Dear Autistic Self-Advocacy Network (ASAN)

Post Reply New Topic

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKEwXTXgw70[/youtube]

We need a variety of groups engaging in self-advocacy, esp a variety of groups where most of the leaders are middle-functioning.

How long has this dislike of ASAN been going on? Because your advocacy efforts appear to be trying to deface this organization as much as possible.

Ever since I found out about how they try to deface other people that seem like they care. I just don't believe in the style of advocacy. I really do think leadership minds should come together, even if on a secure online forum to discussion sociological matters. The ASAN approach I believe to be destructive in the long-term and in some ways short-term. In order to create change I think there are much better approaches to handle when applicable a lack of understanding in minds and better ways to approach issues. It requires a bit of humility but I think what will actually change lives requires both compassion and strength.

You see ASAN has been about defacing others to dictate how others should feel, think and express themselves. I think there is a need of tolerance but also respectful communication. The ASAN approach is simply the worse kinds of approaches. My goal is to get their attention in the same kinds of ways they got attention toward themselves in the first place.

Compassion requires a great inner-strength and dignity for all those concerned with autism.

But that is the problem: you keep talking about coming together...except for ASAN. And I do not think tolerance is anything you want for people who support ASAN or likewise.

You would have to understand how the modalities conflict. The instincts between that of self-preservation and self-esteem, human rights of treatment advancements and that of self-image and doing what is believed best but still having to do whats necessary yet what one does not truly desire to do. I am reminded of movies in which an animal or person is very sick. There is a sadness but becuase the animal or human is so sick they are suffering and so it is humane. However in this context of ASAN and human rights it's like someone is so bad and yet good at the same time at what they do they are risking advancements for others and public unity. ASAN has created a very bad political sickness out of extreme anger and lack of wisdom. Regrettably ASAN has if this were to be a game used cheats but this is not a game. This is real-life and it is not about a fairness of a game. It's about approaches and unity. We cannot guilt the public and ask for money from tax-payers. The best kind of inclusion and human rights advancements in history have come with public and minority group unity and not resentment and fear based division.

ASAN is a special interest selective abortion group and this is biased on other matters such as as the portrayal of autism. Sometimes people fear compassion. The fear can be because it makes someone feel weak inside. Yet love does not come from deep rooted anger that believes in falsehoods and accuses people of things which are not true. It would not be fair to honest people to be amounted to nothing other then bigots as it is alienating and destructive to those whom change is made possible by.

ASAN is a clear threat to social justice and taints other advocacy efforts with their agenda of hostility in politics. It is my decision to not only not have anything to do with them in advocacy but to seek the end of their public relations self-advocacy reign and make room for others that are not affiliated. I believe to end there influence on self-advocacy and general autism advocacy is preventing harm to the outcome of societal change and social justice.

Well, yes, I figured out your opinion here.

I have great news for you, I know how much you do not like me being confrontational with you, so I am not going to speak to you anymore. That would be rather pointless. I am just going to leave this link here and hope people read it. I am not bumping it or anything of that sort. Apparently your views have not changed over a year and a half, and that quote was directed not at ASAN, but the people who believe in such advocacy. I question what the point of your posts are sometimes.

I would also like to point out that all the other things were done as reactionary to your conduct. I stepped in when you personally attacked people or implied that they did not have autism. There were a lot of things you said that I just ignored - please remember that.

It is sad - I personally do not like ASAN much either. But to sit here and let you run these tactics is not in my nature. Good bye. I also stopped watching the thread so do not reply since it wastes keystrokes.

With regards to the link it was in response to hate mail like saying my mom brought me around town for people to feel sorry for me.

I have been personally attacked many times by a few and typically make a joke about it. When people have ingrained beliefs of persecution they will believe all sorts of things. I have been personally contacted by several individuals seeking me to continue writing on this forum as they like it. People that call others Nazi's, bigots and so on are least likely to create resolutions. Instead the matters should be placed out in the open and entirely picked apart (analysed). Resolutions will not come from stubbornness but from the ability to compromise and adapt together but the needs to adapt differ from the VERY high functioning who are already included to other sub-groups which needs more awareness and say in these advocacy.. I have questioned only who really has autism if this is the internet and there is an autism spectrum. It is not scientific for me to simply agree everyone that claims to have autism has autism on the internet. Which is a fault in the ability to organize online and a limitation in the method of networking. I was told by an autism expert to not believe much of anything online with concern to autism and that means forums as well.

Remember I was merely minding my own business doing my own thing when pride advocates assaulted my inclusion rights. They have since retreated and removed all remarks. Pride I don't believe is a solution in of itself but sure has created immense social hostility and destructiveness. Civil rights apart from pride has the right and responsibility to defend itself from direct and indirect threats to progress. If I was to simply allow ASAN to continue with their tact it would eventually cause other efforts including my own great problems. I am happy and not in the least bit hesitant to confront them and be done with it.

I think it's time for matters to be put forth and when applicable separated from other concerns as they are clear threats to progress.

The only people that have ever been hostile toward me are:

1. Vaccine
2. Some forms of Pride

These represent two polar extremes already in great conflicts with others..

I was given sufficient evidence in a previous thread that ci doesn't really know what he's talking about nor does he believe what he does know. He merely enjoys complaining loudly and frequently enough to drawn attention to himself.

My personal opinion though is that we need to either make a clean split between Hight-functioning ASAN-type people and Low to Mid-functioning Autism Speaks-type people and realize (DSM-V change or not) that this is all childish and doesn't help anyone.

