3 ms·

I'm no more interested in being made neurotypical than I am in being made right-handed, cisgender, heterosexual, or Christian. A society that regards people wh

I'm no more interested in being made neurotypical than I am in being made right-handed, cisgender, heterosexual, or Christian. A society that regards people who don't fit in as "defective" is itself defective, and ought to be burned to the ground.

chr1 7y ago
Autism does not only describe people "who don't fit", but also people who would die without someone else caring for them. A society that doesn't regard such people as defective, and doesn't try to help them (when they agree), is simply lying to itself.
- gugagore 7y ago
  I think you lack compassion in your wording. We have evolved as social creatures, and we care for each other. We depend on each other in millions of ways, in millions of varieties. I would bet you too would die, or have died, without some care at key points in your life. It takes a village to raise a child. I argue it takes one to keep a human alive and healthy too. One piece of content in favor of my point: https://youtu.be/n3Xv_g3g-mA https://youtu.be/n3Xv_g3g-mA There's no need for people to be able to survive without care. And yes my society values individualism, but we should be able to critique it, and ask where that emerges from.
  - krageon 7y ago
    > There's no need for people to be able to survive without care. There is no need, but there should be the option. If we can provide that option to people that want it we should be allowed to. Just because someone feels that it infringes on their core identity does not mean someone else should not be treated for something they feel is a defect. Saying that this needs to be possible is not a lack of compassion, it is the most compassionate choice.
    - Porthos9K 7y ago
      > Saying that this needs to be possible is not a lack of compassion, it is the most compassionate choice. Pardon my cynicism, but I have no faith in the "compassion" of "normal people". Not when I've spent my whole life being told that I'm defective and need to be fixed. You might not want to force people into treatment, but my experience suggests that you're part of a small, sane minority.
    - gugagore 7y ago
      You're not responding to this thread. The conversation isn't about people being allowed to feel defective and seek treatment. Read again: > . A society that doesn't regard such people as defective, and doesn't try to help them (when they agree), is simply lying to itself.
      - krageon 7y ago
        I believe that I was responding to you when you implied that sentence (among others) was without compassion. If you have a specific grievance with what I said that doesn't involve something I was quite literally responding to we can discuss that.
        gugagore 7y ago
        The part that isn't compassionate is the part that insists we label certain people as defective. Your response is about people having the right to label themselves defective. If you argue that it's compassionate to allow people to live the lives they want to live, that's beautiful and I agree. I am arguing it's NOT compassionate to insist that certain people are defective, especially regardless of how they feel about their own lives. I mean, the word "defective" alone, c'mon.
        chr1 7y ago
        The crispr treatment in the article is not simply a way to remove the gene causing some forms of autism, it is also a method to add that same gene. The fact that we are talking only about using it to remove autism shows that everyone knows that some forms of autism give much more disadvantages than advantages and therefore are defects. The problem with autism is that many different things are grouped under the same term and some of them are not that disadvantageous.

chr1 7y ago

Autism does not only describe people "who don't fit", but also people who would die without someone else caring for them. A society that doesn't regard such people as defective, and doesn't try to help them (when they agree), is simply lying to itself.

gugagore 7y ago
I think you lack compassion in your wording. We have evolved as social creatures, and we care for each other. We depend on each other in millions of ways, in millions of varieties. I would bet you too would die, or have died, without some care at key points in your life. It takes a village to raise a child. I argue it takes one to keep a human alive and healthy too. One piece of content in favor of my point: https://youtu.be/n3Xv_g3g-mA https://youtu.be/n3Xv_g3g-mA There's no need for people to be able to survive without care. And yes my society values individualism, but we should be able to critique it, and ask where that emerges from.
- krageon 7y ago
  > There's no need for people to be able to survive without care. There is no need, but there should be the option. If we can provide that option to people that want it we should be allowed to. Just because someone feels that it infringes on their core identity does not mean someone else should not be treated for something they feel is a defect. Saying that this needs to be possible is not a lack of compassion, it is the most compassionate choice.
  - Porthos9K 7y ago
    > Saying that this needs to be possible is not a lack of compassion, it is the most compassionate choice. Pardon my cynicism, but I have no faith in the "compassion" of "normal people". Not when I've spent my whole life being told that I'm defective and need to be fixed. You might not want to force people into treatment, but my experience suggests that you're part of a small, sane minority.
  - gugagore 7y ago
    You're not responding to this thread. The conversation isn't about people being allowed to feel defective and seek treatment. Read again: > . A society that doesn't regard such people as defective, and doesn't try to help them (when they agree), is simply lying to itself.
    - krageon 7y ago
      I believe that I was responding to you when you implied that sentence (among others) was without compassion. If you have a specific grievance with what I said that doesn't involve something I was quite literally responding to we can discuss that.
      - gugagore 7y ago
        The part that isn't compassionate is the part that insists we label certain people as defective. Your response is about people having the right to label themselves defective. If you argue that it's compassionate to allow people to live the lives they want to live, that's beautiful and I agree. I am arguing it's NOT compassionate to insist that certain people are defective, especially regardless of how they feel about their own lives. I mean, the word "defective" alone, c'mon.
        chr1 7y ago
        The crispr treatment in the article is not simply a way to remove the gene causing some forms of autism, it is also a method to add that same gene. The fact that we are talking only about using it to remove autism shows that everyone knows that some forms of autism give much more disadvantages than advantages and therefore are defects. The problem with autism is that many different things are grouped under the same term and some of them are not that disadvantageous.