Aspies For Freedom

I'm for it... as long as what we provide is what they actually use.

For instance, I'm willing to write a bit about being Aspie, not being diagnosed til adulthood, communicating for a living and loving it, and being quite OK with myself and not needing a cure... but is that what will actually end up on the site? Or would it be twisted to read like some "amazing story of overcoming adversity" rather than "look, I'm Aspie and I'm quite normal". Would it they suggest "if she can achieve this with Aspergers imagine how much more amazing she'd be if she was cured!"

Quote:

what Nicholas said was that he was talking about it with his lawyer and that he decided he would copywrite the submissions and have some sort of agreement where he would be able to sue Autism Speaks if they edited or changed the submissions in anyway. They would only be allowed to post them on their site.

Clever. This guy's savvy. Smile

Quote:

they're just saying "give us your stories and we'll publish them". You/We can do that on (y)our own, so what does anyone gain by giving the stories to Autism Speaks?

I agree just whacking some crap on their website, without changing the 'terrible hideous life sentence' type attitude will do little. Where I think it might help is that parents with a newly diagnosed little one are probably more likely to end up at Autism Speaks than here - because AS is a large, well known, well publicised group. So if they can go there and read us saying how cool we are, that might counteract some of the "worse than cancer" crap they put around. If the parents and public who shell out for their donations start to read that stuff, they might start to question where their money goes and THAT will force change.

Then again, will it be hidden in a tiny grey link on a grey background at the bottom of the archives somewhere were nobody will ever see it?

Ethel Wrote:

Quote:

they're just saying "give us your stories and we'll publish them". You/We can do that on (y)our own, so what does anyone gain by giving the stories to Autism Speaks?

I agree just whacking some crap on their website, without changing the 'terrible hideous life sentence' type attitude will do little. Where I think it might help is that parents with a newly diagnosed little one are probably more likely to end up at Autism Speaks than here - because AS is a large, well known, well publicised group. So if they can go there and read us saying how cool we are, that might counteract some of the "worse than cancer" crap they put around. If the parents and public who shell out for their donations start to read that stuff, they might start to question where their money goes and THAT will force change.

Then again, will it be hidden in a tiny grey link on a grey background at the bottom of the archives somewhere were nobody will ever see it?

I agree, particularly with the last sentence.
I vote NO!

Beksy Wrote:

morning_after Wrote:

I more or less think so, too.

But the flip side of this is that if we don't do it, Autism Speaks could make themselves out to look like the victims, and say "we made the offer. They're so disabled and disorganized they couldn't do it"

Yeah, so? We get organized. We form a coalition, or a confederacy, or something. Maybe just a webring (gosh, web rings are so old school, but I digress). I know most of us don't agree about most things, but there seems to be three points on which we all agree:

Many autistics can speak for themselves, and should be able to speak without publishing through Autism Speaks
There is no One Universal Theory of What Must Be Done About Autism
Autism Speaks' focus on "cure" does to auties more harm than good

We harness the opposing voice as much as we can, and we create a megaphone for it. We write letters to main stream media, alternative media, friends, parents, teachers, anyone who will read, and we make them think. We don't let people buy into Autism Speaks' lie that the only autistics who deserve attention, the only ones who count, are silent.

To quote Jack Kelly, a character from "Newsies":

Quote:

There's a lot of people out there, and they ain't just gonna go away. They got voices now and they're goin' to be listened to... That's the power of the press, Joe. So thanks for teaching me about it.

Alone, one or two voices can be silenced. Hundreds or thousands of voices saying the same thing, or at least agreeing, are much harder to ignore.

I Like you...
stick around, eh?

Since there's a push towards getting some positive action going:

http://www.aspiesforfreedom.com/showthre...?tid=11677

http://www.aspiesforfreedom.com/showthre...?tid=11630

morning_after Wrote:

Gareth Wrote:

Seems a horrendously traumatic way to teach it.

Ok, so I understand it is horrendous.

Forgive me, but I'm still new here. What example happens that makes it horrendous? Is it electro-shock therapy?

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

Enjoy. It's not too terrible evil, depends who is the teacher. Sometime the teacher is cruel and uses negitive reforcement. I try to keep netural on this topic.

To the topic
I don't know what to think about it might blog about this but as admiral Akbar said

Only if they sign a legally binding contract with the following conditions:

1. Autism Speaks may not edit any material they receive from us
2. They may not claim association with (whatever the other party in this agreement is) when promoting positions which the pro-acceptance disagrees with.
3. they may not provide descriptions or other supplemental text degrading those in the stories we give them.
4. (whatever the other party in this agreement is) has the right to suspend this agreement at any time and mandate that Autism Speaks cease circulation of stories we provide them.

In response to points made by previous posters:
1. They are NOT going to stop their hateful agenda, so don't make your expectations to high.
2. We do not have to be concerned with giving them PR ammo.  The media all but canonizes them.  Their PR is excellent among most Americans, while we are a silenced minority.

This could be i a small step toward getting our name out.  These the contract I suggested above, I would totally support this.  As for now, I vote not sure.

Quote:

We do not have to be concerned with giving them PR ammo. The media all but canonizes them. Their PR is excellent among most Americans, while we are a silenced minority.

"The Media" does nothing. It's not a living creature with a mind and agenda of its own. "The media" is just a bunch of people earning a living. I'm one of them.

