New, Improved Autism Speaks Slogan!

Post Reply New Topic

TLPG is a friend of mine, Joeker we all know that you are friends with a certain recently banned member. What is bad is the things you have said about TLPG on that other blog that you love to post on. Tell me Joeker, do you agree with the latest blog entry on the despicable blog that you love so much?

Last edited by cdarwin on 25 Dec 2007, 2:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

AS is not a defect.

People with AS have very high I.Q.s, exceptional skills in their fields of interest, the ability to make effective systems, and sometimes borderline savant skills (e.g. absolute pitch, total recall). Challenges can usually be negotiated through support and learning. It is not impossible for people with AS to function in a social environment or to be organised enough to be effective. Some (such as myself) may even enjoy the experience of having such vivid emotions due to hyper-sensitivity.

Defective is a subjective measure. Some people could argue that Kanner's Autism with mental retardation is defective based on the retardation aspect (I disagree), but most of what is considered defective is based on a social measure rather than a scientific one. Generally, the majority/group in power will view the oppressed as defective. I cite Jefferson's (and others') pseudo-scientific arguments attempting to prove that African-Americans were inferior to the Caucasian majority.

Once AS is not seen as defective, a cure is unnecessary.



Atypicality is not inherently wrong.

You assume that because AS is atypical, it is something from which one should distance oneself. As I said before, AS is not a defect and provides several academic advantages that benefit society. I need not further reiterate myself.

Regarding the use of the word "normal", you should know that "normal" is a statistical term regarding the arithmetic mean of a sample or a population. It should not refer to people, as no person is a mathematical figure that one could compare to a statistical mean, which has never been calculate for the same reason. "Typical" refers to what is common.



This is true of all behavioural differences, even among neurotypical people.



Non Sequitur

Firstly, you have not sufficiently proven that a difference requires a cure. There is not logical step that links the two in your argument. If your contention is that AS is a defective difference that requires a cure due to its defective nature, I cross apply my previous argument that AS is not defective.

However, as your statement stands, it implies that all physical differences that cause behavioural differences must be cured. As all differences in behaviour stem from physical neurological differences, all physical differences in the brain must be cured, which I will assume means that all brains should be exact copies. How do you plan to accomplish this? And exact copies of what? Who has the authority and the foresight to decide which brain is ideal for copies? Those who assume that they do initiate genocides and other large scale unethical actions. Moreover, the scientific community cannot discern a medical ideal for serotonin balance when treating something as common as clinical depression.

If we assumed that exact copies of the same brain is both a desirable and achievable end, how would one ensure that all of these brains kept the same physical states. We must remember that every minuscule difference in experience affects the physical state of the brain and will thus affect the behaviours of a person. As it is not possible to ensure that even two people will have the exact same experience, the only way that this could be achieved is by eliminating all people except for one. Can you substantiate any ethical advantage to this?

Reductio ad absurdum

Not only is your statement insufficiently proven, but when assumed as true and universalised, it yields an unethical end. Thus, this statement fail to serve its imperfect duty, outlined by Immanuel Kant's Categorical Imperative.



The flaw in your assumptions is that AS inherently makes a person unsociable. I cross-apply my previous argument regarding this matter.



I enjoy it for all of the above-mentioned reasons. As far as parents appreciate their child's AS, I cite the case of Jessie Kierbow.



All of these statements are empirically falsifiable. I cite myself as a counterexample to all above statements despite the fact that I have AS. There are others here who will assert that these claims are not true.



Tragedy is a matter of perception. I'm sorry that your perception of AS is so negative. I can assure you that it is not as negative of you think.



Read this. That is all.

P.S. Both the words "Categorical Imperative" and "Jessie Kierbow" are hyperlinks.

Brilliant post, Dongiovanni! *applause*

I'm a nerdsicle, but i have friends and girlfriends and sometimes other peoples girlfriends. I am burdened by being on a planet full of bad monkies. I am also burdened by not being as hot as brad pitt. I am not burdened with a small penis. I bear my woes manfully.

Z, you DO know that having "other people's girlfriends" is WRONG???

