Disturbing Attacks of Temple Grandin As An Aspie

Post Reply New Topic

Last week, I discovered a disturbing review written by Jeffery Mason, author of the book When Elephants Weep a pioneering book, on the emotional lives of nonhuman animals.

As an animal rights person, he was a person who I looked-up too, ever since I first studied him in college.

I am very disappointed and betrayed by his recent statements accussing Temple Grandin of being a"liar" and implying she is a hypocrite, because she presents herself as a friend of animals, yet works to make factory farms more humane.

I understand that some of this reflects the debate between animal welfare (improve the lives of animals) and animal rights (do away completely with certian practices, e.g. factory farms, slaughterhouses)-which is understandable.

But, what was a real "cheap shot" was the attack Grandin on autistic grounds. This was the most diturbing of all. In his review, in addition,

Questioned whether or not Temple Grandin, or autistic people in general even had anything to offer, when trying to understand animal life.

This argument rests on the idea, that audies have emotional problems-both within the selves and other people.

Claiming, that using Darwin as evidence, animals have emotional lives more like neurotypicals. Which, by the way, as a trained biologist, is an incorrect way of understanding Darwin's continium model. It is incorrect-

That is assumes the scientific research has stoped in the ninetenth century trying to verify the theology of evolution, and that is has not gotten more sophisticated and complicated with time. As a recent issue in Scientific America points out, scientists are searching for evidence of the theory of evolution in both genetics and neuroscience, now. Grandin provides a more advanced version of how human and animal capacities are "a matter of degree." Comparing/constrasting how different nervous systems work.

Then, as an Aspie, I can testify that I have a very rich and active emotional life. Although, I struggle emotional and socially at time, as you guys can testify, being emotionless does not define my reality. Although, Mason was a little bit more sophisticated. But, still he is tapping into that same neurocentric toxic narrative which I have heard all my life.

I also contend, that I do have unique insights into animal nature, as an Aspie.

A friend of mine put it this way-the spectrum is part of the continum between animals and people. And, that he does not know very much about autism.

As a person who has devoted my life to animals and the Natural World, I found this statement very hurtful and offensive. And, unlike Grandin, I can not dismiss as easily what he calls the "myth" that autistics have a special connection to animals. I do not work in slaughterhouses, I am a vedgatarian, not a vegan, but a lacto-ova vedgatarian, I do not eat meat, fish or seafood. And, for ethical and religious reasons, no less. I do not hunt-in fact I dispise and have faught against hunting in my home community. I take animal lives very serious, and with the upmost reverence for life.

And, at least Temple Grandin is out there doing something for animals. Without people like Grandin, these slaugherhouses could pretty much do what they wish to animals. At least she is doing something to make these animals suffer less. A lot more than what I can say, for these animal rights idealogues, who sit around and pontificate. Animals can experience liberation through her in very tangible, practical ways. Temple Grandin is not a specieist, but a realist and a pragmatist. She believes that she can't singlehandedly stop this practice, but working with slaughterhouses and factory farms, she can educate and encourage them to take animallife into consideration in thier design and handling.

And, I believe it is much easier to go after someone like Temple Grandin, then it is to go after the neurotypicals who own, run, work in and manage the factory farms and slaughterhouses, directly. I see oftentimes animal rights and animal welfare people, being way to generous to those folk. More generous, than they deserve. This is a double standard. She is being used as a scapegoat by the movement, in a particularly vicious way.

We need to be in solidarity with her and her very important and liberatory work for both humans and animals, alike.

And, remember to seperate animals from animal rights people. For, it is not the animals themselves driving this. Animals are wonderful creatures, deserving of our upmost respect and moral consideration.

And, I just don't get why animal rights people hates us so much? And, what they are trying to accomplish? Or, how this ultimately helps thier cause?

You mean like how Michael John Carley was attacked here for having the nerve to actually have an understanding with Autism Speaks?

There are many groups and people with a "If you are not with us, you are against us" type mentality. They think that if you are partners with the enemy, then you should be grouped with the enemy and attacked as such.

The attacks you show (and I wish I could see the article are horrible but no worse than what I have seen here for those who have decided to work with Autism Speaks rather than speak out against them.

Temple Grandin is a brilliant woman and her works resonate with me very much. I met her in person at a book signing and she wanted to talk to me after the event, but I was too nervous and scared and left.

I feel these attacks are pointless and Grandin is smart enough to counter them with more solid logic.

Temple Grandlin isn't an aspie in the first place.

Jeffrey Masson is a piece of work. Just one of his antics can be found here:

"Malcolm is best known for the 1991 lawsuit triggered by In the Freud Archives, when psychoanalyst Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson sued Malcolm and The New Yorker for $10 million, after claiming that Malcolm had fabricated explosive quotations attributed to him. After several years of proceedings, the court found against Masson."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Malcolm

It takes a very vile and hurtful man to pursue someone like that, especially knowing that he was telling the truth about him. If you read his forward to "Capers in the Churchyard" it becomes evident that he is pond scum.

