"Autistic Pride Day" is now a thing.
(archive.is)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (34)
sorted by:
The weirdest part of any of these advocacy groups (deaf, blind, autistic, and other disabilities) is that, because they view it as an identity, they're not advocating for it to get better. They're not advocating for less people with these issues going forward; in fact, that would be a genocide.
If autism advocate groups could cure autism tomorrow...they wouldn't.
I think it is a little bit harder for it to "get better" with Autism since it affects so much of brain function, and I would likely turn down any "cure" (for lack of a better terms) because I have no idea what it would change about me and the way I think at a most basic level. But like I said, it is different with Autism. The Blind and Deaf have no such excuse since theirs are 100% a disability with little to no benefit, unlike Autism where in high-functioning cases you are trading some social skills (which you can learn anyway) for things like improved memory and enhanced attention to detail.
At the same time, you are right about those who especially have low-function Autism, like the kind who can barely even speak. In those cases, I think it would be wise to find a way to if not "cure" them at least raise their function level.
They usually call the benefit being part of the "culture" and that by removing the disability you will become an outcast and eventually lose your "family."
Now, a family that basically threatens you into being crippled or else they will ostracize and abandon you sounds pretty awful to us, but apparently its a super big deal to the Deaf and Blind.
That's why I specified going forward. I'm not talking about curing the autistic, I'm talking about curing autism in future people.
A cure, certainly not, but it may be feasible to research and develop some bandaid fixes that at least alleviate or reduce some of the more debilitating effects.
Or, while a bit controversial, maybe come up with some solid tools for early prenatal detection, and then develop some prenatal treatments that might correct the issues while it's still somewhat doable (on request of the parents of course).
That is of course assuming that ot is genetic, which it may be. There is also the distinct possibility that it is due to exposure to some environmental toxin. It may be combination of both. In which case, removing said toxin from human consumption would be how it would be stopped.
I absolutely agree. Environmental factors, or a combination of those and genetic variables are almost certainly something to consider. I was mostly throwing that out there as just one example of how there's a lot of sound practical reasons to advocate for more investigation and research.
Usually yes. Or at least the ones that make a lot of noise and put up a lot of banners. There are genuine advocacy groups, but they're always drowned out by all the loudmouth lunatics who just want free money and attention.