Autism Politics - Insulted At Everything You Disagree With

Post Reply New Topic

Yes. I think I'm going to cry, now.

By pathologizing language, I mean using terms like "disease" to describe autism. It makes me sad as well when we use such language to describe ourselves.

I know what he was talking about, and I happen to agree with him. The logic of not allowing any outside group to have an opinion alienates everyone else to the point that the only brain power allowed towards solving the problem comes from within the created political structure, and then any ideas from outside, good or bad, are dismissed by way of fear mongering. "Oh, what does such and such know, they aren't even on the spectrum" If someone has a good idea, then let them say it. If they are wrong, it's not because they are from outside the special group, it's because they aren't making any sense. So just because someone is against a cure for autism doesn't make them bad. I don't want a cure, but if there was one, as long as I'm not forced to get it, I don't really care. Doesn't affect me.

I don't see anything wrong with giving an opinion on a subject. Whether the person knows what they are talking about or not, an opinion in and of itself isn't a bad thing. It's when opinions replace problem solving that it becomes a major problem, which is where we're at now, on a very large scale.

I work on these topics at nights. Just wanted to say in the meantime that I really don't experience this exclusion by experts where I live. There are laws about dignity and self-advocacy inclusion on the state level. Professionals also have ethics but special interest can be protective of the image of autism both to protect those with more needs and to assure funding for us. I've gone out of my way to test the local system for civil rights, conflict of interest and well some pretty extreme modes of thinking I later told them was a test and that they past.

As a form of logic pathology in of itself is not bigotry in my opinion but rather a system of logic, theory and brilliance enticing human rights improvements in the form of scientific advancement by means of research enabling improved quality of life. However there are always examples as nothing is perfect and individuals within these sciences (branches) fail to have ethics at times but are required in practice certain standards. Pathology is a science and not a civil rights platform as well and the words used seem to be generic for a myriad of conditions and autism seems to be just simply one of a great many others.

I just don't see why pathology which was not formed to discriminate against people with disabilities is a mechanism of oppression.

I think the government has a problem with freedom of information and real democracy. They shouldn't have indoctrinated us to praise such things if they didn't want us to emulate this type of thinking.

Example: Wikileaks.

The problem with wikileaks is we collectively have voted in politicians and they have made certain material illegal to view for our protection. In democracy in order to change the laws you have to vote for those changes. Right now wikileaks conspires to break our democratic law which may put us at risk sometimes, not at all other times and in grave risk very few times. If you have private medical records and a business existed to find your private medical records and published them wouldn't you feel violated? The government is a body of the people, for the people and by the people. If you don't like something about it raise a fuss to create change but the law is the law.

How about phrases like "at least cancer kills you?" That one was pretty epically horrible.

No, it's not secret for our protection. It's secret for a variety of reasons.

It's not illegal for the press to publish such documents once obtained.

The variety of reasons includes national security, special interest perhaps, preservation of privacy in the current system between nations and well can be also used wrongly. It is not just for other reasons but national security to.

I did not say the media could not publish these documents. Wikileaks however exists for the sole reason to leak democratically elected protected state secrets and cannot always confirm the authenticity of the material. Should laws change the authenticity can be better confirmed and we likely can be more rest assured that the information being released does not compromise members of the armed forces like by dad retired from after a long career.

Again the law has been broken, someone has a business that conspires to break the law and does not respect our democratic process in premise. The curiosity can kill the cat just the same as humans but I am open to the idea that fear is not always necessary of course. This topic is not about wikileaks, perhaps make a new topic and post the link here.

On being a victim.

I'm going to go for a balanced view here on this one. If I developed cancer I'd feel like a victim. If I was born with cancer it would be different then being born with autism. Honestly I've never felt disabled in the sense of a broken leg for instance. I do not blame myself for the madness of the school system, the forced transitions and the overloads. I blame the system for knowing something was wrong with me and not listening to me since early on when I could not tolerate it but was forced into it because the cookie cutter had only a few options. I'd really like to be explicit and curse out the ******************* computer screen. However even today unless I was to think about disability and myself which rarely I do I do not feel impaired yet am frustrated. I perceive that there is something that was wrong with the world around me I was forced into and it was not my brain because that is how I have always been.

Being a victim can be about protecting oneself and others as well. You see if someone with autism felt to be a victim of autism and other people with autism and or others called that pity they are dishonoring a persons truth and I think thats an indignity. Autism you got to remember is this label other people made up and thought well maybe they can fix that problem. It is hard for me to separate autism from me if others say how I was born was incorrect and well now I got to realize in spite of my prolonged obliviousness something is wrong with me and was when growing up. I never really conceptualized it and quite liked speech language classes to get out of the craziness. I got to make a new board game.

