Coin a negative word for "curing" people of Autism

Post Reply New Topic

They're saying things that don't encourage others to think for themselves, and seem to incite some emotional fear that isn't based on much. Genuine cure would help those who get it and need it. I don't get why it should be assumed that those without a cure in mind have their best interests in mind. Why not increase abilities instead of just trying to squeeze as much out of them as possible with such burden? I'm thinking of getting rid of disparities in ability altogether. It's not going to be forced. But I didn't have a choice of being disabled in the first place. I think my condition has basically been forced on me.

Ok if I am of the opinion that the goal of a cure is to make people with autism neurotypical...and thus fit into a 'box' how is that not encouraging people to think for themselves. That would be called my opinion. Also I cannot speak for everyone but its my opinion based on what I've experienced and researched that it would be better to help autistic people to function as autistic people rather then trying to rewire their brain and genetics so they function like a neurotypical.

I mean thus far I haven't heard of any safe ideas for a cure, they all sound pretty damn risky to me...but I still respect the individual choice for one to undergo such treatments if they choose. Also my whole idea is increase abilities instead of trying to squeeze as much out of them as possible....instead of trying to 'fix' them by turning them neurotypical which may or may not even work they should be allowed to develop the skills they do have or help them to have the most comfortable fullfilling life they can. I guess I do not understand the idea that the only way one can have a fulfilling life is to be neurotypical and it seems some people into the idea of a cure are of that belief.

Also there is no way to make everyone equal in ability........people in general have different strengths and weaknesses if everyone had the exact same abilities and weaknesses things would be pretty boring and things might never get accomplished because everyone would have the same strengths and weaknesses. So in a natural disaster for instance instead of having people panicking as well as people who are able to act quickly and efficiently.......it would be one or the other either everyone could deal with it efficiently or no one could. Good if everyone can.....But bad if everyone cannot. And considering how the odds of life work not every situation would address the universal strengths some would address the universal weaknesses. So I do not think it would be good to get rid of disparities in ability altogether.......I think a better approach is for people with different strengths and weaknesses to work together in order to make things work rather then everyone being the same. Does any of that make sense?

That's why they still have to research it. It's not ready yet. I'm worried that there is a lot of this made up backlash against the goal that could hinder progress towards it, if that hasn't occurred already.


I don't really get what it would even mean to become neurotypical, and how it relates to this change. This conversion idea doesn't have much of an explanation behind it. I for one can't have a comfortable fulfilling life being dependent on others for resources, with them having higher success compared to me, while I just exist alongside them. I can't get myself to be content with that.


I don't think general equality and cooperation would be boring. It hasn't been experienced in any familiar times, but that doesn't invalidate it. A lot of terrible things have been durable over time and expected, but have been overthrown. Lots of things already don't get accomplished with disparities. I think accomplishment would rise if all had the aptitudes to pursue things they want and need, instead of relying on the ideas of a smaller group privileged to have their strengths, who themselves tend to be interested in their own advancement, rather than satisfying needs.


I don't get why it would supposedly go that way. If all had abilities secured to them, they all would have higher chances of knowing what to do and of coordinating efforts better. Besides, natural disasters are handled very badly currently the way things are. The smart haven't done all that is necessary to abate the problems from natural disasters.


They don't just have different strengths. Some just have higher ability to learn and do things in general than others. Not all have some particular strength that is equivalent with the strengths of others. Some can't do things they are interested in simply cause they weren't lucky to have some aptitude they lack.

Yeah that is how its been ever since humans have been around there have been differences in abilities and weaknesses.......Also I think in the right environment people with or without autism can more or less thrive, but I am of the opinion the society we are in is a negative environment over all and thus contributes to many peoples inabilities to function and or pursue their goals. But it seems you are more of the opinion its all genetic so the only way to improve things for autistics would be to either genetically alter them into 'not-neurotypicals'? since you said the goal of a cure would not be to make them neurotypical earlier.

I don't know what aspect of environment you're talking of. But others being mean isn't what is causing so many to be unable to do things. I don't know if it's all genetic or not. I think it's unlikely to be completely genetic.

I am talking about the environment one is in...society being a large part of that environment, maybe you don't agree with me society is flawed though so I will try and specify more. Take school as a child, if its a negative environment for a child due to ostracism and bullying from other kids and even teachers and they are forced to spend a large chunk of their time there....it is very possible people 'being mean' as you simplify it as can actually effect peoples mental health and contribute to various mental disorders. So while its true people being mean is not what directly causes people to be unable to do things......it certainly can be a contributing factor in mental illnesses that interfere with someones ability to do things.

For instance an autistic person who grows up in a healthy environment...say they don't suffer the treatment I described at school and instead of having a completely dysfunctional family they have a supportive one that more or less has its sh** together. Might end up being more functional than someone who was under constant stress due to a negative home and school environment because the negative enivronment contributed to their difficulties. Not saying the person who grew up in a better environment will function like a neurotypical and have no difficulties whatsoever....but then even people without mental disorders have difficulties.

Genetic factors are also a contributing factor as they more or less determine a lot of personality features, and predispositions for various mental disorders ect. Autism itself is more genetic than environmentally influenced considering people are born autistic....since we are born that way the idea of a cure is threatening since cure typically means ridding someone of an illness.....if we are born autistic then it would take some major modifications to our neurological and genetic features to rid us of autism. Even so if someone consents great...the obvious issue I see with that though is what about autistic kids, would they have any say in whether such treatments are used on them or not?

FalsettoTesla - Change

Plodder - Neurological genocide/murder

Fnord - Re-programming

Maybird - Re-wiring

AardvarkGoodSwimmer - Small boxes/ing/er

CockneyRebel - Forced normalisation

Acranyn - Assimilation

idratherbeatree - Brainwashing

If you would like to post your idea, you have exactly one hour in which to do so! I'm having this thread locked in an hour so that people can vote on their favourite term!

Locked on OP's request.