Conflating the LBGQT rights movement, ND movement mistake?

Post Reply New Topic

OP's Note:
This was taken from another thread. While this topic has been often brought up I don't recall having its own thread which to me it obviously deserves

That was quick

I do sometimes edit posts after because of my dyslexia so i want to make clear in advance:--

Thankfully no one in authority in the west including myself views gender in that way or imposes such ideas on the medical sector.

Of course, LBGTQ is not the same as Autism. Cancer is not the same as autism, Other non physical disabilities are not the same as Autism etc.

IMHO opinion there are enough similarities to be relevant. Different as we may be LBGTQ people were viewed at the time of Stonewall as mentally ill and character flawed just like we were at the dawn of the ND movement. What is wrong with taking inspiration and being influenced by such a successful movement?

All rights movements have their extremists and internal disagreements that harm them by alienating the general public. That does not necessarily mean the cause is wrong.

It does not mean we should do exactly what they did because we are different. For example, organizing and attending mass rallies are problematic for us. But we have an advantage advocates after Stonewall did not, the internet.

A much higher percentage of autistics are LBGQT then the general popularity so there's that

LGBTQ isn't the same as ND movement alright.

Oh, sure, both are varying human rights movements...
And that's very much it.


Their infighting consists of the LGB (the ones who wanted to legalized same sex marriage and make same sex relationships no longer taboo) wanting to be away from the TQ+ parts (the ones who kept going on with gender pronouns, identity affirmation, medical transitioning, etc.).

And the 'A' (asexuality) are just kept getting excluded or ignored, and might as well have their own thing.

Their ideas of rights actually do not overlap or conflict from their respective right to exist as they are.
And do not understand how they even grouped together other than the common right to exist and express themselves. (Probably except also some historical references that they're shoved together by the same majority of people).
Now, the former (stuff around the matters of sexuality) is just outright annoyed at the latter (stuff around the matters of gender identities) whether or not how one can be tied into another.



That's not the same with have autism vs being autistic community infighting, obviously.

The movements of both sides have different ideas of what human rights even meant, usually between right to medical treatment and right to exist as they are.
One is aligned with the ND rights movement, one does not.

One idea can be both aligned with the ND movement and disability movement, one idea only supports disability movement and not the ND movement, or heck there are plenty of ideas that do not even support the basic human rights along with the rest of it and believe it's the best, etc.

And it's too individualized; which right can precede which?

In which either can see another as getting in a way to a right of growth and opportunity. It conflicts, it overlaps.
Mostly because of not knowing where the disability ends and the neurodiversity begins.



As for cancer community?

The difference is obvious, the objective is more than clear.
I'm not elaborating anything about it. I refuse to slice any further than that.

Gained Number Post Count (1).
Lose Time (n).

Lose more time here - Updates at least once a week.

LGBT movement had rather simple aims - to normalise same sex relationships as heterosexual ones legally and remove stigma associated with them. Lets leave aside the trans movement for a minute.

All LGBT people wanted the same thing, i cant imagine some gay people saying "i want more discrimination" for example

They largely succeeded as the power of the church fell away and gov & society got tired of moralising.

ND movement is a lot different its more complicated.

About 90% overlaps and is duplicated with the general disability rights movement, i.e employment, legal protections etc..

Which is fine but its just a duplication of what's there already.

The last bit is more divisive and complicated.

The ND movement :

1. Wants to promote autism as an identity: Problem there is no real single autism to speak of, its just a 1940`s word given to describe many things from mild conditions to the very serious, where does autism begin? where does it end?, everyone is a little autistic as the saying goes? what is the bio marker for it?, nobody knows.

How can you have an identity that is so wide & cannot be properly defined other than a few paragraphs on a bit of paper?

2. Anti cure: Many autistic people like their autism and don't want curing but not everyone. There have been a few basic simple polls on this site i once saw showed around a third wanted curing, obviously that excluded those who were not functional to use a computer so not everyone is on board with this anti cure direction (irrespective of possibility of this happening)

Even those that don't want curing, but would favour treatments to help with some of their core symptoms, an anti cure medical direction would reduce the chance of that happening, because it reduces motivation to develop one.

We already know some genes that cause some autisms also cause bad things like ID & epilepsy

https://jmg.bmj.com/content/57/9/647

https://www.cell.com/cell-reports/fullt ... 11-1247(19)31641-9?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS2211124719316419%3Fshowall%3Dtrue

There`s simpler to read articles elsewhere, some may show high IQ in some autisms but the whole spectrum is very negative.

Maybe in the future some autisms could be sold as an identity or valid "difference", but they will need to be identified properly in the biological sense and with minimal impairments, mostly social but with high IQ.

But not now with the spectrum how it is.

There are always similarities between all civil rights moments. While not the same, there is some intersectionality. For example, a lot of autistic people are also LBGT as well. The ND movement is a bit more complicated because it's also asking for accommodations for a disability (as such it's a sub-movement within the broader disability rights movement), but that doesn't mean that there aren't some similarities with the LGBT movement as well. Comparisons also don't mean that the two are being conflated either.