Yoko Ono auctions art for anti-autism, pro-eugenics group.

Post Reply New Topic

i love japanease women but yoko is the ugliest one ive ever seen

Not that I care for the associations, but what is wrong with understanding the cause of autism and finding a "cure" for it?

It is in humanity's best interest if we can find this out. When you think of how autism affects you in negative ways, wouldn't you like to be able to have avoided it?

One reason diabetes is so rampant in society (aside from horrible diet) is that nature kept the disease in check because diabetic rarely lived long enough to have children. We found a way for diabetics to have rich and full lives (yea!), but the down side is that they began reproducing and increasing the number of people either with diabetes or carrying the diabetic genes.

Should we not seek to find a way to permanently rid people of diabetes?

Now that I'm inclined to agree with.

Basically, it's because people here, a lot of them, see autism as something innately a part of who they are, not something that can be cured. And they see it that "curing" autism on a societal level would mean getting rid of people like them.

I, however, think they are unfairly projecting their perspective onto Autism Speaks and thus protraying Austism Speaks as worse that it really is.

The missng link here is that autism is believed to be at least in part genetic, and the daughter of the founders of the group (the autistic child that inspired it's creation) has accused the group of being too narrowly focused on looking at the genetics involved.

If the condition is genetic, the most likely "cure" or "prevention" will be a prenatal test. The point of prenatal testing is the option to abort. Hence, eugencs. Prevent autism by reducing the number with the related genes who are actually ever born.

You are right, the site doesn't actually say that. But those who have looked at the research they are doing feel that, without a doubt, that is where it all is headed.

All that said, I can't take celebreties to task for supporting the organization. They know A and B, but they don't have the information that connects over to C. I've seen some AS activists write letters explaining all that and I've seen corporate sponsors of Autism Speaks back out after receving that information. To those who are upset, that is the pro-active response: explain to the sponsors and supporters why you feel their involvement is misplaced.

I can understand that, but I see it as odd.

Yeah, autism is part of what we are and it likely can't be "cured." However, if they found a way to "fix" it by early detection and treatment, would we not want people to be spared what we had to learn to live with?

I don't like the association with eugenics because many eugenic groups would exterminate anything that isn't genetically perfect, but there is wisdom is finding a way to "fix" disorders so that those who would otherwise suffer with something can enjoy a full and normal life.

i agree 100%

just today, i noticed banner ads on my myspace music page for cures for autism; argh!! ! i emailed myspace to remove them. stop the insanity!! !

this is an interesting question.

i like who i am, for who i am.

if i was "cured" would i be who i am?

would i have become someone i dont like? would i have assimulated so well into society that i was just another cog in the machine?

no thanks. i like being me. that said, i am mild on the spectrum; i can;t speak for anyone else, especially those high on the spectrum. but it should a choice and decision of every individual, not necessarily an individuals parent either...

myspace.com/mikegeorgemusic

MR:

Have you watched many of their ads? They pretty clearly consider autistics subhuman and soulless. They don't have to explicitly say that; their meaning is already patently obvious, I think, if you read between the lines. And their research is geared toward eradication because they mainly support prenatal testing, which would lead to abortions. They don't promote understanding of autistics themselves, though they do like to praise the parents for dealing with nuisances like us.

zer0netgain:


Autism isn't really comparable to diabetes, and even then I hope we're past the point of killing or preventing the birth of the so-called weak/unfit just to adhere to some Randian or pseudo-Darwinian ideal.

The "cure" they're looking for, anyway, is to prevent more autistics from being born rather than make life easier for existing autistics.

So, you admit I'm right, basically, yet still argue against me. "read between the lines" = projecting your own perspective.

No reason to assume they share that perspective. Which I did specify, but you chose not to quote. Nothing I said had to do with whether Autism Speaks considers autistics subhuman and soulless. That's not what I was replying to. Perhaps some do consider autistics subhuman and soulless. (Some doesn't mean all.) But that doesn't mean they promote or are interested in Eugenics against autism.


And something to keep in mind. Even if you are right that autism is mostly a genetic disorder, that doesn't mean they see it that way. Right or wrong, they don't have that same perspective. And, as I said, it's wrong to project your perspective on them. Doing that is taking what they say out of context and putting into a different context, which is unfair to them.

f**k her.
Yeah I swore.

Anyways, this is why if you say "I have aspergers." you get a really bad reputation.
Because these organizations (which I totally don't support any autism organization, I just want someone to say 'Deal with it' to me) that give people with Aspergers such a bad name.
The reason I can't do s**t without people asking if I need help is because of these people.
This is why I want to be Neurotypical. You can be as stupid as f**k but your rep still won't go down.

That's why I don't like eugenic groups. The ideal would be to find a way to genetically "fix" the problem early during development once and for all, not to terminate those who don't fit the image of the "master race."

Is there a well recognized charity group that isn't for eugenics and spreading positive awareness? If not, why?

If there were, would there be support? Would people who want to give, give or would it be declared as a bad charity in the media?

I already blogged about this yesterday, I was so hopeful at the headline, with the word "awareness" in it. But, no, it's just about treating autism like it's Aids or cancer. The fact that the BBC said that X amount of people "suffer" from autism, and put it in a category with Aids, Diabetes, and Cancer is what's the most horrible about this. Autism is not a disease, and I do not "suffer" from it either. Shame on the BBC for using such poor journalism!

MR, it doesn't matter what they think. What matters is what they do.

If they fund lots and lots of genetic research, and little or no research on outcome in adults, and what we need to be fully functioning members of society, then what is the outcome of that? What do geneticists think people are going to do with what their findings, anyway?

It would be different if they allocated a minimum percentage of research funding towards outcome in adults, and what would help, but at this point they don't seem to. Whether we ourselves are ok or not seems to be the least of their concerns.

Consider an analogy: let's say significantly more than 90% of funding for spinal cord injuries went towards research on repairing the spinal cord. The results would be great, but in the meantime, are people with spinal cord injuries just supposed to lie flat on their backs waiting for a cure,or is it fair to ask for a basic minumum of funding towards quality of life right now?

That's how I see it.