Good intentions do not always have perfect results and I respect that people likely care about me and want to help me. However calling me a victim and especially while not recognizing they themselves who call me this also are not perfect makes me traditionally feel poorly because I am made out to be this person that requires the publics special attention and resulting sympathy. This effects my man ego and social conditioning has programmed me to expel this notion. The idea of humility derives fact but dignity is also a notion in spite of cultural influence that may conflict with it. I think there is a balance to extreme pride (blind arrogance) and extreme compassion (pity) that can be honest and self-realizing of how it all works in my own mind, others minds and just find what is most ethical, dignifying and helpful.

The idea that I have to feel I am defective for the sake of fundraising is just unethical.

I rock the boat where I live all the time. It's my job and the professionals I talk to are usually referring to me as the boss, agreeing or have not experienced me yet. I'm likely more confrontational and in a highly constructive sense then most advocates. Strategy is important but so is allies. I'm told people with autism are the experts to and I've been given permission to give speeches to the business community, in seminars, radio and to groups of professionals. I do not often agree but when I do I am able to in there kinds of logic persuade and get agreements. I'd like to know more about your specific advocacy and advise you on your approach. To me to be considered in my opinion a beneficial expert for having autism unlike professionals saying people with autism in general are the experts you got to have well reasoned out ideas, good ethics and think about how your philosophies may benefit and even harm those unaware.

Where I live folks bend over backwards and including the so called elite to allow me to do as I wish. Should some elite get in the way all I got to do is phone the media and I've done so before. I am respectful, don't act out just to act out and I find that sound judgement works well. You got to go back to ethics and respect in every strategic move. Sometimes showing disrespect for the clear disrespect of others to be candid works wonders, shocks people and well moves little mountains.

It is more simple then it is complicated.

Special interest does not want a cure for a few reasons.

A. Costation by means of validation.
B. Religious views when applicable - God created everything in his image and thats the way it's supposed to be.
C. Self-interest from ego (self-esteem).
D. Political - Pro Life Vs. Pro Choice.

Pardon me but bull. Where I live parents have been very supportive of me and helpful. If you make fun of them you ought to get slapped but not for real just a saying. Try to have a little understanding, compassion and subjectivity.

Actually it's simpler:

A cure is unlikely in the near future, since it would basically require rewiring the brain, whereas spending those resources on services will have tangible benefits for those who are alive and need them. As it stands, autistics - esp. adult autistics - are underserved while the majority of resources goes into trying to insure no more autistic people are born.

I don't know what A. means.

I have been reading anti-cure (pro-services, pro-neurodiversity) writings for three years now, not once have I seen anyone appeal to divine authority.

I do not understand how you came to the conclusion C or what it means.

The argument that it's about denying reproductive justice strikes me as another derail from the point. I doubt you'll find many (if any) advocates who are opposed to abortion access. There is a valid concern that since the organizations that pour so much money into early identification are so invested in the idea that autistic lives aren't worth living that the end result will be that the majority of potentially autistic fetuses will be aborted simply for being autistic. And this actually involves a fairly toxic perspective around disability (one which already exists).

The cure movement also promotes anti-autistic hatred. This can be seen in just about every video or commercial or piece of literature Autism Speaks releases.

Also:

http://www.autistics.org/library/dontmourn.html

There is no proof that the brain is incorrectly wired (differently wired) to the point that it needs re-wiring. Cure can simply mean the development of therapies, life long supports (services) and as well as technology. Moreover a label to me is something that was applied to help me and does not at all represent my entire self. It's when it's assumed as my entire self that I'd really find just about everything insulting. There is something called autism and autistic disorder and for some reason folks called themselves and others a disorder as an identity (ID). That to me is unacceptable in my life.

Neither you or I can stop a prenatal test despite the hardship of the judgement should it be possible to develop. This has to do with pro-choice vs. pro-life and will cause socio political problems. Other advocacy needs to be protected from this political damage in the making. Saying autism research all in all is evil or bad over that of simply providing special interest with funding is a no go. Research explicitly having to do with a prenatal test for autism I want nothing to do with. Your an emancipated adult in a free country and can cause whatever political confrontations you want. I understand where it's going and it's simply the abortion issue. Again nothing I can do about that but don't drag me and others into it when it effects other issues and people.

Bias of other issues are logically clear.

But you don't know that a cure is unlikely in the near future, nor do we know that the brain would need rewiring - both these are assumptions.

The abortion thing confuses me. You say most advocates aren't opposed to abortion - except when its someone like them - then its wrong?! Which one is it?

The 'cure movement' and a cure are not the same thing. Also I haven't interpreted what I've seen in those videos that way, hatred of autism is different from hatred of autistics.

I don't disagree with that. But wanting cure(s) doesn't invalidate autistics.