When asked in class
"Is violence an effective way of achieving changes in society?"
one of our children in the past replied yes.
Subsequently, they were held back and questioned under the initial stage of the schools PREVENT policy.

For a question that was expecting a response to what should have been asked "Do you think violence should be used as a way of achieving changes in society?"

How many autistic people get caught out by badly phrased and framed questions?


Obviously, violence can be accepted as being effective and also something a person does not wish to engage in.
Stupidly phrased/coded questions are going to catch out all sorts of people.

Prevent was awful when we were trained in it when it started. Everything we have heard, shows it got worse as it developed.

Now, we suspect, Westminster will taint autistic people with the *might be a terrorist* in the same way they have with others they do not like.

@CreatureOfTheHill That and the way the question is framed leaves too much room for interpretation. I can see myself answering it both ways, depending on what issue I'd think of, while being asked. Most of the times violence isn't the solution, but I really can't imagine overthrowing a dictator or solving a lot of the things happening during WWII or shortly after it with no violence what so ever.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!