My stance on a cure for autism

Post Reply New Topic

Lazy way of trying to support your argument. The legislation would make it possible for the state to mandate drug treatment for certain individuals, and also track and compel compliance. Its language poses serious threats to civil rights of those deemed mentally ill, but the wording is focused on behaviour, such as being unemployed, lacking the ability to care for oneself, etc.

Bottom line, I see your concerns as legitimate. Sorry that I didn't make that clear in the first reply.

You're still saying "they will" without any evidence for that. I'm asking if you have anything more than speculation, here.



Those aren't mutually exclusive.

Do I have absolute 100% conclusive proof? No, I don't.

Do I have endless examples of imposition for the other person's "own good" or society's "greater good"? Anyone who thinks otherwise really needs to start paying attention to the world around them. It's not speculation: it's how the majority of NT society works, and other users have described what would happen, to the point where it starts to look like you are trolling.



No, they aren't, but the demand for a cure looks to me like a combination of internalised ableism and a reaction not to intrinsic problems with AS but the way too many Neurotypicals react to Aspies. If they reacted more positively, there wouldn't be a problem.

@Niall:

If you have endless examples, why is it so hard to provide even one? What I'm seeing from you looks like a "the sky is falling!" mentality. At this point, I'm not sure I care because this has gotten pretty tiresome. I've said my piece; I'd still be supportive of the idea of a "cure".

Your country has enforced medication laws. My country has enforced medication laws. Actually, most "developed" countries have enforced medication laws.

They will do whatever is cheapest, as they always do. They won't accept us unless we are like them. This is why there is a neurodiversity movement in the first place!

Maybe. I still don't think I understand what people mean when they talk about a neurodiversity movement. I haven't had it described to me in a way that would make me support it. You and I may not even be in the same book here, let alone on the same page.

Instead of seeking to cure autism as whole perhaps our time is better spent seeking to cure the common problems associated with people on the spectrum. Being a neurological anomaly isn't a problem , but any amount of suffering stemming from the diversity is. A specific distinguishment between primary an secondary effects (the primary being autism an secondary being characterics caused and or influenced by that autism .) needs to be drawn. People who look at aspergers have a hard time understanding the need for a cure while respectively people who look at severe cases of autism where the individual can't speak , bathe , potty , or control their violent or inappropriate impulses may not understand why someone WOULDNT want to cure autism. Separate the problems am cure them individually I say. Because some traits of autism spectrum are beneficial , genius , eccentric , or so deeply imbuiged in the individuals personality its inseparable from it. When a women is suseptable to breast cancer because of her breasts ,do you seek to change her already established gender because of her predisposition to a problem ? Or do you seek to cure the cancer? No one says being a woman isa disease bbecause their suseptable to certain issues more than others.

We definitely aren't on the same page, no.

There are several keys to the neurodiversity movement but, to me, the most important one is that diversity is a positive thing in any society. I often draw parallels with biodiversity: monocultures are inherently unhealthy.

There are several implications of this. One is that such differences need to be accepted and respected, and allowances made. The reason I struggle as an Aspie is not because I'm an Aspie, but because neurotypical society is set up for the convenience of neurotypicals. I'd probably have more friends, and have more chance of a romantic partner were that society to make allowances for those differences, which not only would increase the chances of making friends, but decreasing the chances of those friends not wanting to talk to me when it becomes clear how much I struggle living in that society - because I would struggle less.

What you curebies do is play into the hands of those neurotypicals who want a neuro-monoculture, which does nobody any good in the long run. I want to be me: I don't want to be told I have to be somebody else for the convenience of a society that wants everyone to be like them, and I want it least of all from other people with a variant neurotype!

Here here! Except society views none conformists identities like antibodies view a virus. If you cannot cull a popular backing for your beliefs the unconscious instinct to irradicate the irregularity like a parasite will kick in. It happened to African Americans an gay people today. Also people want to structure society to what's most convenient for themselves. You can't just want a change these days , you have to give other people a reason to support your views an change it. I can tell from your social cadence your much more psychologically developed than I amand view things from a more in depth informed view, but my opinions still rest.

I guess so. I'd maybe be more in agreement with you if I agreed with the very concept of a neurotype as a distinct, meaningful thing. At present, I don't.



I'm far, far less convinced of that than you are. In my view, society is not the problem; it only aggravates the problem. I don't think any society could ever exist where it would be easy or convenient to be on the spectrum. Such a world sounds nice to a lot of people, I'm sure. To me? It scares me, to be honest.



Is that what it feels like to you?

