If you're not Autistic you think this means a person of disadvantage able to do what they shouldn't be able to better than those conventionally thought to be better-equipped for it. If you are Autistic you will immediately have cottoned onto there being no ass-kicking contests that you have heard of and if there are any, no one goes to watch them. No matter how awesome you are, you have to be awesome by yourself.
At my support group this week(like Fight Club but we don't like touching each other) we discussed our confusion when we first realised people don't think like us. We just assume of others as they assume of us that we are alike. This is why a groan when I hear some well-meaning people arguing for tolerance, understanding and the usual on the basis that 'we are all the same inside'. Actually, the very definition of what I am is that it's the inside that is what is different and the sameness of the outside that causes the problems. You don't need to know how we think(and if we ever play Chess I'd prefer you didn't), but if you did know you would already be asking yourself "What has this to do with Case file number five?". You'd be right as that file concerns the issue of distortion, the misuse of facts and data to support Coalition goals on welfare policy. Well, what about...
Have you guessed what it is yet? If your answer was words to the effect of 'typical muck-raking Mail article' then you can't be helped. If I ask you what is wrong with it and you say something like 'they're cherry-picking the one day where the court heard a load of cases' then you're closer, but still wrong, still not Autistic. Walk like an Autistic, do it right now: flap your hands, flick your fingers, make strange noises. Who owns the copyright on the photographs?
WITHOUT LOOKING, if you're Autistic you already know. The rest of you flick back to the tab or window you've got open of that article. If you have not yet even clicked that link and got this far, you probably do this with all my other dispatches too. Shame on you; I love my links.
The answer you are looking for is the Press Association and here is the image that was used.
If you're thinking like an Autistic you have some issues with this response. That is just one photograph, what about the others? What are those Autistics going on about ask the rest of you? Well, only one image in that article had a copyright label; the rest are clear. If you're Autistic you already know where I'm going with this. Write your answer down now to the question: Where am I going with this?
The answer: The Daily Mail must own the copyright to those pictures otherwise they would have to credit the owner, so they had a guy stand outside a Birmingham courthouse identifying people, putting faces to names and taking pictures of them of which he managed 12. This means the Mail would have had to have known what was going to happen on that date at that courthouse beforehand. Even if they just knew from local newspaper courts pages, they would still have had to have been actively searching for this which they almost certainly wouldn't have been doing. Whilst the Mail is in the habit of taking stories for local newspapers and blowing them up into national outrages or bloated human-interest stories(or cuddly animals and cuddly animals having horrible things happening to them), they do parse cycles, not detailed reading for this. Someone told them.
The Mail tries to sell it as if this was just one ordinary day where there just so happens to be 23 benefit fraud cases in the same courthouse and possibly the same court-room within minutes of each other, one after the other. They cover themselves with one quote from Emma Boon of the Taxpayers Alliance:
"It’s shocking that the DWP is now having to block-book time in court to deal with scroungers."