Yet again, here's the link to How To Work With The Media, in the hope people might read it and maybe even act on it: http://www.aspiesforfreedom.com/showthre...?tid=11630

Gareth Wrote:

voiceoffreedom Wrote:

Only if they sign a legally binding contract with the following conditions:

1. Autism Speaks may not edit any material they receive from us
2. They may not claim association with (whatever the other party in this agreement is) when promoting positions which the pro-acceptance disagrees with.
3. they may not provide descriptions or other supplemental text degrading those in the stories we give them.
4. (whatever the other party in this agreement is) has the right to suspend this agreement at any time and mandate that Autism Speaks cease circulation of stories we provide them.

In response to points made by previous posters:
1. They are NOT going to stop their hateful agenda, so don't make your expectations to high.
2. We do not have to be concerned with giving them PR ammo.  The media all but canonizes them.  Their PR is excellent among most Americans, while we are a silenced minority.

This could be i a small step toward getting our name out.  These the contract I suggested above, I would totally support this.  As for now, I vote not sure.

The point is that currently they claim to represent us while doing the opposite. This could easily allow them to point to these essays and say "hey, look - autistics themselves are represented by us on our site".

Good point. I now propose a fifth condition:

5. Autism Speaks must clearly state that our community does not believe they speak for us on a vast majority of issues.

I highly doubt they will accept it. I say bring it to the table as non-negotiable item.

Idea: if this falls in a screaming heap, how about putting together an Edited Highlights of this thread (striking, heartfelt comments like "they want to wipe our kind off the face of the Earth") and presenting it to AS with our blessings for them to read and digest.

And then ignore. :/

I've just watched the video, Suzanne Wright is lying!!!

She is in the defensive, she has just realised that her organisation has publically had blame been put on it. Therefore she has responded by twisting it around and pushing all responsiblity onto another person (although extreemly subbtely, it is not an outright attack). She elects the man to organise getting together to positive stories from Autistics and calls him "roving reporter". She gives him the title in a way you would give a child a role to make him/her feel special. She is belittling this man in a cutesey way.
She gives the audience a little head shake and roles her eyes. This is to say "

You have to admire nt's ability nipulation th

Please ignore my last post, I hit send by accident mid post.

I've just watched the video, Suzanne Wright is lying!!!

She is in the defensive, she has just realised that her organisation has publically had blame been put on it. Therefore she has responded by twisting it around and pushing all responsiblity onto another person (although extreemly subbtely, it is not an outright attack).

She elects the man to organise getting together positive stories from Autistics and calls him a "roving reporter". She gives him the title in a way you would give a child a role to make him/her feel special. She is belittling this man in a cutesey way.

She gives the audience a little head shake and roles her eyes. This is to say " Geeze, this man is over reacting, feel sorry for me, be on my side" to the audience. This is to ridicule him and to mock him while gaining support. What it really means is that she knows he has hit a weak spot and she is rattled. Good on him Big Grin

To agree to work with Autism Speaks will make her laugh at our vunribility ( a nt would know she is being false). However by not agreeing she will be able to then say its not her fault she gives a biast view on Autism, we are so unreasonable. She is not expecting us to agree and once she initailly laughs she will realise she is in trouble. She cannot refuse to publish our stories since she publically said she would love to. However if they insult Autism Speaks then she has grounds to refuse to publish. We have to tread carefully around this situation and be subbtle in undermining her.

You have to admire nt's sickening ability to manipulate with such speed and accuracy. I find it discusting genrally in everyday life but this is beyond creulty. She knows Autistics have the weakness of difficulty in reading body language and knowing when someone is lying.

By the way, my special interest is human behviour.

Mabey lying is too stong a word, but she is not being completely honest with her intentions. A non-ASD would interpret her actions diffenrently to how I would since it doesn't come naturally to me. I break it down and analyse each section since reading body language and I have found in the past I have been more accurate than a person who can read body language naturally.

She looks away with a little shake of her head and says fine. Sarcasm is implied. Looking away from the person she is speaking to. In the same category as rolling eyes, she has the same intention. I would say she is rolling her eyes from the angle at which her eyes move when looking away. Possiblility that I am mistaken, it is not a high quality video.
Her head rocks forwards slightly as her eyes open which imples that she thinks the person is over reacting. In general her expressions and gestures are over the top which screams to me dishonesty. Although I do realise the posibility that its just from cultural diffences since she is American.

"There's certainly no secret in-joke that autistics won't get in there"
Shes using body language to do most of her communication when she knows she is speaking to an Autistic, that is what I find creul because Autistics are well known for difficulty in this area (I am not saying we are incapable). I know if i was in that situation I would find it very hard to interperate what she says, means and come up with an adequate response saying what I think/feel in the speed that is required. Yet nt's, especially extreem ones like Suzanne Wright are able to do without a lot of brain power.
(Please note I am not attacking you, I am defending myself)

damned if we do, and damned if we don't.

if we go along with it, we lend it our support, and make ourselves look like hypocrites
if we DON'T go along with it, they turn round and say, "see, we told you so; they have no talents".

Ethel

Ethel

Ethel

woman from mars

pikajedi4

Ethel

BardWolf

voiceoffreedom

Ethel

voiceoffreedom

Ethel

Moo

Moo

Moo

pikajedi4