Actually I talk about these issues with people with degrees in social work often and obviously I am competent enough to hold conversations for an hour or more at a time. You happen to disagree or not like what I'm saying is conflicting. Also it would seem unlike others you don't share a sense of humor which is found in movies, T.V and in social media by both younger individuals and adults. If you don't like raspberry (fart jokes) and think yourself superior simply because of that then I can promise you millions of others have an opinion about you as well because you simply don't have the same sense of humor.

Where I live I talk to autism parents, professionals and people with autism and other developmental disabilities like myself. Here online it's an entirely different world with different rules. IF you have a different opinion someone that simply thinks they are smarter just infers your dumb or since you cannot do grammar as they do they think of you as lessor and make special public note of it. My compromise is simply let's talk about the issues and not do the personal attacks because obviously I can stand up for myself as I have learned for years how to do that well.

1. One can carry on a conversation for hours speaking complete nonsense.

2. You cannot stand up for yourself as I had asked you more than once to provide one example of a single verifiable individual who was hurt by ASAN and you cannot do it.

(See point #1)

I'm used to people saying "you don't know what your talking about" especially when they don't like what I'm talking about but then speaking to people skilled in that specialty carrying on a conversation and agreeing. You don't have to like what I say but again your simply seeking to get your way or leave the conversation. You don't seek a middle ground. Political people have their agenda's at times and don't want compromise. I want both a method and means of inclusion and improvement to outcomes. Many people just want to bicker but don't bother with the solutions.

ASAN hurt my feelings about the autism isolation advocacy but before that they were horribly confrontational and mean to others. This confrontation between ASAN and ASAN-like advocates toward treatment pursuits represents two differing sides. Each side has their weaknesses and strengths. I believe it's time for the bottom line of inclusion and hope. If people cannot get along then people like me will simply do it without their input. Yet when that happens there seems to be a trend of nobody included what they believe. The modaliity of treatment (cures) public relations differs from the modality of inclusion public relations. However it is inclusion that seems to be confronting treatment public relations. It is in the best interest of others I believe a separation like I've said before between that of the very higher functioning, higher cognitive functioning, moderately functioning and otherwise even lower functioning in advocacy.

While treatment awareness does not seem to get under my skin like it does for others I can offer some potential explanation and with the help of others to explain it. Still yet the right to treatment supersedes a dignity argument within reason. Treatment rights would have to go entirely out of it's way to burden human rights for a dignity rights argument to win. Autism the horrible label and disability differs from the whole person and focuses on the disability aspects. I think people get confused with calling autism horrible and then perceiving it as a person.

A person such as myself wanting to end major social conflicts can definitely be perceived a threat to agenda's. Some wouldn't like to say they are wrong or give up any say so on matters they believe in. That's why my focus is not being so much a public advocate and prefer behind the scenes strategy. The ASAN issue has complicated other issues and I'm not the only person to bring up the obvious but it is regrettably either intentional on their part as a special interest or simply a foul up. Regardless it has been determined by others guilting the public by calling them bigots and asking for tax-payer money is not in the best interest of those in great need.

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt163224.html

While not a direct harm to anyone here, at least a dissappointment for some, in a priority for those that are extremely high functioning Autistics with College Degrees and Professional work experience.

While, there have been portraits focusing on the negative aspects of Autism, by organizations like Autism Speaks, sugar coating it as just a difference and arguing against research for a cure can be just as offensive to a parent of a severely disabled child with Autism or an Autistic person that prays for some kind of help.

I would like to see a fair representation of the whole picture of Autism on both sides, but the idea of one organization is that the condition is not a problem, only a difference that should be tolerated, and the other organization understands it as a serious disabling condition for some that merits research for a cure.

The fact of the matter is that some people cope with it and some people cannot cope with it, depending on how serious the condition is.

The strong opinions of Nathan represent a more silent group of individuals that are not as likely to express the opinion that some of ASAN's opinions merit review just as some of Autism Speaks opinions merit review.

If the efforts of a group like ASAN were to convince professionals that Aspergers is not a disability and to remove Aspergers as a disability from the ADA for those that suffer from the condition rather than have the ability to adapt to it as a difference, that would truly cause harm to a number of people with Aspergers. It is definitely a disability for some people; to suggest that it is only a difference is only part of the story.

No cause for alarm here, there aren't any psychologists in ASAN that I am aware of.

All that said, ASAN is providing benefits to some people with Autism and regardless if they can help everyone with Autism, that effort is commendable. It is also evident that Autism is only a difference for some, and some do cope quite well, so that is a story worth portraying to give a full picture of the disorder.

I don't think that either extreme is correct or constructive. We need two points of view to support two levels of functioning and not expect both of them to be appropriate for everyone. Being a high-functioning person, I have no use for Autism Speaks in my life, but I don't hate them and I have never written long rants in which I call them dangerous. As I said, there are people in our community who have different abilities and they need different advocacies.

I had a hard time understanding why Nathan was the only person ranting against ASAN and why there were so many people ranting against Autism Speaks. I can't imagine anyone with another condition ranting against any organization that might offer help to those that share that condition. But whereas some people with Epilepsy function well in life and some don't, most everyone with the condition would agree that a cure would be a good thing. Autism, is relatively unique in that some with the condition see it as a different type of human and some see it as a disorder that some humans have.

Nathan may not have a Ph.d, but would imagine that more people think about these issues, than did before he came along. For those that understand and live Autism as a disorder, the fact that someone is presenting that point of view, might make some that are not higher functioning more comfortable with being here.

The grammar police are often seen here enforcing the rules for those that may have learning disabilities and Autism. Nathan is not afraid to state that he has a learning disability when his grammar is criticized. Others say nothing, although I'm sure the criticisms sting when one is doing the best that they can do.

Obviously, some people don't understand that learning disabilities are common among people with Autism, although not nearly as common with Aspergers. I would imagine that there are at least a few that understand that better now that Nathan has brought it to their attention.