Page 2 of 7 [ 99 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

Girl_Kitten
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 29 Apr 2015
Posts: 71

16 Sep 2015, 12:07 pm

iliketrees wrote:
Being gay, black, or female are different to being autistic. None of the first 3 are recognized as disorders, nor are they.

Homosexuality disorder, removed from the DSM in 1973. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexua ... cal_Manual
The most recent large-scale academic discussion about how race could cause a genetic decrease in intelligence was 1994. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_o ... ontroversy
Hysteria, modified in the DSM in 1980. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteria

All three have been considered disorders within the past 50 years. What is a "disorder" is decided by a society controlled by white, heterosexual, Protestant, wealthy, NT men; the classification of "disorders" is subjective and politicized and historically has been used to oppress and exclude certain groups.



iliketrees
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,155
Location: Earth

16 Sep 2015, 12:21 pm

So are you against aborting fetuses which have down syndrome, since disorder is subjective? If not, why?



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

16 Sep 2015, 12:31 pm

I don't believe in aborting fetuses with Down Syndrome.



iliketrees
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,155
Location: Earth

16 Sep 2015, 12:33 pm

Fair enough. It's the parents' choice, and is a different discussion altogether. What about medication for anxiety, depression, schizophrenia etc?



RhodyStruggle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Nov 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 508

16 Sep 2015, 12:38 pm

Girl_Kitten wrote:
iliketrees wrote:
Being gay, black, or female are different to being autistic. None of the first 3 are recognized as disorders, nor are they.

Homosexuality disorder, removed from the DSM in 1973. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexua ... cal_Manual
The most recent large-scale academic discussion about how race could cause a genetic decrease in intelligence was 1994. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_o ... ontroversy
Hysteria, modified in the DSM in 1980. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteria

All three have been considered disorders within the past 50 years. What is a "disorder" is decided by a society controlled by white, heterosexual, Protestant, wealthy, NT men; the classification of "disorders" is subjective and politicized and historically has been used to oppress and exclude certain groups.


Don't forget drapetomania, which was the "mental illness" experienced by slaves who desired to be free.


_________________
From start to finish I've made you feel this
Uncomfort in turn with the world you've learned
To love through this hate to live with its weight
A burden discerned in the blood you taste


Girl_Kitten
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 29 Apr 2015
Posts: 71

16 Sep 2015, 12:44 pm

Lukeda420 wrote:
Girl_Kitten wrote:
Lukeda420 wrote:
iliketrees wrote:
Lukeda420 wrote:
iliketrees wrote:
If you don't support the charity's use of money, don't donate to it. That applies to all charities. There are plenty of different autism charities and support them instead if they better fit your ideas on what raised money should be spent on. Autism speaks spends more on research than on autistic people. If you support that, donate. If you don't, don't donate. They don't have to change to match the ideas of those who dislike them. I don't personally agree or like the charity or their marketing, but that's not their problem.


But if people are fundamentally opposed to what the organization stands for then they should still speak out against it.

Can do. And they can listen, too. They don't have to, though, especially if there are more people supporting them than those who don't.


Yep, that's democracy for you.

But a constitutional democracy does not (well, should not) allow for tyranny of the majority over the rights of minorities.


That's true, but we're not talking about the government. An organization can say whatever it wants. Just look at the skinheads or the Westboro Baptist church. I strongly dislike Autism Speaks but they do have a right to exist.


Yes, we are talking about the government. The US IRS has decided that Autism Speaks is a tax-exempt charity because they have a charitable class for which they benefit. Because of this IRS determination, donations to A$ are tax-deductable. Without this determination from the IRS, there would not be corporate donations, walk-a-thons, all the things that come with being a charity whose donors get tax benefits for donating. If the IRS decided that A$ did not benefit a charitable class, A$ would not have the power and influence they do today. A revocation of tax exempt status causes charities to dry up, as happened to schools that excluded black students.

I'm not saying that they don't have a right to advocate their point as a private organization. I'm saying that a constitutional democracy should not allow government benefits (like tax exempt status) to be used for tyranny of the majority over the rights of minorities. The support of the US government is A$'s lifeblood, and if it was gone, A$ would be too.



