Whats with all the Autism Speaks hate.

Post Reply New Topic

You very clearly were not subjected to diabolical little experiments to try and "cure" you by every other adult in your life throughout your childhood, as I was. If you had been, you might feel differently.

When people offer to "cure" you, they do not take no for an answer. This is telling people how to act, what to think, who to be.



And why do they need help with said social interactions? Is it *gasp* BECAUSE SOCIETY REFUSES TO ACCEPT THEM FOR WHO THEY ARE?!

No its just fairly common that many treatment options for various disorders can cause negative side effects or involve dangerous procedures, so I feel it nessisary to point that out as a possible factor one might consider when considering a cure for autism. Also as of now since there is not a cure and there are people who by your definition depending on remaining in a terrible condition, don't they deserve help and compassion from within the society instead of treated like curses upon otherwise perfect families.

The crap they were doing does not resemble the kind of techniques of cure which are to be researched. My experience wasn't like yours, but I had experiences of my own which were terrible.


You can't prove this. I can't get someone to be influenced by reason when such paranoia surrounds the argument. In so many ways, I was saying no when I was on the edge of losing to my impairments, and no was not accepted as an answer, as I messed up and lost out on what I was doing. My neurological problems said to me yes, that I will put up with failure. I had no choice of whether or not I wanted to be impaired.


Because some of us have a neurological disorder. We have a problem interacting with others in basic ways often, as the brain is indispensable for carrying out social interaction. What is so difficult to understand of that? What is this "acceptance" you talk of? Having us live as if we were permanent children or pets, rather than as adults with needs and ambitions, with saccharine phrases of condescending acceptance? Stop making us beg for acceptance like a bunch of submissive weaklings. Let us become self-reliant.

That is why I think this society needs to change for the better, so it is able to do a better job at being responsible for its citizens. Also you never answered the question if someone who cannot speak expresses other sorts of distress at a treatment do you think that should be ignored or considered? Or should their lack of being able to speak give the impression they are too dumb to have any idea what they actually like or don't like for instance?

The rhetoric you promote shows no compassion. It is viciously dismissive and mocking. Those ideas haven't helped the conversation all of these years. And all the time spent on anti-cure paranoia could have been spent on promoting realistic understanding and assistance.

What valid material?



Disability does deprive many of the means to do things beyond basic needs. It's just a fact. Pervasive disabilities really do get in the way of many activities, work or leisure.


Will the distress be understood? What guarantee is there of that? What if they have a serious pain that is getting worse but they can't come up with a reliable way to get it interpreted? It's not the fault of the person trying to understand, who often tries. These are the kinds of things that occur in real life that don't fit into your neat ideal approaches. If arguments get weak, making up absurd strawmen doesn't help.

When I told people "no", they didn't take it for an answer. They tried to cure me anyway, and the cures attempted included medication, which is relevant to the present discussion. Since it happened to me, it can happen to others too.

I'm not begging acceptance, I AM DEMANDING IT! Tell me, why is the autistic method of social interaction "wrong" and the "neurotypical" method "right"? What constitutes an acceptable social interaction is an invention of civilization, and civilization's idea of acceptable social interaction is perfectly capable of changing. What right does society have to say that there is something "wrong" with you or I because we fall outside the norms it invented for itself?

What neat ideal approaches, it seems you're just avoiding the question since you still have not answered it. Should other forms of communication one might attempt to use if they cannot speak be ignored or acknowledged and considered where treatment is concerned in your opinion? I am not asking how neat or ideal you think my approaches are or whatever that means.

Medication isn't cure. What you are referring to isn't cure.


There is no autistic method of social interaction. When you have met one autistic, you have only met one autistic. It's not an invention of civilization. Social interaction arose from hundreds of thousands of years of evolution, becoming further advanced along the way. There is no acceptability. Only sufficiency. You're not making any sense.

What rhetoric? and how does it not show compassion to say we need a society in which the needs of people severely disabled by autism or other conditions should get the help and support they deserve, what is in-compassionate about that. You're idea that it should be impossible for anyone with a disability to have any quality of life is a lot more non compassionate then that. Maybe you should comprehend my points before putting a bunch of garbage in my mouth that I am supposedly spewing.

And what anti-cure paranoia are you talking about, I just find it unlikely they are going to find a cure for something that is a major difference in genetics and neurology I think its more likely they will find it to be an incurable difference, that is just based on the knowledge I have its not up to me whether that proves to be true or not. Quit trying to judge the type of person I am on how I feel about a cure or lack of one.

Than what is 'cure'?

Too complex? That's not a scientific/engineering argument. That's a creationist argument. I don't just consider cure from what is taught in psychology. I went to college and had studied biology, chemistry, genetics, etc. I know that there are advancements going on.


Other ways won't solve all of those issues. Doubt of possibility of something doesn't make the goal bad. You don't need to attack the goal. Others want to look for a way out of this.


You're avoiding the question that concerns a harsh reality. Other forms should be acknowledged, but what if they can't be deciphered? In order for communication to work, it has to be understood.

Something that treats the root, underlying cause, not just the symptoms. Something that really eliminates impairment.

If medication isn't what you mean by cure, then what do you? I know sweetleaf already asked you this, but your response was vague. What exactly do you believe can "cure" autism?

Wether you want to use the term "acceptable" or "sufficient" nothing changes. Who decides what is "sufficient"? Why is what is considered "sufficient" considered such? Why are other forms of social interaction, be they those used by an aspie, an obsessive-compulsive, or whoever else may not "fit in" (or whatever terminology you would use) deemed "Insufficient"? And lastly and most importantly, why can't these preconceptions change? Why can't a wider variety of forms of social behavior, or lack thereof, be "sufficient" to the standards of our civilization?

We don't know exactly what forms cure will come in for the various individuals with varying impairments. Implementation will vary from person to person. It may involve forms of gene therapy. Something that will enhance any connections that may be lacking within the brain.


There is no bureaucrat deciding what is sufficient just to be mean to you. Language changed gradually over time in many countries over time, but all involve verbal language in conjunction with alphabetic writing systems. Theoretically, you could start your own language based on abstract symbols, but those with the capacity to learn languages tend to learn the language they are exposed to as they grow up. After all, you are communicating right now with the English language. In order to have in depth communication with others, advanced systems of language are needed. Our species would not have had the level of success we have without our facilities for communication.

Again, there aren't really any other systems of social interaction for aspies. There may be proclivities or patterns, but there can be varying levels of skill in communication, which for aspies is not known to be low. Obsessive compulsive has nothing to do with this. These are not preconceptions. These are actual realities. There is a difference. Making up fake preconceptions or delusions won't change reality. Lack of communication is a bad thing. Period. Debating that is not sane. If standards are just considered to be things that come out of the whims of some prototypical jerk, I can only be suspicious of what would occur if your side gained power.

And you don't think treatments to do that could possibly have any risks or harmful effects? I mean to eliminate the 'impairment' ones entire neurology and genetic structure would have to be altered(how is that not going to come with risks. So my pointing out it could be risky is hardly rhetoric.