(no subject)
Jan. 25th, 2023 06:24 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dmxratedThe other day on our way to the gym, Mom asked me if I still like to eat at Panera Bread. I confirmed that, but stated that it currently supports Autism Speaks, going on to cite everything wrong with that organization when she asked me about that.
The Week came two days ago, and as I read it that evening, its science pages featured an article about how hair samples can help to predict autism. That kind of research is exactly one of said problems with AS, because it would allow mothers to terminate autistic pregnancies, which would mean that people like myself who could think up, in my case, unique ways to play video games and devise game mechanics, would almost cease to be born, with the few who still are then liable to become stigmatized.
I tried to google how hard people are trying to stop this kind of research, and came across this article, into which I simply skipped to the following paragraph before Mom came up to watch an episode:
Many parents of autistic persons and some autistic persons themselves (myself included) have expressed a desire for a cure for autism. This causes outrage among neurodiversity proponents. They equate a cure for autism with eugenics and genocide. Research has shown autism has a large genetic component and those who endorse neurodiversity cite selective terminations of Down’s syndrome pregnancies. They insist that the purpose of genetic research in autism is to develop a prenatal test to abort autistic fetuses. The only cure we need, they say, is an end to discrimination, which would solve, or at least greatly mitigate, the challenges and poor outcomes accompanying autism.
As we spoke before watching, she explained that a lot of these people are not so high-functioning as I am, never learning things like empathy or how to take care of themselves, and would not in fact contribute anything to society.
I showed her the article after the episode was over, and she asked me to email it to her to read at work.
Took a few minutes yesterday to read the whole thing for myself, and it turns out to be more than the usual one-sided propaganda, validating the opposing view to the author's own.
It also mentions that, along with the federal government having enacted certain laws and a governing body, Autism Speaks itself has since gone on to appoint two autistic anti-cure individuals to its board of directors.
So, I guess boycotting stuff might become a moot point, depending on how AS continues from there.
The Week came two days ago, and as I read it that evening, its science pages featured an article about how hair samples can help to predict autism. That kind of research is exactly one of said problems with AS, because it would allow mothers to terminate autistic pregnancies, which would mean that people like myself who could think up, in my case, unique ways to play video games and devise game mechanics, would almost cease to be born, with the few who still are then liable to become stigmatized.
I tried to google how hard people are trying to stop this kind of research, and came across this article, into which I simply skipped to the following paragraph before Mom came up to watch an episode:
Many parents of autistic persons and some autistic persons themselves (myself included) have expressed a desire for a cure for autism. This causes outrage among neurodiversity proponents. They equate a cure for autism with eugenics and genocide. Research has shown autism has a large genetic component and those who endorse neurodiversity cite selective terminations of Down’s syndrome pregnancies. They insist that the purpose of genetic research in autism is to develop a prenatal test to abort autistic fetuses. The only cure we need, they say, is an end to discrimination, which would solve, or at least greatly mitigate, the challenges and poor outcomes accompanying autism.
As we spoke before watching, she explained that a lot of these people are not so high-functioning as I am, never learning things like empathy or how to take care of themselves, and would not in fact contribute anything to society.
I showed her the article after the episode was over, and she asked me to email it to her to read at work.
Took a few minutes yesterday to read the whole thing for myself, and it turns out to be more than the usual one-sided propaganda, validating the opposing view to the author's own.
It also mentions that, along with the federal government having enacted certain laws and a governing body, Autism Speaks itself has since gone on to appoint two autistic anti-cure individuals to its board of directors.
So, I guess boycotting stuff might become a moot point, depending on how AS continues from there.