Revison/rejection of "Anti-cure Cowardice"

Page 3 of 4 [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

fabshelly
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2007
Age: 53
Gender: Female
Posts: 207

29 Jan 2008, 1:21 pm

Sometimes, I'm convinced that AS is the cure for NT.


_________________
I wonder if Homo Sapiens Sapiens called Neanderthals "NT"s too?


TLPG
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Nov 2007
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 693

29 Jan 2008, 5:21 pm

Zwerfbeertje wrote:
2) There is no cure, nor treatment, nor will there be in the foreseeable future.


Treatment is a subjective word, Zwerf. No offence - I know what context you meant that comment in and I agree with you. But we do need information in order to adjust to the best of our ability - and I would call that treatment as well. Ditto the ability to cope, that works as a sort of treatment as well.

OK - I'm being a bit picky, but let's not give the word "treatment" such a broad based rejection. Hope I'm being understood with this.



Joeker
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 9 Aug 2007
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 361
Location: The Interwebs

30 Jan 2008, 8:27 pm

Logitech, let me put it like this. You wanted to know why people don't want to cure red hair, and I explained it. Not all metaphors or analogies can be completely direct; and by changing the hair's colour, you're "curing" it.

Like by changing the enzymes in the brain will change perceptions. I recently heard about something on another forum; German scientists have apparently discovered how to induce, and then reverse ASDs. So, if they can cure us, they can put us back the way we were. It's not like they're only focusing on a single, simple and brutal solution. This ought to satisfy those who love their ASDs, while still letting people get a cure if they want one.

gbollard, that's an inherent risk(though a highly unlikely one) anyone diagnosed with anything have, of being thought of as lesser, or being singled out. So far though, with people who're physically disabled, I don't really see much hatred, or discrimination. I can't help but feel that people are building soceity up to be something more negative than it is. Is it really so bad?

TLPG, you misunderstand the analogy. We're not the aliens. The Aliens are the Aliens. We're not aliens, but that's not relevant to the OP. If you re-read it, more closely, I'm sure you'll realize what was meant.

I hope you understand though, that our thoughts are alien to NTs, like their thoughts are alien to us.

Well, the symptoms of Red Hair are certainly treated. For all effects and purposes, the hair would now be whatever colour it was coloured, green even, if that was the choice. I myself would enjoy a nice dolcent blue.

TheFace, it is your body. But other people's bodies aren't yours. If I want a cure, I have the right to express that as much as you have the right to express you don't. If someone else wants a cure, they have the right to express that the same. Why can you not accept that someone else wants a cure? Do your standards apply to everyone but yourself?
To deny a cure to those who want one is of the same stock as forcing a cure on people who don't want one. Are you just the other side of a coin, or are you holding others to a standard you don't follow?

What gives you the right to nullify the preference of the lives of those who want a cure?

He can say it, when the emotion driving it appears to be fear. Fear is what gives you gut instincts. Fear is what drives knee-jerk reactions. If someone reacts strongly to something, on an emotional basis with no logical founding, and before they can explore all the possibilities, you end up with entire arguments inspired by fear-driven, presumptious assertions with no logical, physical, or historical evidence.

The origin of the argument that a cure would kill the autistic's personality, who they are, and replace them with an NT, was in 1993, by Jim Sinclair. Since then, it's been taken as fact, and is used as an end-all to discussions about cures. Usually it's used to accuse those for a cure of attempted murder, though in this case, it's be more like suicide. Point is, there's no real proof that it will destroy our personalities any more than going through a major change like, say, puberty. Did that kill us? Did that destroy our personalities? Nope.

As for the cure debate, it follows a specific pattern. I found this quotation quoted, so I quoted the original quotation. Ironically, it was from the Anti-cure site. Still, the meaning is clear to me about the things that have happened in most discussions about cures, from the insults to the dramatic opposition. I hope that it doesn't become a violent matter though.

