Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • Willow

      Welcome to the forum!   09/17/2017

      Please come in from the rain and sit by the fire! We're happy you found us and hope you will feel at home here.  
Aeolienne

Chris Packham subject of TV documentary on 17 October

Recommended Posts

Nesf

I really look forward to watching this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sanctuary

I've now see this and it was very good. Much of what he said will resonate with members here. He explored "cures" for autism that some are using in the USA. He was sceptical of the value of these and said in his view the best therapy or "cure" for AS / autism is just being alone - when we are alone our differences cease to be a problem. He's been able to build a career around his specialised interest in wildlife and he rightfully pointed out there should be far more emphasis on what individuals with AS can do rather than the usual focus on what they can't do. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nesf

It was better than other documentaries I've seen on autism, perhaps because it was narrated from an insider's perspective, that of an autistic person, rather than from an outsider's point of view. I could relate a lot to what he said, especially how he had to find coping mechanisms to deal with academic life and to get by in a job or environment that demands a lot of interaction. I feel that I'm in a similar situation, though I don't have the added pressure of having to appear on TV.

I can relate to what he says about his mind wandering and jumping from topic to topic and not being able to focus on what a person is saying. This is a huge issue for me - my mind just wants to go off on its own tangent. I also struggle with processing and catching up when a person changes subject. I agree that people need to try to understand autistic people rather than trying to 'cure' them. I liked that he conducted an interview with someone who was saying how valuable autistic people are to society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gone away

I can relate to it, but not sure what to make of it as it was necessarily made for TV and fairly superficial ... looking forward to part two next week though as it just seemed to end hanging / incomplete. 

I wonder how the NT community found it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sofi

I thought it was good. I liked how they used a little boy to play him when he was younger, it made the programme very lifelike. I could relate to him explaining his intensity of love of his special interests. I didn't realise there was part two next week, that's good, I'll look forward to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
collectingrocks

I watched it and could related to much of it.

My wife and I had a good laugh when he was talking about buying a sweater (or jacket) and buys 3 of them...who else would do that...? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gone away

Well there was no part two.
Its stirred up a lot of naive outrage within the warped ABA cults - because he was not supportive of them.

 

Edited by Gone home

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nesf
10 hours ago, collectingrocks said:

.who else would do that...?

I would :lol: I have multiple copies of clothes that I like.

9 hours ago, Gone home said:

Well there was no part two.
Its stirred up a lot of naive outrage within the warped ABA cults - because he was not supportive of them.

 

That doesn't surprise me. The way those kids in ABA were being treated in the footage was appalling.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
collectingrocks
15 minutes ago, Nesf said:

I would :lol: I have multiple copies of clothes that I like.

Yes I bought 3 of the same last week in different colours 😆

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aeolienne

The bit about him being in a relationship with a zookeeper surprised me a bit, because I'd seen him quoted in press releases by the Captive Animals Protection Society (who are anti-zoos). Then again, just because he gives them the odd soundbite doesn't mean he buys into their entire philosophy. It's a bit like Martina Navratilova lending her support to PeTA's anti-fur campaign whilst turning a blind eye to their blanket opposition to animal experimentation ("Even if it led to a cure for Aids, we'd still be against it").

Here's a rather provocative piece by Chris in his capacity as a zookeeper's significant other: Why killing Marius the giraffe was justified - even though it's a PR disaster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sanctuary

I don't think the headline does Chris Packham any favours as he seems merely to be saying that animals in general sometimes need to be euthanised - not that he thought it was unavoidable in this case. He also states in the article that animals in zoos can be seen as "animal ambassadors" and I suppose someone can be critical of zoos in general but still feel they have a role in educating the public about animals. It's true that on many issues there may appear to be inconsistencies or possible anomalies in people's views. e.g. someone who campaigns for animal welfare but eats meat or supports animal experimentation. Even among vegetarians and vegans there can be question marks about their views on certain animal issues. Sometimes the inconsistencies arise from lack of knowledge, sometimes changing on other issues seems too difficult for some people. I don't eat meat and am a big supporter of animal rights and welfare but I would far rather appreciate any steps someone can make to promoting the better treatment of animals than expect them to change on every issue. On this and many other issues there can be apparent inconsistencies in attitudes and behaviour - an entirely "pure" or consistent policy is rarely possible. Moving in the right direction is something to be applauded even if the ultimate destination may never be reached (and may not even be a desirable place.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gone away

Quote from the article ...

'The principal role of zoo animals, I feel, is as ambassadors for nature's wild masterpieces, as tools for education and public engagement, to teach people about the need for conservation and to motivate them to be concerned about the plight of animals in the wild.

I have never seen any evidence of that at all....ever. 
I think they are horrendous places personally and therefore can't support them

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×