Fantastic article! Thanks for posting it!
Maybe not so neutral, but true
Thanks for that link, Drifter. I like.
I love it! I have written down the link to give to any curebies I might encounter online in the future.
(I suppose if I weren't such a nOOb I would have "bookmarked" it, but anyway)...
Brilliant article, we need more of this kind of thing.
Reading the article and the part about "Autism not allowed" just reminded me about a story about a deaf person. I know the mother of a deaf man. She said when he was growing up that sign language was considered taboo and deaf people were being forced to learn to lip read and talk. This boy was almost totally deaf so learning to speak for him was very difficult and most people could not understand him. One day he said to his mother that he wished he could exchange heads with his hearing brother for a few months so he could learn more. He went to college eventually and learned to sign. He said he learned more those two years at college than in his whole life just from signing. He was alone for so many years until he was allowed learn how to sign and join the deaf culture.
The emergence of autistic culture is similar to that struggle for deaf culture. People just do not understand. They will talk about coclear implants being available, new hearing aids, better speech therapy but nothing will change a deaf person's brain and way of thinking. Are we similiar?
They can force out our handing flapping, stimming and try to make us "indistinguishable from our peers" but we will still be the same in our heads. Why can't the curebies understand that?
GREAT article! Thank you drifter!
But (because I have to complain just a little bit...
"and those who see autistic people as having a natural variation of human neurological wiring that must be tolerated, accommodated, and respected."
I really, really can't tolerate the word "tolerate"...
I think it would be bad if a teacher don't even try to tolerate (as in accepting) autistic behavior. I am not sure what you mean by that Max.
My dislike for the word "tolerate" may seem like a subtle distinction, but the word says nothing good about the object of that tolerance. God forbid a kid comes home from school and says "Mommy! My teacher tolerates me!"
We "tolerate" something that we frankly wish didn't exist, but we're willing (however begrudgingly) to allow to exist. We don't tolerate things that we like; we tolerate things we don't like.
When we "tolerate" a group of people, it suggests that we don't like them, don't approve of them, and don't want them around, but -- because we must -- we hold our nose and allow them go on living. But they are distinctly of inferior status.
There's a clear implication that the person doing the tolerating is superior to the person being tolerated, and even an implication that if the Tolerators decide to withdraw their tolerance, it's tough shit for the Formerly Tolerated.
Is being tolerated better than NOT being tolerated? I suppose it is, just as crumbs are better than starvation.
Wow-- the comments following the article are amazing, too!
I agree... the article is great, and the comments are a wonderful read as well. I'm particularly fond of this one in response to autism causing depression and other emotional disorders:
"It is easier to simply blame the autism than it is to take responsibility for how one treats autistic people."
I loved it when curebie Paul Awfit accused the author "Your intent and bias are obvious."
and the author proudly responded, "Thank you. They were meant to be obvious."
Great response. Why should a writer hide her intent or apologize for her bias toward the truth?
I responded to this article. I hope I didn't sound too vague. Guess which one I was? LOL
Nice one rossco