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." -- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860), philosopher

The relevance comes from this; They don't see the benefits, but they're told the benefits, though they never experience it themselves. For the brave few who do try it, they can't be trusted to be unbiased, because now they are different too.

No, you can have pickles, but you can't state that your hamburger is better than the other varieties. I make mine on a barbecue, at home. Mm-mm! Yum! I kind of like the junky McDonalds stuff though, the fries are nice and salty, crisp, and the burgers taste like meat candy. :P

Proven false, proven false, and proven false.

But the general view shown has yet to be effectively disproven logically, has been attacked emotionally, and is being linked to other hypothesis which are proven false, simply to make it look bad. How about the hypothesis that the Earth revolves around the sun, that there is a force called gravity which influences motion, and that Hamburgers are delicious?

Deacon, I've seen no evidence to show that he's an idiot. He's eloquent, well-versed in social models, sees through attempts to derail discussions, and has so far shut you out to the point where you need to call him an idiot to make a point. I think that the evidence outweighs your theory by a wide margin.

Zwerf, 1) Do they retain this right when it infringes on the same rights for others? (I.E. those who do want a cure) If no cure is created because of the choices made by Anti-cure supporters, does this not then infringe on those who do want a cure, to be full out denied their right to make that choice?
2) It's more likely than you think. German Scientists have discovered a way to induce, and then at will, reverse ASDs in rats. Besides, the arguments are to not create a cure, in essence, stop the creation of a cure even before it begins. That was the theme of the discussion. I think you ought to have read closer.

Sure you could, and that's what happens, and this is why so many people are complicit in restricting people's rights based on cure stance. Those who want a cure are shunned, insulted, harassed, belittled, mocked, libelled, and sometimes even threatened. It's becoming an issue of politics, in something that is at worst a neurobiological disorder. I'd like to see how smug you'd be if you were on a recieving end of a bunch of people who want nothing more than your silence. People who are for cures aren't popular, I know. But does that make us fair game?

Fabshelly, there's nothing the matter with being normal. That's just plain rude, to imply that being NeuroTypical is something bad.


_________________
1234
FOUR
Four is the only number which is itself has the same number of letters as it itself is.


TheFace
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 273
Location: The Sweaty Palm of Michigan

30 Jan 2008, 8:58 pm

Joeker wrote:
TheFace, it is your body. But other people's bodies aren't yours. If I want a cure, I have the right to express that as much as you have the right to express you don't. If someone else wants a cure, they have the right to express that the same. Why can you not accept that someone else wants a cure? Do your standards apply to everyone but yourself?
To deny a cure to those who want one is of the same stock as forcing a cure on people who don't want one. Are you just the other side of a coin, or are you holding others to a standard you don't follow?


Because then people will try and force a cure on everyone because of the "common good". For example John Nash, they almost killed one of the greatest mathmaticians the world has ever known. Pratically made the guy a zombie and called the side effects "tollerable".


_________________
My Blog - http://www.thezach.net/blog
My Online Store - http://www.thezach.net/store
The Nasty Truth About Autism Speaks - http://www.thezach.net/about/aspergers/aspeak


CockneyRebel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 102,076
Location: Hanging out with my fellow Sweet Peas at Stalag 13

30 Jan 2008, 9:04 pm

You can't cure something that's not a disease.


_________________
Schultz

Kanye West 2020

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=26&start=645


TheFace
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 273
Location: The Sweaty Palm of Michigan

30 Jan 2008, 9:10 pm

CockneyRebel wrote:
You can't cure something that's not a disease.


I think this is why people are still thinking its a disease.

Image


_________________
My Blog - http://www.thezach.net/blog
My Online Store - http://www.thezach.net/store
The Nasty Truth About Autism Speaks - http://www.thezach.net/about/aspergers/aspeak


Joeker
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 9 Aug 2007
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 361
Location: The Interwebs

31 Jan 2008, 12:12 am

TheFace, no, they won't. Do you think people will stand for it, and do you think that once you're cured, you'd no longer be a voice crying out against it. Besides, the research that looks most promising for curing autism has been done by German Scientists, and what they've managed to do is induce, then reverse, the effects of autism in lab rats, or mice. Note the word induce, meaning that they can give it back. They're closer than you think, too.

