What do you think of the Autism Rights Movement?

Post Reply New Topic

Leaving aside the fact that science and logic does not disprove G-d's existence, I can say that there are moral arguments against both public nudity and cross dressing. Both are unnatural, period. Boys in dresses look weird [to put it mildly]. Sorry. It's cruel to mainstream the symptoms. As for science, it's a biological fact [I'll stick to science and not to religion], that men and women have different bodies. For instance, men can not get pregnant. It's unnatural for men and women who don't know each other to see each other naked. In my view, it's immoral. I can understand having a nudity beach somewhere [certainly a place I would NEVER EVER EVER go to]. But for society to accept public nudity, in my view, goes way too far. Why should people who are rightly uncomfortable seeing a stranger's private parts [particularly if the stranger is from the opposite sex] be forced to look at them? Why!? The point is that the things you listed are not silly. And my point also is that, for any society to function, it has rules. Some of those rules don't make "logical" sense. That's leaving aside my view that not all morals and ethics can be reduced to logic puzzles. Science is an aspect of learning about the world. And a very important one at that. But there are other aspects as well. I think it's good to learn the rules of the society you live in instead of always demanding that there be a "logical" reason behind every rule. That's my broader point.

I appreciate you have a difference of opinion, but this has gone beyond the scope of the thread. Once again, I'm not going to argue, because I don't want to get into an argument about these things when they're not the point of the thread. Let's just agree to disagree and leave it at that and move on.

Let me address each point by point again.

"I could not disagree more that ND people have bent over backwards to help autistics it is the other way around or if it has happened I completly missed out on it as well as the coddling."
I didn't say that NT people bend over backwards to help autistic people. I said that NT people bend over backward to cater to the autism. Those are two very different claims. Helping autistic people would be helping them integrate, not sustaining their disability. And yes, autistic people are coddled. The sensory movie theaters is but one example. The concept of autism acceptance month [that is acceptance of a mental illness] is another.

"What I do know is when I had a mild stroke suddenly people were bieng real nice to me, opening doors for me etc. Never had anything like that for my autistic issues."
Here you go again assuming autistic people are weak again. I have autism [and am currently fighting it]. Let me be very very very clear. Unless I have a stroke, I don't want people to treat me as if I do have a stroke. What you want is special treatment.

"You mentioned cancer which I am dealing with now, People are bending over backwords for me accommodating my cancer symptoms. Nothing, nada, zero for my autistic ones."
I know I brought up that example. But please, cancer is an actual sickness in the body. And the point is that people don't cater to the cancer. They try to rid the individual of the disease. What you want is people to cater to the disease and treat autistic people as if they're weak. Big big difference.

"When they help me with cancer or stroke symptoms it is bieng humane, doing similar for autistics is coddling?"
Yes, because autism is not a physical symptom. It's coddling because it's catering to the autistic mind, which is as rigid as can be. That's very different than helping someone out because of any physical condition they have.

"Most of the most successful people are not normal, while most of them are not autistic, a lot of them annoy people socially, they are stubborn, a lot of them stay where they are and buck the system instead of running away to place more friendly to them. Fanatism towered the normal leads to societies stagnating then falling."
Yes, people are different, but still not a valid argument for integrating into society instead of demanding special treatment.

"As for eye contact if it is so naturally basic to human communication does that mean all those people in East Asia and Africa are defective somehow?. Eye contact norms seems more like a cultural thing then a basic human need."
Even if eye contact is a cultural thing, if you live in a society where eye contact is the cultural norm, learn it. If you don't like it, then move to East Asia and Africa where you say that having no eye contact is seen as respectable. In the US, eye contact is the norm. It isn't going to change anytime soon. Deal with it.

"Some autistics like some some cancer patients (sorry with the cancer references but it is on my mind now) are to severe/weak to be normal, some can be fully functiional, many can hold up the facade of bieng normal for a period of time even a long period of time before collapsing."
It's funny how you will go from what you say about some autistic people and say that therefore, autistic people can't be normal. Thanks for admitting that you see autistic people as weak by the way. What you say next is even more telling.

"In long term if the person can do that they will often burnout or develop mental illness. This is not something limited to autistics, most people are social which is the reason prisons have isolation cells to break prisoners mentally."
It's not limited to autistic people, but autistic people are somehow too weak to become normal? Is that what you're saying? What will make you happy? Seriously?