Anyway, I don't appreciate you suggesting I "play into" anyone's hands. I know exactly what I'm doing and what I'm saying, whether you agree with it or not. What if there are autistic people who wanted a "neuro-monoculture"? Your statement doesn't even allow for that.

It's a more extreme view than mine, but it's closer to where I stand than the "no cure" standpoint.



I can easily see both sides. I'm Asperger's and if anything I'm slightly pro-cure. Maybe because I don't necessarily agree that "some traits of autism spectrum are beneficial".

That said, I think you're making an excellent point. Treating particular problems one individual might have is an excellent approach and in truth is probably more realistic.

Last edited by AJisHere on 22 Dec 2015, 12:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I think autism has a place; I think autistic people are clearly some of the most gifted. Savants, prodigies. Why would we "cure" this? Society is a network of functions, however, and at present this network is full of individuals with hatred & greed; this hatred and greed seeks to impose dominance and compliance in order to perpetuate power, which, in the end, is being leaked into some people's hands more than others. For this reason, autistic individuals who are capable of perceiving the truth of the way things are—are commonly demonized, pathologized, disdained, scorned, humiliated, exploited, and disrespected. When social beasts and individuals live in shadows (hide the truth behind lies & manipulation)—they must perpetuate philosophies and oppressive systems & regimes that ridicule anything capable of seeing things AS THEY ARE. The autistic individual commonly is detached from the social world of "eye contact", and processes factual information; schooling systems and other entities almost unanimously go above and beyond to convince themselves that they have no use for it—because it allows them to live comfortably within the illusion, not admitting to themselves the injustice permeating their realities. Thus, autistic individuals ramble, and ramble, and work, and work, and perhaps end up nowhere—for the masses are programmed to play a game.

While I'd like a cure for some symptoms, like light sensitivity or shutdowns, I kind of like how my brain generally works. I have a bit of a niche as a nerd, and don't really aspire to being a popular bright-eyed NT with lots of friends. I like being able to go into my zone...

I do lean a little into the neurodiverse way of thinking, but here's my problem... I don't feel entitled to change how others think or how they spend their money. I wish for better understanding of our ways, and hope with work the public acceptance will come. I can see how the public acceptance has come, with horrible fits and violent starts, for women and gays and ethnic differences. I can see it coming for other groups like transgender folk.

But, I don't feel that I can demand that someone else feel some way. And, I have a hard time demanding that they pay for accommodations or be forced to hire me. I'd rather that social pressure and cultural change go there, even if it's slower. But I might be wrong. Looking at something like racism or gay marriage, I don't know if the message of openness ever gets through some peoples' heads.

Just some thoughts, no conclusions that I can find, I guess.

// that throbbing heart emoji on the bottom of the screen is driving me crazy

A volentary cure will never exist because there will always be parents who will immediately opt for a cure when their kid gets diagnosed without asking if they want to be and before they can actually understand what both options mean

As further elaborated in this article https://purpleaspie.wordpress.com/2013/ ... tary-cure/

That's a lot of "probably" right there.

I can understand the fears here, but see no indication that they are more than that; fears. I'm just seeing a lot of "what if X!?" and "they* could Y!". These do not make a compelling or rational argument, and based on the fact most of the time I see these things no alternative is proposed, it's hard to believe people making these statements are trying to. It smacks of fearmongering.

If someone has something more substantial than that, please share.

*there's a lot of these vague "theys" thrown around. Is it that much work to say who "they" are?

They are rational fears based on plenty of history. From what I have read those that expect any potential cure to be on a truly voluntary basis have offered no rational reasons for thier opinion. I just have read blanket statements that it will be voluntary.

As for alternatives I have read none on this thread but have read them elsewhere. I have written that better understanding and acceptence would make autism a significantly less onerous experience for many. This should be true if we understood better what causes continuous violent meltdowns for example. I have proposed research money be put in to a model similar to glasses or hearing aids. They do not attempt to cure impairments but help with communication. This will be much more complicated matter then glasses but reaserchng a cure has proven to be complicated also.

I see creeping ableism in this thread in the assumption that a cure would be more of a positive thing for severe autistics then us more mild autistics.

A fictional book that covers this whole area is The Speed of Dark by Elisabeth Moon. Already discussed on these boards a lot. Though it's not a Hemingway, I felt it expressed the life of an autistic guy pretty well, and a society where autism was "cured" in the womb. Then, it took a weird left turn,and no spoilers here. But it did explore the conflicts of a cure and a bit of what the brain science for a cure might look like.

do. not. want.