Besides, the Media as they are, they catch the slightest whiff of people being forcibly cured, they'll be on it harder than a hammer on a nail. Besides, your example with John Nash hardly works. All they did was drug him out of his mind. That's not a cure, that's drugging.

So because you don't want a cure out of fear, no one can have one? Pretty selfish.

CockneyRebel, don't mistake Autism as being just like any other gene. Consider; Diabetes can be genetic. Does that mean it's not a disease?

More to my point, you don't want a cure. But others do. And they're getting closer to making a cure.

TheFace, that's pretty presumptious, and very insulting of NTs. There's no real excuse for that.

You really don't know NTs. I live with them, talk to them all the time, and more. They're not the monsters that they're made out to be. On WP, I've seen lots of jeers at NTs, lots of insults, and even a bit of what I think is called Aspie Supremacy. It's really not appropriate, or justifiable, and it really makes me mad to see people attacking those who's only crime is not having autism. It's no fault of theirs, but they get lumped in and stereotyped, prejudged, and get a guilty verdict for being normal. My apologies, oh different ones, that I don't think being normal is nearly as bad as it's being made out to be.

Why does everyone seem to hate NTs so much? Why?


_________________
1234
FOUR
Four is the only number which is itself has the same number of letters as it itself is.


TheFace
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 273
Location: The Sweaty Palm of Michigan

31 Jan 2008, 12:31 am

Joeker wrote:
TheFace, no, they won't. Do you think people will stand for it, and do you think that once you're cured, you'd no longer be a voice crying out against it. Besides, the research that looks most promising for curing autism has been done by German Scientists, and what they've managed to do is induce, then reverse, the effects of autism in lab rats, or mice. Note the word induce, meaning that they can give it back. They're closer than you think, too.


In rats.... hehe.

Joeker wrote:
Besides, the Media as they are, they catch the slightest whiff of people being forcibly cured, they'll be on it harder than a hammer on a nail. Besides, your example with John Nash hardly works. All they did was drug him out of his mind. That's not a cure, that's drugging.


They still do that to this day to people who don't comform to societies standards, and this has nothing to do with the media.

Joeker wrote:
So because you don't want a cure out of fear, no one can have one? Pretty selfish.


I dont want a cure, because I'm not sick, I'm not diseased.

joeker wrote:
CockneyRebel, don't mistake Autism as being just like any other gene. Consider; Diabetes can be genetic. Does that mean it's not a disease?


If its genetic it is not a disease.

Joeker wrote:
TheFace, that's pretty presumptious, and very insulting of NTs. There's no real excuse for that.

Then tell them NT's that just because I'm different doesent mean I have a disease, and my comment was a reference to Autism Speaks and there following.

Joeker wrote:
You really don't know NTs.

Thats a line of crap

Joeker wrote:
I live with them, talk to them all the time, and more.

Well so do the rest of us. Your not special or unique there.

Joeker wrote:
On WP, I've seen lots of jeers at NTs, lots of insults, and even a bit of what I think is called Aspie Supremacy. It's really not appropriate, or justifiable, and it really makes me mad to see people attacking those who's only crime is not having autism.

Aspie Supremacy? No its more like protecting who I am. I am unique, not supreme.- should I get a cure because I dont like onions on my Big Mac too?


Joeker wrote:
Why does everyone seem to hate NTs so much? Why?

Could it be because NTs seem to not accept me because I'm different, the seem to look at me as I have a plauge of some sort and treat me as if I need to be cured.