Girl_Kitten
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 29 Apr 2015
Posts: 71

16 Sep 2015, 12:49 pm

iliketrees wrote:
So are you against aborting fetuses which have down syndrome, since disorder is subjective? If not, why?

I'm unsure about how I feel about Down's and would form my belief based on speaking to people with Down's about their thoughts and feelings, not the publications of the APA.

I am in favor of allowing intended parents with genetic Deafness to select Deaf embryos for IVF and discard hearing embryos. (Technically, the embryos are incapable of hearing at that stage of growth, but they have the genetics to have an average hearing ability)



Lukeda420
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,640
Location: Chicago suburbs.

16 Sep 2015, 1:15 pm

Girl_Kitten wrote:
Yes, we are talking about the government. The US IRS has decided that Autism Speaks is a tax-exempt charity because they have a charitable class for which they benefit. Because of this IRS determination, donations to A$ are tax-deductable. Without this determination from the IRS, there would not be corporate donations, walk-a-thons, all the things that come with being a charity whose donors get tax benefits for donating. If the IRS decided that A$ did not benefit a charitable class, A$ would not have the power and influence they do today. A revocation of tax exempt status causes charities to dry up, as happened to schools that excluded black students.

I'm not saying that they don't have a right to advocate their point as a private organization. I'm saying that a constitutional democracy should not allow government benefits (like tax exempt status) to be used for tyranny of the majority over the rights of minorities. The support of the US government is A$'s lifeblood, and if it was gone, A$ would be too.


On that point I agree. I forgot about the whole tax exempt thing. You are right.



Girl_Kitten
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 29 Apr 2015
Posts: 71

16 Sep 2015, 2:53 pm

iliketrees wrote:
Fair enough. It's the parents' choice, and is a different discussion altogether. What about medication for anxiety, depression, schizophrenia etc?

Anxiety and depression are different because they must cause significant distress to the individual by their very nature. They are intrinsically different because they are mutually exclusive to living a comfortable, happy life.

As for schizophrenia, I support schizophrenics' refusal of medication. From my understanding of how it feels to be schizophrenic, it is an intense world of sights and sounds. Though this schizophrenic world can sometimes be scary or prevent a person from acting typically, the medication that exists to treat schizophrenia makes a schizophrenic's world bland and often causes depression and a crippling lethargy. I don't feel that it is ethical to force someone to give up a vivid world to instead live depressed for the rest of their life.



B19
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,993
Location: New Zealand

16 Sep 2015, 2:59 pm

Wandering off topic now.



iliketrees
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,155
Location: Earth

16 Sep 2015, 3:10 pm

Girl_Kitten wrote:
Anxiety and depression are different because they must cause significant distress to the individual by their very nature. They are intrinsically different because they are mutually exclusive to living a comfortable, happy life.

As for schizophrenia, I support schizophrenics' refusal of medication. From my understanding of how it feels to be schizophrenic, it is an intense world of sights and sounds.

Autism needs cause significant impairment to be diagnosed too.

I don't really know anything about schizophrenia but from what I've heard they hear voices non stop which tend to call them bad things. Again, this may be as ignorant as saying autistic people can't speak. I really don't know.

Yes, it is, B19. I apologise, OP.



lostonearth35
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2010
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,363
Location: Lost on Earth, waddya think?

16 Sep 2015, 3:11 pm

They are a hate group disguised as a organization that "cares" about autistic children. Not adults, just children, and they play on parent's fears and stresses. They see us as an incomplete puzzle that desperately needs to be solved or it will be the end of the world as we know it. They show sympathy and support for parents who murder their autistic children and want everyone to believe that there is no way we can possibly live happy, productive lives, even though there are people who are blind, deaf, and in wheelchairs who do, and that we will ruin the lives of our families or become mass murderers.

They are really no better than the Klu Klux Klan or even the Nazis, and sometimes I get scared that one day they might even force us into gas chambers or do horrific things to our bodies in a vain attempt to "cure" us.

