ASPartOfMe wrote:
ND movement supporters while generally anti cure are not anti treatment. ND movement supporters are widely PERCEIVED as anti treatment.
Right. And the solution isn't to shut up (as carlos apparently thinks we should) but to advocate more loudly
for the kinds of treatments (and research) we believe are needed.
ASPartOfMe wrote:
“Identity Politics” as currently defined is a pejorative describing people who view themselves and others solely through the prism of group identity. The term is used to discredit people’s opinions as invalid. When there is Columbus Day or St. Patrick’s day parade and politicians go there and mug for the TV cameras as is common practice, we don’t call that identity politics. When a person is a member of the Knights of Columbus and calls himself “Italian” we don’t browbeat him for not calling himself “American” or even “Italian-American”. People just seem to assume the person is not more loyal to Italy then America and thinks of himself as more than just Italian.
Right, because the Italians and Irish aren't discriminated against all that much anymore.
Only the groups that are still disadvantaged get browbeaten (by conservatives, at least) for "identity politics" -- precisely
because they are the very ones who actually
need to organize on the basis of group identity, and because others either (1) would rather keep the disadvantaged group in their place or (2) consider their own difficulties with the process of social change to be an oh-so-much-more serious problem than the far greater difficulties faced by the disadvantaged group.
(Additionally, alas, some members of the disadvantaged group echo the discomforts of the privileged as a reason to refuse to support the fight for their own rights.)
ASPartOfMe wrote:
If someone identifies as “autistic” or “aspie” and is a supporter of the Neurodiversity movement so many assume that person is an and elitist ableist engaging in toxic identity politics. Why is this?
For a historical perspective by Jim Sinclair, in
his history of Autism Network International:
Quote:
Nearly all of us who were involved in the earliest period of ANI had met many parents of autistic children, at conferences and local parent support groups. Almost invariably, the parents were pleased and excited to hear from us. True, their primary interest was in using us as resources for their children rather than supporting us in our own goals; but still, they were not
hostile toward us. It seems that one autistic person at a time--and preferably a passive one--might be welcomed as an interesting novelty or an amusing diversion or possibly even a valuable source of information and insight. But autistic people organizing together, autistic people pursuing our own interests rather than furthering the interests of parents and professionals--suddenly we were perceived as a threat.
Only several years later, while researching the history of self-advocacy by disabled people (Sinclair, 1996), did I learn of the long history of similar opposition to attempts at self-advocacy and self-determination by people with a variety of disabilities (Kugelmass, 1951; Putnam, 1979; Williams & Shoultz, 1982; Van Cleve & Crouch, 1989; Lane, 1992; Shapiro, 1993; Christiansen & Barnartt, 1995; Dybwad & Bersani, 1996; Kennedy, 1996). Any attempt by a group of disempowered people to challenge the status quo--to dispute the presumption of their incompetence, to redefine themselves as equals of the empowered class, to assert independence and self-determination--has been met by remarkably similar efforts to discredit them. The discrediting tactics used most frequently are:
1) If at all possible, to deny that the persons mounting the challenge are really members of the group to which they claim membership. This tactic has been used against disability activists with learning disabilities and psychiatric disabilities as well as against autistic people. As people with these disabilities often look "normal" and the disabilities are all defined in terms of behavior rather than empirically measurable physical differences, many of us have been told that the very fact that we are able to express ourselves, object to the ways our freedom has been restricted or our rights violated, and demand change proves that we cannot truly be autistic, or learning disabled, or psychiatrically impaired.
2) If there is incontrovertible evidence that the activists are members of the affected group, to aver that they are rare exceptions who are so unlike typical members of the affected group that what they have to say is irrelevant to the group as a whole. Michael Kennedy, who obviously and indisputably has cerebral palsy, explains the destructive impact of this tactic:
Quote:
When people tell me that I am “higher functioning” than the people they are talking about, I feel like they are telling me that I don't have anything in common with other people with disabilities. It's like they are putting me in a whole different category and saying that I don't have any right to speak. It upsets me because I take it that they don't want to give anyone else the opportunities I have been given, and that what I say can be ignored because they see me as more capable. It is a way of dividing us and putting down those who have more severe disabilities or who haven't had the opportunities to experience different situations in life. (Kennedy, 1996)
3) If it is not possible to deny that the activists are authentic representatives of the affected group, to appeal to the very prejudices and stereotypes the activists are seeking to overturn, and use those prejudices and stereotypes to claim that the activists are incapable of fully understanding their situations and knowing what is best for them. Often this approach incorporates the belief that disabled people need to have their freedom restricted for their own good, to protect them from coming to harm through their inability to act in their own best interests.
These strategies to undermine credibility are not new, nor are they limited to situations involving disability. Frederick Douglass was a nineteenth-century African American who escaped from slavery in 1838 and became a well-known abolitionist writer and speaker. In his 1855 autobiography
My Bondage and My Freedom, he recalled that at the beginning of his career speaking to white audiences about the evils of slavery, he was presented as something of a curiosity. Most anti-slavery lecturers where white; lecturers who were themselves fugitive slaves were a rarity. As the novelty wore off, people began to doubt that he had ever been a slave. He was suspected of being an impostor because he was too educated and too well-spoken to fit prevailing stereotypes about the ignorance of slaves. He also expressed frustration with white abolitionists' demand that he confine his speeches to simply recounting his personal experiences of slavery, and allow white people to elaborate on what they meant: "Give us the facts, we will take care of the philosophy." Eventually Douglass stopped working for white abolitionists and started his own anti-slavery publication.
Jim Sinclair was writing about events 25 or even 30 years ago and writing about beliefs of allistic parents. Five years ago I would have defined the autism wars that way, autism “warrior moms” and Autism Speaks against autistic ND supporters. It seems to have reversed itself to a large degree. Autism Speaks does not use the word cure much anymore and while many autism parents still have that hostility based on stereotypes towards ND autistics just as many if not most others seem to have ND movement beliefs(even if sometimes they stereotype autistics too positively). It is among autistics that the belief that the ND movement is all about toxic to autistics anti treatment beliefs based on autistic supremacy has taken significant hold.
As mentioned outsider backlash and gaslighting while distressing is to be expected. What I find truly disturbing is how much of this is coming from us.
Earlier I asked why this is. While I don’t have an answer I have a theory. I do think what we are seeing is reflective of the increased popularism/anti elitism that has been happening worldwide over the last five years.
07 Sep 2019, 4:19 am