_________________
My Blog - http://www.thezach.net/blog
My Online Store - http://www.thezach.net/store
The Nasty Truth About Autism Speaks - http://www.thezach.net/about/aspergers/aspeak


Joeker
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 9 Aug 2007
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 361
Location: The Interwebs

31 Jan 2008, 1:56 am

http://io9.com/349956/one-pill-makes-yo ... s-you-back

Not too far from getting to humans though, especially with the results they've had.

You don't, but others do, and by saying that, you're supporting that, you're infringing on their right to be cured.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genetic_disorders
So much for that statement.

Did you say Autism Speaks? No, you said NTs. Nowhere did I see someone from Autism Speaks on there. Besides, they're hardly specifically targeting you, and you alone. I do take issue to the way you set it up though. Not all NTs are members of Autism Speaks, not all NTs support Autism Speaks. If you meant Autism Speaks, say Autism Speaks. Not NTs in general. It is a sad thing to see such prejudice.

The way you talk about NTs, I'm amazed you think you really have any idea what you're talking about. You're scared of them, hate them, and insult them.

I seek out interaction, and I don't happen to have a conspiracy theory concocted about them. I like NTs, as opposed to believing they're out to get me. And I don't make it my business to blame them for everything that ails me. I earn respect, I don't demand it. I make my own way on my own merit, I don't use AS as an excuse or a crutch. I don't shove my AS in people's faces and demand that they accomodate me. I play by their rules, and I like it.

You're being an idiot, comparing Aspergers to Hamburgers. It's not even relevant to what I said.
Aspie Supremacy. You mock and taunt people you consdier lessers. You discriminate against NTs. You pick a fight with Autism Speaks, who isn't even talking about Aspies, but those with severe autism. Autism doesn't mean you, there are different contexts. And the context their speaking in isn't the autism you know and love, the Aspergers and high functioning autism.
It's not their fault that they're NT anymore than it would be their fault for a skin colour, or a religion.
Lots of NTs don't like onions on their Big Macs either.

They "seem to" not accept you. That seeming is just a seeming. You're reading material that's misinterpreted, like assuming that Autism Speaks means you when talking about the severe autism(the one you don't have), and you're assuming they mean you(an Aspie) when they say autistic or autism. Maybe you had a bad past with some NTs. Maybe you just have been pointed at a bunch of people and told that they think of you as a plague.

All I know is, it's counter-productive. You will never gain any respect from them like that. You will be considered as a plague and in need of a cure so long as you act the way you're acting. Think about it, you don't gain anything but a cheap outpouring of misguided anger the way you're acting. If you want change, you have to make the change. If you want respect, you earn it like anyone else. To show that you're able, and capable, you need to be mature.

Look at Sue Rubin. She was diagnosed with low functioning autism, and she had incredible obstacles to overcome. And look where she is now. A successful author, well-respected, an inspiration to people, and she got to where she was because of perseverance, hard work, dedication, the will to go the distance, and maturity. She didn't get to where she was by mocking NTs, by stating that she was superior, by demanding acceptance. She earned it.

If you want something, you have to make it happen yourself. You have to earn it. And you won't earn anythign but scorn and deaf ears by yelling at anyone who comes along with an opinion you don't like.


_________________
1234
FOUR
Four is the only number which is itself has the same number of letters as it itself is.


TheFace
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 273
Location: The Sweaty Palm of Michigan

31 Jan 2008, 2:09 am

Joeker wrote:
http://io9.com/349956/one-pill-makes-you-autistic-++-and-one-pill-changes-you-back

Not too far from getting to humans though, especially with the results they've had.

You don't, but others do, and by saying that, you're supporting that, you're infringing on their right to be cured.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genetic_disorders
So much for that statement.

Did you say Autism Speaks? No, you said NTs. Nowhere did I see someone from Autism Speaks on there. Besides, they're hardly specifically targeting you, and you alone. I do take issue to the way you set it up though. Not all NTs are members of Autism Speaks, not all NTs support Autism Speaks. If you meant Autism Speaks, say Autism Speaks. Not NTs in general. It is a sad thing to see such prejudice.