I am not burdened with a small penis either...not least because I am a woman...

M

Corollary

Here are the primary problems with cure organisations such as Autism Speaks:

1. The focus is not on autistics.
These organisations focus largely on the state of those around them, namely the parents. "Autism Everyday" did not highlight how difficult life was for the autistic child, but how difficult life was for the parents raising them. I saw not one autistic person speak about how difficult autism made their lives. Some parents speculated how difficult the lives of their children might be, but Autism Speaks allows no first hand evidence about autism.

2. The funding is horribly misdirected.
The goal of Autism Speaks and Cure Autism Now is (of all things) curing autism. However, funding from autistic organisations is better spent creating accommodations for autistic adults whose functioning level could be significantly improved with support.

3. Autism prevention is unethical.
While my position on abortion is fairly moderate (I believe it unethical but must be legalised in order to uphold Griswold v. Connecticut as it is a penumbral right before viability), my position on eugenic abortion is rather fervent. Few pro-choice advocates argue that abortion is a viable method of gender selection; this is almost universally acknowledged as unethical. I equate elimination of disabled children via abortion to abortion as gender selection, as both reflect a mindset that one group is inherently superior to the other, an idea that my previous post disprove when referring to autism. While I cannot (yet) contend that this action can be prohibited by the government, I can contend that society has a right to influence the behaviour of others in ethical ways.

4. Autism Speaks will not allow input from anti-cure autistics, nor will they publish stories about successful autistics.
This is marginalisation of a group for political means and lying by omission. Both actions are unethical. In fact, lying by omission is considered to be equal to lying in a U.S. Court. So, if a witness omits fact with the intent to mislead when under oath, he is guilty of perjury.

5. Autism Speaks assumes that a cure is necessary.
It is not. See above post and read the Jim Sinclair article "Don't Mount for us".

6. Many parents in Autism Speaks fail to understand their own instrumentality in their autistic child's difficulty.
While some difficulty with autism stems from having to cope with neurochemical difficulties, the primary difficulty stems from functioning in a neurotypical world that makes no sense to an autistic. They do not understand that there are things that they can do that would make leaps and bounds in their children's progress, things that have nothing to do with therapy. Many parents express how difficult it is to involve their children in certain activities. However, they do not realise that they are deciding the activity and then trying to force the child to participate. While this may be necessary in some cases (for hygienic or safety reasons), it certainly should not be the case in recreational activities. Those should be about the child. Some also try to eliminate important coping mechanisms from their children's activities. This is absolutely inhumane. Stereotypy and rigidity are often necessary for autistics as they need to be able to cope.

7. Autism Speaks perpetuates the Thiomersal myth.
It is false.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/c ... /4/S1/1023
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entre ... s=17168158

I know that I stop referring to organisations besides Autism Speaks. I just got lazy.

Mechanima, I am a thoroughly bad puppy that deserves a one way trip to the vet. I grew up with two elder teenage brothers, and the house was always full of girls...

Ummmmm, there's a completely sexist remark just begging to be uttered at that, Zara, but I think I'll hold my tongue!!

Darwin, TLPG was a friend of mine too. Falling outs are harsh.
I'm hardly friends, so to speak. I am simply offended at the self-centered and self-righteous people accusing him of Nazism and worse. I just don't see any justice in their actions, and I myself feel ashamed of actions I took against him. It's called guilt.

Despicable? As despicable as demanding someone tell their brother who's recently been diagnosed with AS, who'd been on the brink of suicide, all kinds of things about how he'd been taught to hate himself, including his parents? To bring him a message from the Aspies about how happy and proud they were, when he'd been on the brink of suicide? Cdarwin, you should look more closely at your friends before you choose them.

I do not agree. This is fine. I have the courage to disagree. I don't outright make accusations, stand up on a pedestal, and challenge him like some kind of crusader. I ask questions, I make remarks, I talk to him. I don't call him a Nazi and make demands. It's a matter of politeness. If you just start flipping out, then why do you expect anything but his laughter and your comment being deleted?

