Popular Science has article on autism
Read this article about "Radical Cures" in Popular Science, and came across a section called "Reversing Autism". I was a little disturbed; any thoughts?
http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2010-02/radical-cures
(Scroll down past "Restoring Sight")
No matter what others do, I will resist. What happens if we get this procedure? What happens to our IQ? Our intelligence? Our personalities? Is there any guarantee that we will feel the same, or better?
Since I'm proud of my Autism, that may add a bias to my opinion - but I still have many concerns.
The 'resistance is futile' comment was a tongue-in-cheek reference to the Borg collective from Star Trek (a soulless blob with no concept of the individual). It expresses an attitude I have, but was not intended to be prescriptive. Maybe if you and enough others resist, this kind of treatment won't be forced on all autistics. Let's face it, though, it will because most NTs don't value us.
The article you mentioned, The Charlie Rose program I referenced, and basically the direction of almost all modern medical research into autism is based on the ableist premise that autism is inherently awful, and must cause us all unspeakable suffering. Their goal is to introduce therapies that would be normative because they assume we all want to be normal. The fact is, they don't know what it will do to us, but as long as the treatments appear to make us more like them, they're sure that those treatments are helping us. This attitude has implications that are naturally troubling to many autistic people- especially to those autistic people who are able to have lives that they enjoy.
My hope is that whatever "breakthroughs" scientists make with regard to autism, that we autistic people are individually asked if we would like to receive the treatments they're offering; and that if some of us who are having a harder time avail ourselves of something that would provide us relief from some of the more troubling aspects of our autism (like sensory issues) that we wouldn't face criticism from sanctimonious autistics who might accuse us of not being proud of who we are. However, I'm afraid that this kind of treatment, if it became available, would be given to every 18 month old child they could identify before he/she had a chance to grow and learn who he/she was in his/her autism. That would be tragic, and like the proposed prenatal testing that would undoubtedly lead to an autistic genocide, it would rob individuals of their individuality, and it would rob the world of necessary diversity. That being said, some autistic people could be helped by treatments like that- maybe more than you think, given the cruelty of the neurotypical world. What I'm saying is that some of us autistic people have real problems just because of our autism. Plus, those ableist people are right when they think that being very autistic must be painful for some of us. After all, they make it so.
Not the thoughts you wanted, I'm sure, but they're my authentic autistic thoughts, nonetheless. I guess I'm pragmatic about the cure question, the way you're pragmatic about baseball. To me, baseball is a potentially perfect world, where the distance between bases is always the same. I need baseball to remain a bastion of decency, where I can meditate, and I'm disturbed when the human element creeps in and ruins it. The real world is ugly, and mean. I'd like it to be different, but all of humanity would have to change in order to make it half as equitable as the highly imperfect game of baseball. I just can't get worked up about what evil people will inevitably do to me anymore- not because I'm depressed- but because I'd spend my whole life angry and afraid. I leave all that to the politically-minded.
No no no, I totally got it - I just probably took the article too seriously. I love Star Trek.
Let's face it, though, it will because most NTs don't value us.
Sadly, I have to agree on some levels. Moreover, they don't value us as equals.
Their goal is to introduce therapies that would be normative because they assume we all want to be normal.
The basic problem with 'normal' is in people's concept of the meaning. Our society seems to believe 'normal' is a static concept - it is not. 'Normal' is a dynamic concept that is ever-changing due to the constant evolution of our culture and society. 'Normal' cannot be static; if it was, then the normalcy of the 1800s would be acceptable for today (i.e., child labor, unregulated pollution, types of style, etc.), and humans would not move forward. Once people accept that 'normal' is a dynamic concept that will always change, then maybe - just maybe - acceptance will be a part of that normalcy.
That being said, some autistic people could be helped by treatments like that- maybe more than you think, given the cruelty of the neurotypical world. What I'm saying is that some of us autistic people have real problems just because of our autism.
Very true; I am for treatment, as long as it is accepted by the person - and that it doesn't harm their intelligence, personality or being. I think that if more autistics were on boards/comissions dedicated to raising funds for research/treatment for autism, things may turn out better than we predict.
Not the thoughts you wanted, I'm sure
On the contrary, I enjoy hearing other opinions, even if I may not agree - especially if they're carefully reasoned.
I just can't get worked up about what evil people will inevitably do to me anymore- not because I'm depressed- but because I'd spend my whole life angry and afraid. I leave all that to the politically-minded.
Or you could end up cynical, paranoid and a terminal smart-ass, like myself
I just enjoy political conversation. But that's just me though.




Resistance is futile. We will be assimilated.
I saw those same mice on Charlie Rose the other night. They were able to induce audiogenic seizures in them.
Yeah, it bothers me, too.