The way you talk about NTs, I'm amazed you think you really have any idea what you're talking about. You're scared of them, hate them, and insult them.

I seek out interaction, and I don't happen to have a conspiracy theory concocted about them. I like NTs, as opposed to believing they're out to get me. And I don't make it my business to blame them for everything that ails me. I earn respect, I don't demand it. I make my own way on my own merit, I don't use AS as an excuse or a crutch. I don't shove my AS in people's faces and demand that they accomodate me. I play by their rules, and I like it.

You're being an idiot, comparing Aspergers to Hamburgers. It's not even relevant to what I said.
Aspie Supremacy. You mock and taunt people you consdier lessers. You discriminate against NTs. You pick a fight with Autism Speaks, who isn't even talking about Aspies, but those with severe autism. Autism doesn't mean you, there are different contexts. And the context their speaking in isn't the autism you know and love, the Aspergers and high functioning autism.
It's not their fault that they're NT anymore than it would be their fault for a skin colour, or a religion.
Lots of NTs don't like onions on their Big Macs either.

They "seem to" not accept you. That seeming is just a seeming. You're reading material that's misinterpreted, like assuming that Autism Speaks means you when talking about the severe autism(the one you don't have), and you're assuming they mean you(an Aspie) when they say autistic or autism. Maybe you had a bad past with some NTs. Maybe you just have been pointed at a bunch of people and told that they think of you as a plague.

All I know is, it's counter-productive. You will never gain any respect from them like that. You will be considered as a plague and in need of a cure so long as you act the way you're acting. Think about it, you don't gain anything but a cheap outpouring of misguided anger the way you're acting. If you want change, you have to make the change. If you want respect, you earn it like anyone else. To show that you're able, and capable, you need to be mature.

Look at Sue Rubin. She was diagnosed with low functioning autism, and she had incredible obstacles to overcome. And look where she is now. A successful author, well-respected, an inspiration to people, and she got to where she was because of perseverance, hard work, dedication, the will to go the distance, and maturity. She didn't get to where she was by mocking NTs, by stating that she was superior, by demanding acceptance. She earned it.

If you want something, you have to make it happen yourself. You have to earn it. And you won't earn anythign but scorn and deaf ears by yelling at anyone who comes along with an opinion you don't like.


Where did I say I was supperior? Huh?

I pick a fight with Autism Speaks because Autism Speaks just wants money. They give people a false hope for a cure just to rake in money. So if you want to insult me some more, go right ahead. But I am prepared to return the favor.


_________________
My Blog - http://www.thezach.net/blog
My Online Store - http://www.thezach.net/store
The Nasty Truth About Autism Speaks - http://www.thezach.net/about/aspergers/aspeak


Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,014
Location: New Orleans

31 Jan 2008, 2:38 am

Pods will cure you, make eveyone the same, and everyone should want to be normal, for I say so, and put pods in your greenhouse. Dont go to sleep folks, that is when they come and make you just like them, endlessly happy perfectly adjusted to everybody, NT's.

First lies about autistics, now lies about NTs.

Insanity is saying the same thing over and over and thinking the outcome will be different. You might be insane if..

I have met NTs, lived with them, worked with them, watched them in groups, and I am not impressed with normal.

An IQ of 90 to 110, an overwhelming desire to hear themselves speak of nothing, is not anything I want. I can see that it is something they cannot overcome, so they do not like the conflict that there are other people who see differently.

German Scientists induced a state like autism? Did the rats build computers, or just act drugged?

Drugged can be reversed by the Cure, quit giving them drugs.

It is much more likely that a way can be found to induce autism, without the benefits, as a Bioweapon.

I call it The Tard Bomb! It brings a sudden end to sociaizing, left with only their own thoughts, they will cause havoc! They will endlessly repeat the same single issue out of any context.

They will see everyone else as deranged with a thousand mental illnesses, which they will now cure by endlessly repeating themselves.

Early tests show it works, now for wide spread application.

When everyone is suddenly blinded, those blind for life have the only skills that work.