Now tell me Cdarwin, if you agree with sending a group of people onto someone else's blog with the express purpose of harassment? How about agreeing that Autistic women only deserve respect if they don't make waves, and support your cause? How about agreeing with attacking someone's integrity in a public forum, then moving on to attack them in a private blog, where none may comment? I believe I gave you a link for that last one.

Is that how WP lets it's members treat each other? By saying that someone's opinion is a crock of crap, and then giving her both barrels out of spite for her beliefs?

What have the Admins or Mods to say about TLPG's little tantrum and rant, hm?

I for one think that Selo in no way deserves this kind of treatment. She gives her opinion, and instead of discussion, she gets insulted and harassed. She spoke up, and said what she believes. Is that so wrong?

I'm not even going to keep coming into this argument, because whether people listen to me or not, I'm allowed to have an opinion.

I never wanted to stir up this big fight, I just asked for people's thoughts on why Autism Speaks is so hated. Then when I was told a few people's views and I didn't agree, this happens.

The people arguing with me seem to think that having Asperger's is a jolly wonderful experience full of unicorns and sugar and leaping into fields of flowers where nothing can go wrong.

All the things I said about Aspies are things I still stand by, no matter how much TLPG or anyone else argues with me. You're allowed to think Aspies are going to save the world and bring change, so I'm entitled to not think so.

In truth, I didn't know jack about AS until I got to these forums - so really you can thank all the people who post here for making me think the way I do now, because such a vast majority of them have exactly the characteristics I described.

Again, I didn't want to cause a fight. I was just stating what I observe and believe based on what I've seen of people here (the only autistics I've ever had experience with).

As for dongiovanni asking me to give a reason as to why differences need a cure, I will say that a cure is only necessary if the difference of the person in question causes some kind of difficulty or challenges for the person or those around them. AS sure seems to do that, at least on some level, without help.

I said earlier that eugenics isn't the only cure available. Since other people have stated that with work and support those with AS can overcome their troubles, I'm going to say that that's probably the number one way that I see to "cure" AS - social work and training with the diagnosed will help them succeed in a tough world while not sacrificing their IQ or talents. I don't see eugenics as a possible option because I don't believe AS is genetic, so really the only surefire way to give Aspies some help is give them social work and some good TLC.

I really don't want to go back to arguing that goes nowhere, and trying to get my points respected even if they are not agreed with. So that's really all I have to say. I'm not particularly mad at anyone, and all along in this thread I've just been stating my opinions which is as much my right as it is everyone else's.

Darwin's battle with Autism Speaks is one sided and created by him alone. I've read why others don't like Autism Speaks and that's their right. The organization is fighting hard to make life better for those on the spectrum and if some don't like it, then they shouldn't partake of the fruits of that labor.

Autism Speaks may not be everyone's cup of tea. World Planet may not be everyone's cup of tea. But, there should be room in the community for all, plus more than one place to share ideas without flames. Parents and Autistics on this board don't get flamed or put in the defensive chair no way near what goes on on Speaks. It is generally the parents supporting biomed and alt treatment that get attacked. It doesn't mean they don't respect Autism. They're looking for ways to alleviate and cure symptoms so the kids can live better lives. Who can fault a parent for that? People here are looking for better lives as well. I'd say 75% of the threads on World Planet deal with lifestyle issues and from what I've read, many here struggle daily in certain areas of their lives and some have tried different things to help in those areas.

Whether you support a cure or recovery, some parents on Speaks have been successful in helping their children. Some of these parents have kids that are not just thriving as Autistics, but excelling, despite coming from the lowest end of the spectrum. Tito Mukhopadhyay's mom once said, "Autism is a door. We all have to find our own keys to open it." The parents there are finding the keys that open the doors to a better world for their kids.

There shouldn't be any harassment against Speaks or members of its community. The parents on Speaks are good people and have held their own despite the beatings they take from outsiders. Not to mention the financial, emotional and other hardships they endure on a daily basis offline. Come together on common ground, if not WP can do its own thing and Speaks can do theirs. With respect and in peace.

