Aspies For Freedom

Joker,
  Have you noticed that the *vast majority* of 'pro-cure' people are NT's, and that the *vast majority* of 'anti-cure' people are autistic?

  Now, if we as autistics - the people that the 'pro-cure' people are *supposedly* speaking for - are *against* a cure, shouldn't that give the 'pro-cure' types a *little* bit of a clue that they might *not* be doing the Right Thing?

  If the curebies *respected* us as people, I could see my way clear to giving them the benefit of the doubt. As it is, though, Autism Speaks and their ilk go barging along with *no* regard for *our* point of view!

  Since we're the ones who are autistic, I think it's *their* responsibility to respect *us*, i.e., drop all their patronizing crap!

  -BobB

The world isn't so black and white, BobB.
"Vast majority" this or that, is what you're doing still fine? Is it still moral? You justify that it's just venting, but that excuse won't work if pro-cure people used it to justify one of their vents. It's a hypocritical argument, if you accuse them of being ignorant and disrespectful based on their venting. Think about it; Is this any better than the ignorance and disrespect that you feel is unjustifiable? Is trying to justify it in your case any different from them trying to justify things in the same way?

You accuse those who want a cure of being a vast majority of non-autistics, people who don't really understand autistics.

On the flip side, the smart pro-cure aspies and Auties don't speak up about it anymore, because they know it gets them insulted, ostracized, mocked, ridiculed, and subject to no holds barred harassment. I've seen autistic people who hold pro-cure views come and go, I've seen aspies who wouldn't mind a cure or wanta cure just not posting in these kinds of topics, because they know that if they do, they will get dragged over the proverbial coals... by the few people they ever really shared their autism with, the people they know who are the ones who also have ASDs.

One autistic woman wanted a cure, and now she's being ridiculed by strangers, people who never even met her. Why? She doesn't want to be the way she is, she wants to be cured.
Is it so wrong to not want to be autistic? Is it?

Respect can't be demanded, it can't be taken, it can't be stolen, forced, or bought. You don't get respect for being autistic because you should; That's plain laziness and selfishness. All the "normal" people, they need to earn respect, through their words, their actions, and their attitudes. Are we then deserving to be respected because we have Autism, and not because we're good people? Are we to become so self-centered that we think the world owes us? That's the way that parents spoil children rotten, by giving them the things that they don't deserve.

I'm not saying that being autistic means you don't deserve any respect, but I am saying that you can't expect it to fall into your lap or be handed to you. If you want it, you earn it. I want it, and I earn it. I earn it from my friends, my neighbors, or even total strangers.

What you're doing? That earns scorn and derison, unless you're among like-minded individuals, people who seem to share a sense of entitlement, or simply want to let off some steam in a negative way.

You don't earn respect by mocking others, by degrading people because of their beliefs, by insulting mothers, silencing criticism, attacking anyone who doesn't toe the opinionated line(the one that you know is the "right" one), altering views and spreading black PR.

Timelord, that it was justification for mocking, insulting, and ridiculing strangers out of anger and spite... Well, I believe you wrote something about her, no? I understand why you would agree with any justifications for personal attacks and outright slander.

M, I don't think that's the point, whether or not she reads AFF forum posts. But it makes no difference to what it is; Biased, insulting, libellous filth and muck being slung out of spite, anger, frustration, or simple ignorance.

Is it not filth because the person being ridiculed isn't present to read it, is unaware of it? I think it is.

Tenaciouscj, TheZach, Timelord, BobB, Natalie, isn't this kind of petty and vindictive mockery and slurs beneath you? Are you capable of responding to her only by insulting her? You can't counter bad with bad; As the old adage goes, two wrongs don't make a right.

Are you petty, spiteful, vindictive individuals, ignorant, or are you ready to act mature and do something worthwhile about Jenny McCarthy rather than just insult her?

morning_after, do you think that they'll change their minds if we insult them enough?

Personal insults like, brainless blonde bimbo, for one. I think that's fair rude, don't you?

The people on the anti-cure side need to get their acts together regarding personal insults and deliberate attacks and messages of war against pro-cure groups, even curebies. You can't claim a moral high ground when you're as stained as those you're fighting; We can fight for the public view, but the pro-cure groups are pretty big, well-known, and have lots of money and support, no? Anti-cure just can't win against all the celebrity, money, and sheer numbers of pro-cure.

If we ensure that both sides become completely opposed, closed off, and deadlocked, anti-cure is done for. That's why the anti-cure movement needs to stay above this base garbage; Otherwise, pro-cure people will oppose simply for the sake of opposition, and won't be swayed by any arguments in a course that the anti-cure movement was formed to face: The elimination of autistic culture, of autistic people, of autism.

earthmonkey, solid points, great arguments. If we make these reasonable people opposed to the anti-cure movement smply out of a disregard for us based on our own negative attitudes and actions, like what's going on with Jenny McCarthy.