The whole argument is, why does not everyone want to be just like me, for I am perfect.

You are a prime exaample of life?

If I thought I was becoming like you, I would seek a cure.



Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

31 Jan 2008, 3:23 am

How the hell do you you diagnose a rat with autism?

Quote:
failure to develop peer relationships appropriate to developmental level


oh I see. The rats are not f*cking or stealing food from each other, thus, they must be autistic.

Quote:
delay in, or total lack of, the development of spoken language (not accompanied by an attempt to compensate through alternative modes of communication such as gesture or mime)


Oh I see! the little lab rat is not saying "Same thing we we do every night Pinky.. try to take over the world!" Not even with sign language.Must be autistic!

Quote:
encompassing preoccupation with one or more stereotyped and restricted patterns of interest that is abnormal either in intensity or focus


Oh I see,,, the rat is suddenly interested in trains instead of food, sex and nesting like the other rats. Obviously, the rat is autistic.

I know! Maybe the rats have Retts disorder or childhood disintegrative disorder!

Its as stupid as those 'scientists' that said "autistics dont activate this part of their brain, thus they do not daydream.



Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

31 Jan 2008, 3:37 am

Joeker wrote:
All I know is, it's counter-productive. You will never gain any respect from them like that. You will be considered as a plague and in need of a cure so long as you act the way you're acting. Think about it, you don't gain anything but a cheap outpouring of misguided anger the way you're acting. If you want change, you have to make the change. If you want respect, you earn it like anyone else. To show that you're able, and capable, you need to be mature.


Then why are they so nasty towards Amanda Baggs? She flies in the face of their myths.



TLPG
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Nov 2007
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 693

31 Jan 2008, 5:20 am

Fuzzy wrote:
Joeker wrote:
All I know is, it's counter-productive. You will never gain any respect from them like that. You will be considered as a plague and in need of a cure so long as you act the way you're acting. Think about it, you don't gain anything but a cheap outpouring of misguided anger the way you're acting. If you want change, you have to make the change. If you want respect, you earn it like anyone else. To show that you're able, and capable, you need to be mature.


Then why are they so nasty towards Amanda Baggs? She flies in the face of their myths.


A hit! A very palpable hit! :D



Zwerfbeertje
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 6 Sep 2007
Age: 119
Gender: Male
Posts: 362

31 Jan 2008, 9:34 am

Joeker wrote:
Zwerf, 1) Do they retain this right when it infringes on the same rights for others? (I.E. those who do want a cure) If no cure is created because of the choices made by Anti-cure supporters, does this not then infringe on those who do want a cure, to be full out denied their right to make that choice?


1) It's a basic right and everyone should retain it no matter what.

2) Your argument makes no sense in any way. Not wanting to be cured does not make one responsible for the actions of those who are expected to create one. The no-cure supporters neither have the choice, nor the responsibility.

If I don't need a 8 feet plasma TV, would that make me responsible if the thing is never produced?


Quote:
2) It's more likely than you think. German Scientists have discovered a way to induce, and then at will, reverse ASDs in rats.


Abuse and neglect can induce autistic behaviour in human children and one could say, autism is induced. This induced autism can be reversed when the child is placed in suitable environment.
Autistic Behaviour does not equal Autism.

Quote:
Besides, the arguments are to not create a cure, in essence, stop the creation of a cure even before it begins. That was the theme of the discussion. I think you ought to have read closer.


I think you ought to read their arguments better. And not turn the facts around. I think the no-cure supporters are asking for options other then 'curing', because currently the attention and funding is on curing and treating rather then, for instance, support and education. The no-cure people are, I think, asking to be approached, seen and supported as humans with equal value and they want to be accepted as they are rather then as something sick that needs to be 'cured' first.

The call for a cure for autism implies that autistics are inferior and it is this view that the no-cure supporters oppose.

