therapy to disliked foods.  And, repeated attempts to eat aversive foods might just produce new results (e.g., "Hey that's kinda good!").

So, when we talk about "accomodation" (versus change) of individuals with sensory aversions it's important not to assume that "going with" is always the best path.  First we can try, gently and systematically, to "go against" by introducing aversive sensory stimuli.  Exposure to our worst fears is usually a good, not a bad thing.  In the end, it helps people to live within greater rather than smaller boundaries.

I'm going for more Kombucha.

Puzzling Internet Failure: People Still Lack a Say

I started blogging in the early days of blogging on Radio Userland and tapped in to the excitement many of us felt about our new found freedom of expression.  I wrote often about how the net via blogging now afforded Profs at small colleges with traditionally  fewer supports direct access to an interested audience.  I was taken by the early writings of pioneers such as Jon Udell who showed us how the media could be pryed open to include reporting from everyday folks and aggregated in useful ways.

And, there is no doubt that all that did happen and that so many aspects of life, including business (web pages, RSS), music (Pandora), academia (blogging) changed and flourished as a result of novel use of the web.  Yet still, it seems that so many people continue to feel unempowered, disengaged.  Influential blogging is owned by a limited group of people who manage to climb the google chain, music breatk-throughs to fame are possible but still difficult, and scoring big with an internet business is often equated to buying a lottery ticket.

So why hasn't the web achieved democratization?  Why do so many feel that "having a say" is still for a select few who have managed to achieve high Klout scores?  Despite tremendous access via cell phones, laptops, public access computers in libraries or cafe's, most people do not get to say what they think or to "vote" in any meaningful way.  For example, why don't we really know how many in the Ukraine favor annexation by Russia? Or how many think the US has a shot in the upcoming World Cup? Or what people really think about celebrities running amok? Or about shrinking funds for state colleges and universities?  Instead there is pervasive cynicisim that all that matters is what a select few think...that "what people think" is not really about "what people think" but more about power and money and control.

And so, to anyone listening, I'm wondering how the internet can adapt to accomodate the thoughts and beliefs of the many, rather than the relatively few?

College Choice and Social Capital

I had lunch not too long ago with a recently retired college president with whom I was discussing my own kid's plans on applying to college.  After telling him about the various schools my kid was thinking of attending, he muttered, "Social Capital."

It took me a bit of time to fully process what he meant by the remark, even though it was obvious: Getting a degree is not just about, well, getting a degree, but also about the people you meet, the social network you create.  And, obviously attending a first or second tier school is going to create more social capital than a third or fourth tier school.  Put simply, the connections one makes at Harvard or Middlebury are very different than the ones a student makes at lesser known schools.

Of course no one wants to put "social capital" on the table when discussing higher education.  Educators would rather talk about, well, education.  But for the sake of our students and their future we should talk about it.  And, we need to work on improving the social capital of our lesser known schools.  And as for online for-profit schools, students should be mindful of these limitations before incurring big debt to obtain these degrees.