(copied directly from front page of autistics.org)
The Toronto Star published articles that contained demeaning and misleading information about autism. When Michelle Dawson, an autistic woman, tried to counter these letters with facts, she was told (at long last) that her letter was "too hurtful" to publish. Read her correspondence with the newspaper (as well as the original articles that sparked this off) at
Autism and Hate Speech in the Toronto Star: The Letter that was "Too Hurtful".
This makes me so furious it's one of those occasions I'm lost for words, thank you for sharing this anbuend. How many times are these spiteful and tunnel visioned idiots going to deny every right we have as human beings?
Debs
I'm confused why the editor said this woman's letter was hateful....any intelligent person who reads this article will see that she was in fact responding to hateful comments about autistics.
Even if the editor made a good argument to why they couldn't print the letter verbatim, she could have at least acknowledged that the newspaper had recieved many letters that argued against the remarks about autistics.
I understand that any newspaper has the right to print whatever they chose - but in this case it's obvious that they are afraid of the opposition.
one thing that always annoys me is reading about parents attempting to say that brainwashing their autistic children is a human right (ABA "therapy").
another thing that always annoys me is the "autistic=***" assumption seen everywhere.
and another one is censorship of opposing views. my personal view (as can be seen on this forum) is that people should have free speech unless they are writing something that is pointlessly insulting and/or dangerous. (dangerous as in promoting suicide/violence or self-harm).
Gareth, that's how the first amendment was suppose to work, according to my History teacher. But now, the country is being ruled by religious conservatives(I wouldn't mind if they were liberals...) that think that anyone who dosn't follow their faith sacrificies babies and kittens and then drinks their blood.
As I said before, we need to annihilate all humans...
I wonder if the paper wouldn't print Michelle's reply because it might offend one or more of their major sponsors - perhaps some with a vested interest in autism "cures" - may sound cynical but it's just possible.
Also, having been involved in letter writing myself for years, I've noticed when I come up with a really convincing argument that will trounce the opposing argument well and truly, the letter is often considered too "hot" to publish.
This is despite the fact that I do my best to avoid personal denigration and just stick to the facts.
Reminds me of Nick.com and stupid moderator NICKzoedog, who deleted the text of posts on the Nick Talk board (with that "topic" that never made any sense to me) for being "off-topic" even when they were not; NICKMyst, who went through a mass deletion of topics on the Books & Reading board for being "off-topic" and refusing to keep them (they were very enjoyable to all of us); and NICKBeckie, who would only allow "bots" from Nickelodeon shows and made-up ones for a reason I could never figure out.
Nick.com has too many rules, some that never made any sense, and the same goes for Newgrounds.
M, I've never been on that website but it looks as if I didn't miss anything if that is the way the moderator carried on.
M, I've never been on that website but it looks as if I didn't miss anything if that is the way the moderator carried on.
Most certainly.