I agree; A topic for venting needs to be where it is appropriate. Where it is known that it's not being taken seriously, and is not part of a serious point of view. Of course, in some instances, these are serious points of view, which is negative. And about first impressions, I agree completely. If all they see are threads involving things like this, or like overtly biased topics, they'll chalk us down to being the other point of view of similar pro-cure sites.

I think it's come down to two groups of anti-cure people; Attackers and equality promoters. Sometimes the two intermingle, and you get people who mix the two. You'll get people who are autistic elitists, and other negatively focused people from the attackers, and you'll have people who promote that they're just different, and other positively focused from the equality promoters. Problem is, the negatives are ruining the positives with stuff like this.

Pita bread? I don't think I've had it many times... I think I'll look that video up.

Well, in closing, I guess that it's up to the individual to govern themselves; I can't stop anyone from being a certifiable jerk, but I can name them fo what they are. Tolerance for pro-cure beliefs from autistics, is the first step to the examination of those beliefs by those who hold them.

I never insulted her appearance.  I just put up some of her quotes here and asked some questions about her activities.  I am getting really tired of all the "dumb blonde" insults anyway.  Her hair colour has nothing to do with her thinking.  Half of the insults here could not be used for a man, so they are sexist remarks.  

I would like to know what symptoms and signs did her son have as a toddler that may have lead to a suggestion that he had autism.  I do remember hearing that her son was sick with an infection/fever in the hospital and that seems to be where all her problems started.  She said it all started after he had a MMR vaccine.

What is it about Americans that they like to look at female celebrities who have jaws that would look butch on a man (Julia Roberts, Glenn Close, Ms McCarthy...)?

My comment wasn't meant to be an insult, it was just one of those late-night brain farts that popped into my head when I saw that huge picture of her on the screen.

Beyond that comment, it actually got me thinking more deeply - I know that she used to be Playmate of the year, but I also know that men, in general, tend to prefer feminine traits in women. Jenny McCarthy has a square jaw, large chin, and strong cheekbones, which are traits normally associated with masculinity (this is not an insult, it is an observation). Her body also appears to have very little fat, another masculine characteristic.

Isn't it paradoxical, in a sense, that while scientific studies have repeatedly shown that heterosexual males prefer more feminine females in "real life", those who get paid to be beautiful (not just Jenny McCarthy, but nearly all supermodels and a sizable portion of actresses) show very few of those associated traits? Additionally, while men seem to lust over masculine-looking women in magazines, a similar-looking woman who used to be a man will almost invariably be rejected. Weird.

In case you're wondering, I find human sexuality to be fascinating (despite being asexual myself).

, your comments, insinuate that she's in the pay of someone to believe what she does. Are you paid to hold your beliefs?

honestjohn, it's the litany against fear, from the book Dune. There's also a movie, and several spin-offs. It was a pretty popular science fiction, back in it's day, I believe. I enjoyed reading it.

But as for good out of the differences... Call me pessimistic, but debating ideas is a far cry from debating a person. Especially when people are so hostile towards her, to the point of open mockery and personal insults.

morning_after, that's a big part of what I'm saying. Of course, telling people that they're being rude can be seen as being rude, which is fair ironic. I actually found something pretty interesting; It's about anger.
http://www.guidetopsychology.com/anger.htm

I just thought it would be interesting to share, especially after you said: "No one is convinced of anything if they feel like they are being attacked."

BobB, the promotion of one race over another is the promotion of ne race over another. If it were blacks who took whites as slaves, would the argument work only in reverse?

If we're not promoting equality, we're promoting superiority. Look at it this way; If the roles are reversed, and blacks become the oppressors, will it be right for the whites to demand equality? If you follow through on the path your argument took, it would be. After all, depending on their race, they are either demeaning or resenting, and when it comes down to it, neither are positive.

Did the blacks, having won the same written rights as whites, immediately decide to promote black superiority? No. They, having been the oppressed, had no desire to become the thing that they hated. Would you become what you hate to "win?"

Are we cold and heartless enough to take those white seats over the pro-cure side? Are we willing to become oppressors?
The resenter is an oppressor, if they are resented. The oppressor is a resenter, if they are the oppressed.
Equality isn't an exchange of oppression and resentment; It's the balancing of the scales.

On to the topic of cure:

Now, the gay comparison isn't valid here. Homosexuality is NOT, in any circumstance, a neurobiological disorder. It's not a disease, it's not diagnosable, it's not a valid comparison for talk of a cure.

Furthermore, your argument is a logical fallacy. You say, a cure is fine for you, the one who wants it. But you flat out openly say that you are absolutely opposed to the creation of a cure, making whether or not I want a cure a moot point in the face of the fac that, in your eyes, a cure may never be made.

Is it then a lie to tell me that I may seek a cure as I see fit, yet directly oppose the method through which I would be cured? You tell me I may use crutches to walk, and then you tell me that crutches will never be.

And by denying a cure to those who seek it, is it not the same forced control as forcing a cure on those who don't seek it? Those who want a cure are a threat to your existence, as you are a threat to them.

