Another point of view that anti-cure "Aspies" must

Post Reply New Topic

You bet you're using the word 'cure' loosely. You've completely cut and mutilated the word from it's original meaning!





That is not a 'cure', that is self improvement. To 'cure' someone means to bring them from one state that is considered 'unhealthy' to another state which isn't considered 'unhealthy'. A paralyzed man can get a wheelchair, and that can help him 'broaden his horizons' because he's more mobile and able to do more then he was before, and with that new ability he can acquire new skills and behaviors that may have not been as available to him before. But a wheelchair isn't, has never been, and never will be a cure for paralysis. The man just improved his situation by getting a wheelchair.

By your loose definition of the word 'cure', autism was 'cured' the moment someone who was autistic decided to improve their situation by using sign language if they couldn't speak, or anything like that. Please don't misinterpret this, your argument that anything an autistic person can use to adapt better is a good thing is an argument that I agree with! I just don't think that it counts as a 'cure' because it doesn't fit the definition of the word. If such things are 'cures', then why is everyone still debating about them? We've had them for years!

I totally agree. I think this loose use of the word "cure" is a bad idea. If "cure" is allowed to mean "learning skills", then "against a cure" will be taken to mean, "against any teaching of skills". This may sound absurd but it's exactly what I initially thought when I first encountered WP. (I am an NT parent of an autistic child). I read some posts that equated "cure" in this very loose way and I read other posts that were "anti-cure". When you put the two together, the impression really is that people who are anti-cure are against therapy and skill building of any kind. Which in retrospect is absurd. But a too-loose use of the word "cure" feeds that wrong impression.

I agree, I am against an actual, literal cure because I don't see anyone with autism as an 'unhealthy state', just a person that might require a lot of extra adaptation in order to flourish. I think that is the root problem with the never-ending 'cure' debate. Too many people, on both sides of the argument seem to think that they can just distort the meaning of words to mean anything they want. Anything, so as long as they never have to acknowledge that they could very well be wrong about the whole thing. Which is why we've got so many snark-posts from people on both sides of this, here on WP. So much misinterpretation of what the Autism Spectrum really is, too!

Well said, both of you.

Back to the person that is advocating for this 'loose definition' of cure for gays... we don't need anything but acceptance and for people to stop making laws barring us from something as simple as legal marriage. Period.

First, people do use the word "cure" loosely, which is why the anti-cure aspies really need to do a better job at considering other people's points of view. Nothing unusual in my use of the word cure.

Second, "self improvement" isn't going to make a gay person find the opposite sex attractive. So, no, self improvement is not what I'm talking about.

Last edited by Mysty on 13 Jul 2010, 12:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Woah... how'd you get "learning skills" out of what I posted? Last I checked, finding the opposite sex attractive is NOT a skill. I can accept "self improvement" as an equivalent to what I was talking about, but "learning skills" is NOT. Not at all.

Self improvement and cure are not two neat, always clearly differentiated ideas. It's not that simple.

Edit: Actually, I take that back. "Self improvement", as usually meant, isn't going to make a gay person find the opposite sex attractive. So, no, I'm not talking about self improvement.

Actually, it's the people who use the word "cure" loosely that need to do a better job at considering the actual meanings of words. Otherwise we'd end up at a crossroads.

Note that I'm using the word "crossroads" very loosely, with no real, defined meaning.

How would it be an improvement for a gay man to be taught to find women sexually appealing?

Be careful with the quotes. That's me you're quoting, not Whatsername. This quote of mine was embedded inside her quote and I am replying to her comments about autism. The post that I was replying to did not mention anything about being gay, and so my comments should not be taken to have anything to do with being gay. They are a reply to the poster that I quoted.