The War on Autism is now a Crusade: Autism Speaks Doubles Down on Combative Language

 The idea of combative language is nothing new; I myself wrote a blog post three years ago decrying its use by most in the Autism Community (But not the Autistic Community. Big difference there.) In summary, I demonstrated that the use of those combative terms suggested that the people using thought that the autism was some external invader rather than a descriptor of what kind of person the autist actually is. But the war metaphor goes deeper than that.

When a person takes into account the major “combatant” in this war, Autism Speaks, and looks at their fund distribution, it really is apparent that they truly do seek to wage war on us. Most of their funds go to advertising. Propaganda at its finest.

They use divide et impera techniques by perpetrating the idea of functioning labels, trying to divide autists into two camps that they might fight each other rather than their true enemy. Using the innate desire for acceptance all humans have, they label the ones who can appear to not be autistic (regardless of what actual issues they face) as “high functioning” and place them on a pedestal, showing how these pillars of autism are almost human in their eyes. They may even employ a few in token positions to make it appear as if they want to help. They could never be a general or commander, though, that would be too much! They should just be happy to be a foot soldier fighting against their fellow autists, and that the gracious Autism Speaks even gave them a gun!

If anyone seeks to call them out on their war, however, they remove the pedestal from below us and use it as a cudgel instead, claiming that they're not really talking about that kind of autist, just the “low functioning” ones that “can't speak for themselves” (Though a great many autists incapable of vocalized speech do quite well using the written word.) However, this division is only made when an autist calls them out. Otherwise, their propaganda is quite happy to include us among the numbers of the growing autistic menace.

Their pieces are “calls to action,” reminding people of the burden we autistic people are to the world, and how much happier the place would be if only we were gone. “I am Autism” painted our neurotype as an enemy, in no uncertain terms declaring war on the way we are. Make no mistake, they want us gone. They just can't say it outright.

Even the fundraising walks themselves are oddly reminiscent of military marches; watching people walk along the streets, to both gain recruits and monetary funds for an organization that uses combative language against us scares me quite deeply.

Then there are the executive salaries. After all, you have to make sure your generals and commanders are well-fed, right? To them, funding the war effort is more important than helping autistic people, and it shows in their fund distributions. Only 4% of their funds go to actual autism services. This is a token effort, done only to create the facade of helping.

Then there is the research they fund, most if not all of which is funding ways for prenatal screening and early detection. They want to find us before we are born or at the very least when we're too young to be a viable threat to their rhetoric. Less soldiers that can join the opposition. And if they can brainwash a few of us to join their side, so much the better. And what better ways to brainwash than conversion therapies such as ABA and outright torture at the Judge Rotenberg Center, both of which the organization happily endorses.

But now, they have once again shown their battle fatigues in a recent “Heroes Among us” article from People Magazine featuring the founding members, Susanne and Bob Wright as the titular heroes. The cover title is “Crusading against Autism.” They're outright using combative language again. They've upgraded it from a simple war to a crusade, even! Now not only are they fighting us, they are showing that they believe their fight is righteous and holy and heroic! They have not backed down from combative language now, but have doubled down. Their actions and fund distribution are warlike. It's time to Boycott Autism Speaks.

I have drafted a petition to People Magazine asking them to publicly apologize for and retract the article. I hope you will sign it.

https://www.change.org/p/people-magazine-issue-a-public-apology-for-and-official-retraction-of-your-heroes-among-us-article-on-the-wrights-of-autism-speaks

Epidemiology of Autism: One Autist's Thoughts of Possible Reasons Behind its Surge

In many of the news reports, popular culture and talk amongst families regarding autism, I have noticed a common theme: too many times people focus on the epidemiology, what causes it, how to “cure” it and other such things.  Now, as a hyperlexic and verbal autist I may have a biased opinion, but it is my contention what the epidemiology stage is not, quite frankly, where the autism community should be focusing its efforts at the moment.  Sure, it's an interesting puzzle; I should know, I'm an analytical autist, I love puzzles.  Still, I think the focus should be on neurodiversity and integration in general; how to deal with society.  Granted, I already spoke of this in my “War on Autism?” post, so I won't wax poetic about it now.  What I will talk about is my thoughts on perhaps why people like to try to find the cause or a cure.