Goose: I agree with you 100%. Dr. Grandin is exemplary and well-established as a HFA animal scientist and role model for all with ASD - she's is awesome!

About the remarks made by this biologist - just way out of line and incorrect. Where might he be getting his data?

Have you considered writing to him, stating just what did here? I think this would be appropriate. Dr. Grandin has earned her respect and she shouldn't be misrepresented in this way. I would urge that biologist to READ Dr. Grandin's writings before he speaks erroneously of her, or any other Autist.

And Dr. Grandin is technically a HFA (as am I) BUT HFA does diagnostically overlap with Asperger's Syndrome (AS) and I do have a 'dual Dx' as well; so that Temple is described as HFA &/or AS isn't really of consequence. But the point is.....disrespectful of a scientist to misrepresent another scientist (even calling Dr. Grandin a 'liar' or hypocrite? NO.) 'Emotionally - and I do not guess; I'm a scientist too. And autistic.

Autists do have a special relationship with animals and I'm offended that Jeffrey Mason refers to us as having 'emotional problems.' Further, Dr. Grandin's work is for humane treatment and J. Mason is showing a LACK of understanding Darwinism. And he's a biologist?

I would hope this biologist has the integrity to acknowlege his mistake and apologize to both Dr. Grandin and the Autistic Community as a whole. He's misleading and Autism is NOT Jeffrey Mason's field! He has no authority to speak in this matter, and especially with not doing his homework first!

Write a letter to the editor of Scientific America.
You've made a very valid point, Goose. And good you stand up for what's right, and Dr. Grandin.

Temple Grandin is a controversial figure within the autistic community.
The autistic self-advocate Jim Sinclair (co-ordinator of "Autism Network International") wrote a beautiful criticism of Grandin, titled "If you love something, you don't kill it": http://web.syr.edu/~jisincla/killing.htm

Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson originally trained in Sanskrit, to the PhD level (and was a professor?). Then he switched over to psychoanalysis. But he was a lousy analyst (his words, more or less) so he became curator of the Freud archives instead. Then he wrote a book claiming Freud overlooked real instances of sexual abuse among his patients. So he split with the Freudians. The next I heard of him he was writing books on animals. But as far as I know he's never had training in biology.

From what I've read of him he is unusually intelligent and unusually driven - one of those people whose mind explodes outwards all the time. He's likely to be controversial whenever he says anything, just because he can't seem to turn the volume down. On the other hand, he may be receptive if people were to send him logical arguments correcting his pov, which is more likely due to poor/insufficient information than to bigotry.

It would be nice to actually read what he wrote. Is it on the internet? Got a link?

Sorry, but I have to say that is some blatant self-righteous pontification right there. Failing to account for the position of the reader is probably a common failure for us, but when one brings upon themself to attack someone like that, their claims will not hold to a jury (the populace.)

I'm told she's one of the rare few that have physical symptoms if they don't eat meat. I'm the opposite, but I see where she comes from, and I respect that.

rare few?

Both my sisters came down with mono after 3-6 months on a vegetarian diet. My mother and I both notice major differences in energy levels without red meat. Lots and lots of women out there are anemic. And a meat-free diet is decidedly un-bioregional in many places in the world where people live but crops cannot be grown (due to poor climate, soil).

Did Masson criticize Grandin for anything other than eating meat and supporting the meat industry?

Damn, no wonder you're promoting those feminist ass kissing conferences where they're all worried about "abductions by non-custodial parents." In case you're too dumb to figure it out, "non-custodial parent" is feminist-speak for heterosexual father.

Don't get me wrong, feminists are really intelligent and perceptive. They "can just tell about people." In other words, they judge people by their emotional responses to non-verbal communication. And you really think they're gonna help aspies, huh?

Guess you don't know that nature is wild and not always Disney. The plains indians had a religion built around the buffalo, and it involved killing them to eat their meat to sustain their own lives and the lives of those they loved. The northwest indians had a similar set of beliefs around salmon.

You can love an animal and deeply respect it and eat it's meat with joy and gratitude.

If you object to killing animals to eat meat, take it up with the wolves and cougars, then get back to me.

I have read the book "thinking in pictures" by Temple Grandin , and I have read the essay by Jim Sinclair. I think that Jim is being too harsh on Temple, but in a world where we allow freedom of expression we have to be ready to accept that some people who express a view may express a view which is not the same as ours.

I think that Temple Grandin and Jim Sinclair should agree to disagree. I think that in both the NT and non-NT community that for many questions and subjects that many people will not share the same point of view. For example on the subject of sex, on WP we have both people who are asexual and some who like having sex.

I am not fit to judge in most cases which is better in cases where a persons views or choices do not harm the interests of others. Woodpecker has been rethinking his view of how he should view the actions and thoughts of others.

Last edited by Woodpecker on 20 Feb 2009, 4:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.

As someone who's been a vegetarian for moral reasons for the past 16 years (except when I was pregnant with my two children), I 100% applaud Gradin's work. People are going to eat meat. Period. Her work as made thousands, millions of animals' lives more humane than they were before. IMO Jim Sinclair very nievely sees the world in terms of black and white, as he so clearly demonstrates in his essay.