____
Joeker wrote:
Why does everyone seem to hate NTs so much? Why?


Perhaps for the same reason you seem to get mad about (just swap 'normal' and 'autistic'):

Quote:
... it really makes me mad to see people attacking those who's only crime is not having autism. It's no fault of theirs, but they get lumped in and stereotyped, prejudged, and get a guilty verdict for being normal. ...

____

Joeker wrote:
... All they did was drug him out of his mind. That's not a cure, that's drugging. ...


You and I know that, but I am not convinced that everyone involved in curing does. Making symptoms go away is a lot more lucrative then helping people improve their lives.

Quote:
I seek out interaction, and I don't happen to have a conspiracy theory concocted about them.


Neither do I, but I realize that they've organized their (and our) world around their strengths and weaknesses and not those of autistics. They do not understand us and our problems with the way they've organized the world as as well as they understand their own problems. And that is not a conspiracy-theory, it's just how people work and an issue that should be discussed.



elan_i
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 84

31 Jan 2008, 3:14 pm

In my original post here, I provided what I think is strong anti-cure position that anyone, if they wished, could state in response to pro-cure arguments. My position, obviously, isn't intended to be a position against the various competing concepts of normality, disorder, autism, neurotypalism, nor the question of whether someone with autism or Aspergers ought to receive treatment, etc. Rather, it is a position about, in my view, the psychological perspective that any person with autism could take. Namely, that it would be a blind gamble to accept any treatment or cure for autism. I explain why in my original post http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt54994.html

As I wrote in my other post http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp1175413.html#1175413 I think the current anti-cure arguments and anti-treatment arguments are poorly justified, and the response of most in society (the general public, doctors, scientists, politicians, families of autistic people, organizations, educators, etc) is to set aside the anti-cure arguments as being given from people who's perspective is irrelevant, similar to how most people with personality disorders vehemently argue against having any disorder, against any treatment, and so on. (This I believe is a major aspect of having a personality disorder...the person doesn't recognize it, doesn't seek treatment for it, and rejects it's diagnosis and treatment...most with personality disorders who seek medical attention do so for other reasons such as depression, anxiety, from the insistence of family, etc, and it is then that they are given the diagnosis, which they usually reject.

As for the non-autistic public who are anti-cure, this is interesting, as their perspective is different than those who are autistic. But you will find that their positions are essentially identical to those with autism, as if they have adopted some of the common anti-cure positions of many with autism. They taken on the role of advocate using the positions of people with autism.

Anyway, while I find my original post to be a possible anti-cure argument (which I revised later at this thread http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp1175413.html#1175413 based on some useful comments by many at this thread, and after further consideration), I do think, in retrospect, that it might be worth being willing to take the gamble regarding trying a major treatment or cure, especially since, during the treatment development there will be, IN FACT, children and adults who will have tested the treatment or cure and the effects will have been observed, and the testimonies of the family and the patients themselves about the results will be given.

Some other things:

It could be asked "HOW could anyone with autism or Aspergers even want a treatment" as their is no basis in their experience for them to have such a desire?" It is not as if they acquired Aspergers at age 15 and would like to be as they were pre-15yrs old. In regards to this, I'm very interested in the pro-cure pro-treatment opinions of those like me who have Aspergers or autism. What are you bases in experience for wanting a treatment or cure? Or, is your position one of curiosity, that is, being open to the possibilities of a major treatment or cure?

I've been surprised at the commonly head view of what a cure is by many with autism and Aspergers, namely that it WILL fundamentally alter every aspect of the make up of your self. I do not think those in medicine trying to develop a cure believe it will do this, nor is this their goal. As in schizophrenia, for example, the goal is to not alter the person to the extent that there is a different person, but rather, to retain the person (personality, identity, attributes, etc) and to restore their prior level of functioning. Of course with autism, the prior level of functioning was not experienced, though it did in fact happen prior to the onset of autism at 0-2 or 3 years old. The goal is to reach the nature of how things were then. I've been surprised at how many people with autism reject these obvious factual considerations. And those who look at what you're doing will reject your positions quickly and easily, and say your perspective is made within the throws of a disorder, like those with personality disorders, and they will reject your perspective, as they have done.