Personally I think there are two reasons for this, the latter caused by the former: They think autism is a net negative on the person, and the parents of children with autism want some sort of justice; by having some cause, especially an environmental cause, there is a concrete injustice done, something they can fight.

First, let me assure parents that autism is not an inherent net negative: If there are any net negative effects it's due to how society treats us, not some defect in ourselves or otherwise.  The idea that we're somehow broken does us a disservice, even if you mean the best.  We're not broken, we're just different.  Yes, we have disadvantages in many areas compared to neurotypicals, but we also have advantages over them as well.  It's a tradeoff and an integral part of who we are as people.  If we can remold society so that autists and neurotypicals work together to produce a better life for both, that should be where our efforts are focused, not trying to find out what makes us who we are.  That can be an interesting puzzle to figure out together, once we are no longer ostracized.

Second, let's assume that the many epidemiological hypotheses are false: I'm not going to say for sure that any are false, but let's perform a thought experiment here.  We're going to assume, for the sake of argument, that genetics and genetics alone is the only cause of autism.  That doesn't mean you still can't fight for justice; that doesn't mean it's your fault that your child or your grandchild has autism.  We are not geneticists playing with DNA strands knowing what we'll do; we cannot fathom what the genetic cocktail will be when sperm meets egg to make a baby.  Your fight for justice now can be to make your child's life the best it can be, rather than trying to fight some possible cause.  Autism is a tough struggle, but I view it through the lens of a civil rights struggle.  It's something that develops in early childhood, if the child is not born with it outright.  It is a facet of one's identity, like nationality, race or creed.  It is something to be proud of.

War on Autism?

Being an advocate for autism I find myself perusing a great deal of message boards and websites in general to get some idea of the zeitgeist surrounding the condition. What saddens me even more than the stories of children having to cope with the social isolation more often than not inflicted by their fellow children which society deems “innocent” and “precious” is the attitude most adults have towards autism and the wording they use for their struggles with it.

Too often the words “cure”, “defeat” and “fight” are used in terms of helping children with autism. While I am sure most of these parents and other adults mean well and only want the best for these children, the usage of these words tends to betray the stigmatization that autism has. By using these terms, there is the connotation that autism is a curable ailment, something that needs to be removed much like polio, smallpox or leprosy. Autism is more than a set of symptoms: it is an entirely different way of viewing the world. Perhaps it is a bit in the way of hyperbole, but when I hear people talking about fighting autism I cannot help but think of intolerance in the past.

For example, take the word sinister: Most people connote the term as meaning evil, untrustworthy and conniving, and due to the way language evolves, that has become the accepted meaning; however, the etymology of the word is a translation of “left-handed.” During the Middle Ages, people actually believed that being left-handed was a sign of demonic possession, something to be exorcised and cured. Even in my lifetime, being both left-handed and autistic, the schools attempted to drive traits of both from me; however, thankfully they did not believe me to be possessed by demons.

I have a feeling much is left to be done in the way of autism advocacy: I want society to eventually learn to have both parties come together in the middle, to accept the benefits autism has and cope with the drawbacks. But so long as words that divide the autists from the neurotypicals are used, words that imply autism is only bad and has nothing good to offer, that day will likely creep further and further away.

Some of you are probably asking, “Cisco, How do I indicate I want to help the autistic people I know while fostering a bridge between the two?” Well, the wording can change while keeping the intent; instead of cure, help can be used; instead of defeating or fighting autism, integrating and supporting could transmit the proper intentions. I, for one, fight for the integration of autists and do what I can to support the autists I know; what we need to defeat is not autism, but ignorance.