From a different perspective - I am an Alaskan (by birth) and lived as what is defined as a 'Tier II Subsistence.' This means subsistence lifestyle but not Alaskan Native.

Please know I LOVE animals, not just like, but LOVE!! Animals are special to me and I am fortunate to live in place that is still wild frontier. I've had many different sorts of pets and support animal rescue. Humane animal care is foremost and I'm liberal-thinking. I do not have a 'Bambi complex' in that, being an Alaskan, I have a deep respect of wildlife and they cannot be disturbed in their environment.

Sickening to see domestic animals hurt by humans who don't know how to care for them as shown by gruesome stats of Animal Shelters - I cry when I've entered the Animal Shelter. Humans are to blame for this - some will routinely buy a cute fluffy puppy for their kid, like a gift, and then not care for the animal, not understand the puppy grows into a dog that needs to run, romp, and play. Then have the animal put down since he/she is 'inconvenient!' Reprehensible. Some owners let their Tomcats run about the neighborhood, then multidues of kittens are left abandoned, homeless, suffer, then put-down since owner is too lazy to spay. I've personally seen cats who have had their ears frostbitten off - this is tragic and makes me feel sick inside. Humans are to care for their domestic animals, and with love and forethought - not neglect.

Sickening for me to watch (yep, some vegetarians, nonethelss) go to a zoo for entertainment with a wild animal that doesn't have even their most basic needs met! Then zoo-goer has the audacity to critize a hunting when they know NOTHING about true hunting practices.

Let me explain how Alaska Natives approach their hunting, which has been done for thousands of years - part of their religious beliefs too. When one kills an animal, for their own sustinence, they give thanks. They say, 'Thank you' to the animal for giving them life. Hunter takes ONLY what they need to nourish themselves and their family. They share surplus with their neighbor and those without. This is a beautiful way.
Some who don't support hunting (such as some from the continental US) don't understand their meat, which they buy at the market, comes from real live animals.

Nutritionally, humans have eaten meat for millenia. Those who choose not to are fine too! Vegetarian cultures do very well and this is dependent upon their ecosystem. Y'upiks and Inuit Eskimos have the highest diet in fat known yet heart disease, diabetes, obesity was unknown to them (until white Americans came - another story). They have an inherent love for nature, uncanny observational skills, and are renowned for their gentle nature and unassuming manner. They have not word for 'to steal' in their language.

Now I work with animal models (neuroscience research). Animals are treated well, better than they would in the wild - I use mice. The research that have come from HUMANE research is invaluable and modern medicine wouldn't be otherwise.

I fully realize many will take plenty of offense with what I just related, above. But know what Temple has written about humane slaughter is precisely that. She knows well the intimate relationship of agriculture (the oldest science!) and human evolution. She eloquently wrote that animals must be treated well, to roam and graze as free beings. In the Jewish faith the animal is given kosher slaughter - Temple applauds this method and follows. She's modeled her love for animals through animal handling techniques that have revolutionalized the industry - and this is good news.

A prime example of BAD animal handling technique is bovine spongiform disease, which is tragic for cattle and humans which consume - we all know the tragic mad cow disease. Temple has addressed this; if cattle are fed properly this can be averted.

For instance, I REFUSE to buy/eat products by YUM (that is, chicken sold by KFC, for example). They house their chickens, from chick to slaughter, in tiny cages, force fed, and injected with anitibiotics, etc. - this is cruel! I simply do not condone this. But many who proport to 'hate hunting' think nothing about eating KFC! If I want fish I won't buy farmed fish since I cannot bear to see how fish, which are wild, are confined. Fish are suffering in the ecosystem right now since humans sickly and inhumanely slaughter with mass-netting. More dolphins and other 'non-food' fish are killed for your can of tuna than just that tuna. I am environmentally inclined and this is becoming a pervasive problem; over-fishing is a mess and we all suffer as a consequence.

Ok, those who disagree with Temple, and humane slaughter can. This is their right. But many just truly don't know.

I didn't read what J. Masson wrote, but Goose showed J. Masson expressing that Autistics/Aspies are emotionally unbalanced, etc. This is just nonsense. If J. Masson disagrees with animal handling methods - okay. But leave Temple's autism out of the dispute. As an Alaskan I do have a different perspective. And I'm autistic.

You stated this beautifully! And precisely right - black and white thinkers can be oblivious (ie: J. Masson) who judges humane animal slaughter and Dr. Grandin without even knowing what he's judging. The indigeneous Alaskan cultues are dying because of Western influence who have introduced their junk foods such as soft drinks, cricso (this one is a disease waiting to happen for the Eskimo culture), pop-tarts, alcohol, etc. Lets consume healthful foods obtained by humane means. And healthful can certainly be grains, produce grown, and equivalent. Any good farmer knows about over-harvesting of crops and how greed means the crops suffer, then so do we all. Then our grazing animals are without...and so on. The chain of life.