"As for the siezures mentioned that came from a just published study concluding that the mean life expectency for autistics with learning disabilities is 30 years less then NT's with the leading cause of death is epilepsy (for autistics without learning disabilities it is 16 years less with leading cause of death suicide). The study found that autistics have a number of health problems at a greater rate then the general population Obvoiusly too early to know what the linkage if any there is."
One, correlation does not prove causation. Two, you admit that we don't know what the linkage is. Type up the link or else I'll see your "study" as dubious. Anyway, your post is saying: Autistic people are too weak to become neurotypical people. Autistic people are too weak to learn eye contact. Autistic people are too weak to go through the normal human experience of not getting their way all the time. Face it, life is difficult. Crap is going to happen to you, as it does to everyone. Like I said, you're the condescending one, not me. You're part of the problem, not the solution.

I never said or implied autistics are so weak as a group as to not be functional. What I said Autism is similar to cancer in that some Autistics can function in society some can not, some have limited ability.

Autism like stroke is caused by physical. Genes are physical objects. Most environmental causes whatever they are are probably physical also. Autism has some physical manifestations like clumsiness and "weird" physical gait and possibly seizures (the study I cited might be crap but that autistics more often have seizure disorders is well known and validated).

So are you trying to say people with strokes and cancer should only be accommodated for thier physical difficulties but stop coddling thier mental issues?. Is it ok to treat mental issues in stroke because they are a direct result of stroke but since cancer patients who get depression is a mind issue and not a direct result of most cancers they should just deal with it?

If people want to move to a location more friendly to them that is thier right, but it is also thier right to delibertly choose to make it hard on themselves for the purpose of making easier for others like them. A lot of what you and I enjoy or the needed services we get are the result of people sticking it out by staying put.

Let me respond with you like how I did before.

"I never said or implied autistics are so weak as a group as to not be functional."
Oh yes you did.

"What I said Autism is similar to cancer in that some Autistics can function in society some can not, some have limited ability."
And you used that claim to say that autistic people are too weak to learn eye contact and, if they did learn eye contact or the like, somehow seizures would kill them or they'll be burnt out.

"Autism like stroke is caused by physical. Genes are physical objects. Most environmental causes whatever they are are probably physical also. Autism has some physical manifestations like clumsiness and "weird" physical gait and possibly seizures (the study I cited might be crap but that autistics more often have seizure disorders is well known and validated)."
I don't deny that autistic people get seizures [other people also get seizures]. I just don't think helping them to integrate is the cause of the seizures. And the fact is that you can't even provide the link for the study, but just expect me to take your word for whatever you say and basically shurg your shoulders, say, "Well, it's well-known." I learned eye contact and am conquering my autism. I don't get seizures. Somehow your crappy study did not talk with people like me.

"So are you trying to say people with strokes and cancer should only be accommodated for thier physical difficulties but stop coddling thier mental issues?."
There is also another argument that I made that you didn't address, one that I think is a better one. The difference is that people don't celebrate or try to cater to the cancer. They show compassion to the sufferer by trying to rid the sufferer of his/her disease. People, on the other hand, cater to autism and celebrate it. That's what I say is coddling. I'm not against services that help autistic people function in society. I'm against services that cater to the disease and condemn autistic people to be welfare recipients who whine all day about neurotypical privilege. What I say is coddling is celebrating a disease that keeps autistic people from function in society and calling those who genuinely want to help autistic people "bigoted" or "intolerant." For instance, the autism "rights" movement denounces ABA, a service that does help autistic people be competent members of society. Again, what you want is special treatment because rather than pushing yourself to learn to make eye contact, you want people to cater to you because not making eye contact is allegedly seen as respectful in east Asia and Africa. Should we bow instead of shaking hands because it is seen as the norm in Japan and China? Like I said, if you don't like making eye contact, move to a place where you don't have to.

"If people want to move to a location more friendly to them that is thier right,"
Agreed

"but it is also thier right to delibertly choose to make it hard on themselves for the purpose of making easier for others like them."
But it's not their right to expect everyone to cater to them. Like I said, eye contact is, at the very least, a social norm in America and the Western World that isn't going away. Deal with it. Either deal with it or leave to Africa or east Asia where you say it's respectable to not learn eye contact. Although maybe you'll find norms there to complain about. The point is that society has social rules. That isn't going to change. Not everyone will cater to you. Deal with it.

"A lot of what you and I enjoy or the needed services we get are the result of people sticking it out by staying put."
Maybe so, but I can tell you that I'd rather adapt to society than expect special treatment. I'm so sick and tired of this self-entitled victim mentality that those on the left promote. I may have contributed to it [even when I was politically on the right] at some point in time. But I've had it and am sick and tired of it, period. Not everyone will coddle you, period. Like I said, I support services that help autistic people overcome the autism, not ones that celebrate and sustain the disease and thusly treat autistic people like little children. I am NOT a victim. And I DON'T want to be coddled. Period!! ! !