Joeker,

You said,

Yes falling out can be hard, but TLPG think very much alike and it is unlikely that we will have a falling out.

And then you said,

You did not answer me when I asked if you agree with his last blog entry on euthanasia. Do you?

And then you said,

I would say the same to you. The person you support says things like hanging a person upside down from a tree and....well you know the rest. Is that the kind of person you want to associate yourself with. I do choose my friends carefully. TLPG and a are a lot alike. When he describes himself on his blog he could be describing me. See TLPG know that we are human beings, and we don't need to be cured of anything. We need acceptance of who we are.

And then,

The personal attacks made on the site we are talking about, it is hard not for anyone who has a any common decency not to be offended. He states false information. He impersonates peoples children. Why would anyone feel obligated to be polite to a person who insults people who are different just because they are happy being who they are. The website we are talking about is about hating people who are different. Are you surprised that people are offended and flip out.

You then said,

Yes, you did give a link to that website. The website is not open for comments like many other websites. The blog you like to post on does it all of the time. Yes, it is open for comment only so it can be edited, for the sole purpose of insulting the person with indecent and threatening language. If that can not be done the comment is not posted. I will address Selo's comments in a minute right here on a public forum.

You then said,

No generally the people of the WP community generally support acceptance of who they are. It is surprising that someone with Selo's opinion would expect a lot of support from the members of a community like this. Autism Speaks would most likely welcome Selo with open arms. I am sure she would be very popular there with the people who feel that autistic people must change to be "normal". There is no such thing as normal. Is the person who runs the blog you love to post on "normal"? I define normal as average or mediocre. Not exceptional. I have never wanted to be average or mediocre. I will be happy to debate Selo right here on this forum. I will suggest to her that we start a thread called Selo, and Darwin where we can discuss the pro's, and con's of being mediocre, rather than exceptional. I will discuss anything Selo would like to discuss with me in a civil and rational way. I can see why some people were offened by her posts. She is on a message board that is pro acceptance.

Selo, I would like to discuss an debate with you, your thoughts that you posted, and are quoted above. I am the number 1 poster on Autism Speaks. I would like to answer your questions, and you can answer mine. I am willing to debate this on an open forum and maintain civility with you. I do not wish to fight with you either although I do disagree with you on a number of th points you have made her and on other posts. With your permission, I would like to start a thread, using your quot above as the OP. I would like to call this thread the Selo and Darewin thread. It should be interesting.

Opening a new thread like that would be a good idea, if Selo consents.

Please remember to keep things civil, guys. There have been several comments on this thread that could be interpreted as deliberately inciting conflict, which is against site rules. There has also been a good deal of quality discussion, which is great.

NewportbeachDude. I would like to make you the same offer that I have made Selo. I am completely willing to debate you on the merits of the Autism Speaks organization, You said,"" While this sytatement may have some truth too it, there are many people who feel the same way as I do.

How about we create a public thread and entitle it NBD vs Darwin thread, and I will be happy to discuss this matter with you. You answer my questions, and I will answer yours. People can weigh in, but we will keep our conversations on track with each other. I welcome this discussion. Lets not derail this thread any further. This deserves it's own topic. The conversation will remain civil, and productive. I imagine that considering that you are an Emu Egg you are most likely someone I have spoken to before on Autism Speaks. PM me and I will start the thread. Or you can It is up to you. PM me when you do.

I would appreciate that too. When I enter into discussions of this nature, I do not want to do it from a position where it's something personal about people, or worse, about people's friends, like who takes what side just has to do with who likes who rather than what people's positions would otherwise be. The social tangles and multiple-board-fights and stuff are just confusing, detract from real discussion, and make me not want to get involved lest I or others end up subject to personal attack by someone whose friend's enemy's friend's enemy's friend agrees or disagrees with me or something and who thinks that's the basis for all such discussions. (That sort of thing, as well as having to answer for other people's opinions than one's own, ends up baffling and aggravating and non-fruitful for everyone involved.) The moment I saw the "You're X's friend," "Well you're Y's friend," stuff going on I just wanted out.