Don't tell me I can be cured, when you will not let a cure come to pass. Don't lie to me.

Respect breeds respect. If you won't respect the pro-cure side, they will not respect you. If they will not respect you, you will not respect them. Do you see the folly?

Look within your own ranks before pointing your finger at your enemy. I'm not talking about her, or the pro-cure movement; I'm talking about the anti-cure movement. A fault is a fault, no matter who commits it.

Are you being serious? Are you not responsible and accountable for your own words? Are you not insulting someone, be damned if her public persona is that of a dancing bear? You are still the one to choose whether or not to throw the mud.

It is high time to do that. But you're not going to do that if you look like a pot calling a kettle black. If the anti-cure movement doesn't shape up and present a clean and mature public image, it'll become a mass media myth melee, if you'll forgive the alliteration. And anti-cure is a grassroots movement, as opposed to the combined organization of the pro-cure movement.

Sometimes... Maybe in military conflicts, but not in a fight for people's good regards. Today, in this day and age, the only way to win the fight, is to win the people. And you won't win them with such tactics.

I believe you misunderstand my last post; I mean that in order to get people to stop and think about their own beliefs, is the acceptance and desire to understand those beliefs. You won't cause as many to examine their beliefs by mocking theirs; But you will if you understand what they believe.

As for the right to be cured; Again, do not lie to me. If the anti-cure movement will not permit a cure, then to say that those who want a cure are free to seek it, is dishonest.

Timelord, if she acts in such a manner, she only hurts her own cause. If you add to it by responding in kind, then you're hurting your own cause as surely as she hurts hers. The only difference is, if it comes down to pro-cure and anti-cure being deadlocked because both are in the mud, anti-cure is going to be drowned beneath the larger, more powerful, richer pro-cure movement.

If you let her harm their image, good. If you draw attention by being a negative to a negative, people will assume that both sides are like that, and they'll go for the one who say "cure this," rather than "no cure."

Her celebrity will hurt pro-cure, if she acts in such a manner. But by mocking her, by sinking down to such a level, it only makes her seem like a victim, pulls the attention from her behaviour to the response to it.

Natalie... Well, in all seriousness, I'm not exactly sure how to respond... Congratulations, you stumped me. I guess it is pretty late, though.

As for Wilky, I think it's best we let topics like that lie. I'm sure Gareth and Amy don't want the topic brought up again. And Wilky has left AFF; I don't think it would be quite right to talk about her after she left. It feels wrong to me.

Quite right, Pakrat! Silly thing was - I saw her for what she was a lot earlier than everyone else did. Anyone who calls John Best a hero knowing his modus operande.....

Morning, I'll guarentee you - if she knew you (for example) felt differently about Autism even in a civil way, she'd push you away.

Mudslinging creates news. We'll get ignored by the mainstream media otherwise because there's no sensationalism in it. Why do you think McCarthy is getting publicity? Pacifist PR will not work - that's for cowards who don't have the stomach to fight. One has to get tough, and unfeeling.

Hmm after reading all these posts... and looking through that website (I also watched a bit of that CNN thing) I STILL don't know whats up with all that... to my knowledge Autism has no cure... although there have been documented reports of children diagnosed with Autism who have "seemed" to "recover" from their Autism... idk what to think about that... maybe it happens maybe its all a ruse... who knows... Me I don't know what to think about her other than the fact that she likes attention.
(as for the autism speaks page... it has its uses...but I agree that their take on "finding a cure for autism...and autism NEEDS to be cured" is really a bit too much. =s

TTFN
Me

Joker

As valiant you are for post a very TL;DR post which I bearly slogged throught. I hope you know the audiance your lecturing to? Gung ho-curbie decking-NO CUR PLZ Autisitcs? Seriously? I don't know why you even bother chatising everyone that like to poke fun a very large zit of hollywood elite?

Good god? What are you Mom? Jay-zus! Joker if you want to preach good PR skills and positive protrayal, rant to Autism Speaks. They need lessons in good PR. Not us.

Your daily dose of surreal satire.

BW

[quote=Joker]

BardWolf, that was... Surreal.

Hm... What am I, your mom? Well, I feel like one, to be honest. Telling the kids not to say nasty things back, but to show that the nasty people are nasty.

Without any criticism, the anti-cure side will become like any self-righteous group of people, and they'll consider themselves immune to mistakes.

Ummm last time I checked. This is a fourm. So your whole court analogy is irrelevent. Anybody who takes this kind of shit seriously needs their head scaned. You can go on and on about good PR and positive imaging all you want Joker. It doesn't make sense. In here, it's free game. We don't have a image to uphold or anything. A forum is equilvant the smokers lounge in the School Cafeteria. Not the Press Box on CNN

RISE UP AND FIGHT CURBIE OPRESSORS!! [/enddickery]

Oh jeez now we need a mob of chanting autistics and a march down DC.

My comments are not intended to make anyone angry - just my thoughts on the way I see things.