3 ms·

I don't know if it's kosher to respond to one's own comment, but I didn't see an option to edit. So I'll just say this: I choose that phrasing for a reason. Be

I don't know if it's kosher to respond to one's own comment, but I didn't see an option to edit. So I'll just say this: I choose that phrasing for a reason. Because I know that some people choose beliefs based on how hurtful an idea might be, not on it's logical merits. There is no link between how a person irreparably in a given situation, describes that situation, and how anyone not in it, regards it. Almost every comment fails that most basic understanding. That is my point. There is no real debate. Only a lot of modern people without the fortitude to realistically consider unpleasant things. Feels before reals, indeed.

geofft 7y ago
You are refusing to consider "reals"—people telling you that no, you're factually wrong—because you cannot conceive of holding a certain opinion and therefore your "feels" have you convinced that nobody holds it either. Facts don't care about your feelings, and you'd be well advised to gather some facts. Your phrasing was quite confusing: it could mean either that no one who is autistic would choose to remain autistic if they had the option of choosing to not (which has been debunked) or that no one who is not autistic would choose to become autistic if they had that option. The second may or may not be true, but what does it prove? I'm not white. I don't think I'd choose to become white if I had the option, because I wouldn't be me any more, and that's valuable to me. Does that mean I think being white is inferior in any way? Certainly not! It just means that people generally wish to remain themselves, and that doesn't prove your point; in fact, it argues against it. As someone not autistic, I look at people with autism and I say, oh, you have autism. They look at me and say, oh, you have food allergies. That's it. Sure, both are medical conditions, but I don't find a need to pity them for their medical condition any more than they find a need to pity me for mine and talk about how they wouldn't want to have allergies and how surely I must wish to stop having allergies.
boomlinde 7y ago
Maybe there is no real debate because none of your input to the discussion so far constitutes a reasoned argument. You have presented no evidence to your support your conclusions, yet you've written paragraphs of vapid fluff as if that somehow validates your opinion as fact. Feels before reals, indeed.

geofft 7y ago

You are refusing to consider "reals"—people telling you that no, you're factually wrong—because you cannot conceive of holding a certain opinion and therefore your "feels" have you convinced that nobody holds it either. Facts don't care about your feelings, and you'd be well advised to gather some facts. Your phrasing was quite confusing: it could mean either that no one who is autistic would choose to remain autistic if they had the option of choosing to not (which has been debunked) or that no one who is not autistic would choose to become autistic if they had that option. The second may or may not be true, but what does it prove? I'm not white. I don't think I'd choose to become white if I had the option, because I wouldn't be me any more, and that's valuable to me. Does that mean I think being white is inferior in any way? Certainly not! It just means that people generally wish to remain themselves, and that doesn't prove your point; in fact, it argues against it. As someone not autistic, I look at people with autism and I say, oh, you have autism. They look at me and say, oh, you have food allergies. That's it. Sure, both are medical conditions, but I don't find a need to pity them for their medical condition any more than they find a need to pity me for mine and talk about how they wouldn't want to have allergies and how surely I must wish to stop having allergies.

boomlinde 7y ago

Maybe there is no real debate because none of your input to the discussion so far constitutes a reasoned argument. You have presented no evidence to your support your conclusions, yet you've written paragraphs of vapid fluff as if that somehow validates your opinion as fact. Feels before reals, indeed.