I find this website forum to be, in general, a possible great example of what is said when one is in the throws of a non-neurotypical condition that saturates most everything about the person. The vehement rejections, the denouncing of not only neurotypical medicine but of neurotypical personalities and life styles, and, the assertion of the supremacy of autistic and Aspergers people, the use of rare examples of autistics who are historical figures to define all autistic people.

Regarding Amanda Baggs, I did this post and am curious of any thoughts:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp1170170.html#1170170

Quote:
A loosely related and incredible real-life example. I've recently heard of a woman who was fully verbal from childhood onward for considerable time ... who acquired language at the standard age and had the standard language development ... but who later, well after her early teens, and for a myriad of possible reasons and factors, became, or claims to have become, LFA (low functioning autistic, including being non-verbal). It's been an astounding situation that I've been actively discussing with several scientists. And this woman, from about 16 years old onward for many years, did thousands of Internet posts which show some of the evolution of what has happened. In many statements, she clearly shows that she has "adopted", as she says, "autistic strategies" to deal with her other psychiatric problems. It appears quite possible that she had selected LFA as a coping mechanism to deal with other psychiatric problems of a rather horrific nature. It appears that adopting LFA (which means, acting like it, emulating it) is something that she finds very therapeutic and of immense value to her life.

I fully understand the need for her to do this, and find it to be a very creative way to deal with her other problems, about which I am incredibly sorry to her that she has gone through what she has in her life and that she has those problems. I say this is an incredible example not in the sense to criticize her, as many have done at length, or mock her, but rather in the sense of how unique and interesting it is, and sorrowful as well.

In this case, this is a person who finds what I consider "secondary autism" or "selected autism" to be more beneficial or preferable than being neurotypical with severe psychiatric symptoms caused by a myriad of very unfortunate occurrences, such as, it appears, sexual and physical abuse, mental abuse, and her own abuse of intense recreational drugs, etc.

So there may be neurotypicals, such as some with other diseases or dysfunctions of varying sorts who may actually prefer, in the hypothetical arrangement I gave above, to be autistic rather than what they are. For them, it would be an escape from their usual selves, and all the horrific pain they encounter.


So in essence, she (her thought, and historical experience) is of a non-autistic, and as such, in her representation of herself to others, she speaks from a non-autistic intellectual capacity, and from a non-autistic history. Some have said that she breaks various barriers of what an autistic person is, and this seems to be due to how she, in essence, is not-autistic, but rather is likely, and astoundingly so, emulating one for various therapeutic reasons. I will say that Malingering and Factitious Disorders, which appear to be a factor here, are very serious disorders not to be mocked and laughed at, as many and growing numbers are doing to Amanda, especially in regards to the huge volume of posts Amanda made from 16 years old onward over the last 9 or so years, where she at times states she was unknown to her given the Malingering Disorder diagnosis (which as I discus above with personality disorders) is usually how the diagnosis it made (that is, unknown to the person and at appointments where the person is seeking help for something else). Amanda also posted that she found the "need" to more and more "adopt autistic strategies" to deal with various things. I've seen some replies in Amanda's defense, and am trying to understand the situation better, but so far I haven't seen any direct response to the volume of posts she made over the last 10 years, nor the direct accusations against her. At the core, it seems that she was fully verbal at the standard time of language acquisition, that is, there were no verbal communicative delays, and, she did not exhibit autism nor Aspergers in her early childhood 2yrs old through 12yrs old I believe, and then problems began occurring sometime around 12yrs old due to very unfortunate abuse, then increasing until she was led to abuse LSD and possibly other drugs at 16yrs old, but between 12 and 16 she attended a college actually and was fully verbal. The drugs caused great neurological problems for her and after 16yrs old is when I believe she became as she is. At least this is the general account I've been learning of.