They *need* to be stopped before any of that happens. That goes for similar hate groups as well.



iliketrees
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,155
Location: Earth

16 Sep 2015, 3:16 pm

Yes, that whole murder thing was f****d up. Not the sort of message they should be sending out. And adults definitely don't get enough support, I'm hoping that changes soon.



Girl_Kitten
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 29 Apr 2015
Posts: 71

16 Sep 2015, 3:31 pm

iliketrees wrote:
Girl_Kitten wrote:
Anxiety and depression are different because they must cause significant distress to the individual by their very nature. They are intrinsically different because they are mutually exclusive to living a comfortable, happy life.

As for schizophrenia, I support schizophrenics' refusal of medication. From my understanding of how it feels to be schizophrenic, it is an intense world of sights and sounds.

Autism needs cause significant impairment to be diagnosed too.

I don't really know anything about schizophrenia but from what I've heard they hear voices non stop which tend to call them bad things. Again, this may be as ignorant as saying autistic people can't speak. I really don't know.

Yes, it is, B19. I apologise, OP.


Impairment is not the same thing as "causing significant distress" and "mutually exclusive to living a happy, comfortable life". Women could be considered "impaired" because we lose a significant amount of blood monthly, and need to take time off of work to give birth and breastfeed babies. That doesn't mean you can't be happy as a woman who has a period, and women can certainly be happy about giving birth and breastfeeding. Gay people can be considered "impaired" because they cannot procreate with their spouse without medical intervention. That doesn't mean that gay people can't be happy having gay sex and adopting children. Impairment just means that you can't (or don't) function the way that white, Protestant, wealthy, heterosexual, NT men think you should, and that is the definition of "impairment" that the APA has traditionally used.

This is relevant because A$ is the grand marshal of the white, Protestant, wealthy, heterosexual, NT male parade that is drowning out Autistic people's own thoughts about what we think about being Autistic. The parade is no longer allowed to suppress women's voices, gay voices, black voices, and should not be allowed to drown out Autistic voices any longer. Recognizing the historical social inequalities that A$ is currently benefiting from is important in understanding why A$ is on the wrong side of history and why we should speak out against them.

Here is a recent, well-regarded article about why A$ is awful. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la ... story.html



B19
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,993
Location: New Zealand

16 Sep 2015, 4:02 pm

I get where you are coming from. Autism Speaks is embedded in a wider cultural dynamic with historical precedents, and you can apply paradigm/critical theory to that big picture. That's relevant in its own way to the OP's question, "What is Autism Speaks". It's a different kind of conversation perhaps to what he is seeking...

Autism Speaks' self-fashioned interpretation of what autism is currently prevails as a function of power, manipulation and exploiting the cultural values of the paradigm in which it is embedded for sure.
I was reminded of this following quote because as I see it Autism Speaks currently represents "a function of power and not truth" -

All things are subject to interpretation; whichever interpretation prevails
at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
(Friedrich Nietzche)



iliketrees
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,155
Location: Earth

16 Sep 2015, 4:29 pm

Girl_Kitten wrote:
Impairment is not the same thing as "causing significant distress" and "mutually exclusive to living a happy, comfortable life". Women could be considered "impaired" because we lose a significant amount of blood monthly, and need to take time off of work to give birth and breastfeed babies. That doesn't mean you can't be happy as a woman who has a period, and women can certainly be happy about giving birth and breastfeeding. Gay people can be considered "impaired" because they cannot procreate with their spouse without medical intervention. That doesn't mean that gay people can't be happy having gay sex and adopting children. Impairment just means that you can't (or don't) function the way that white, Protestant, wealthy, heterosexual, NT men think you should, and that is the definition of "impairment" that the APA has traditionally used.

Men could be considered impaired as they have lower life spans and external organs highly susceptible to pain.

Straights could be considered impaired as they run the risk of accidental pregnancy.

So women vs men and straights vs gays are at an equal in terms of advantages and disadvantages. This is nowhere near the case for autistic vs NT.

I am not living a happy and comfortable life. And no, I do not have depression. I am just autistic. The impairment causes distress in a lot of people.