3 ms·

> Whether something is classified as a disorder is imho irrelevant. Homosexuality was classified as a disorder until 1973. As I've said repeatedly, society has

> Whether something is classified as a disorder is imho irrelevant. Homosexuality was classified as a disorder until 1973. As I've said repeatedly, society has the mental disorders it creates. I believe where we’re drifting apart is that ASD *not* just a social construct. Higher levels of ASD are demonstrably more difficult or even impossible to deal without a support system. This is not the case with homosexuality, where society simply has to stop marginalizing them for liking who they like . There is no issue with being “too gay” that society didn’t create. Someone at the high-end of the ASD spectrum simply cannot thrive without support. I’m very much in support of those with ASD1, and do not wish to “fix” them or even think there’s something fix in the first place. However, they’re also the most able to advocate for themselves. We can’t forget the ones that truly need help, and medicine can be one avenue for that.

Scandiravian 2mo ago
It's great that you believe that asd-1 should not be fixed. Plenty of people do think we need fixing and this "cure" would be the tool they'd need for that If this does not at the minimum give pause to consider how societies historically have acted towards people who have not conformed, then I don't think you actually understand the discrimination most people with asd-1 face on a daily basis You can argue all you want that it's good for people with asd-3. I have agreed with that at every step. Using it to silence genuine concerns from people with asd-1 is kind of proving my point, that our concerns will not be listened to and we could end in a situation where people are pressured to treatment through negative social control
- ProfessorLayton 2mo ago
  > "Using it to silence genuine concerns from people with asd-1 is kind of proving my point..." If you believe advocating for ASD3 means silencing ASD1 then we'll just agree to disagree, but I do appreciate the conversation.
  - Scandiravian 2mo ago
    I don't, but your argument as presented is that the concerns expressed by myself and others with asd-1 are irrelevant because a "cure" could help people with asd-3 Since people with asd-3 can't speak for themselves, others are allowed to speak for them and as a result everyone is essentially allowed to ignore the concerns of people with asd-1 as long as they hide behind representing asd-3 I've argued for asd-3 throughout, so if you respond with a disagreement, the only part you're essentially disagreeing with is my expression of concern about how it will impact asd-1. Pitting me as opposed to treatment of asd-3 is a complete and utter strawman

Scandiravian 2mo ago

It's great that you believe that asd-1 should not be fixed. Plenty of people do think we need fixing and this "cure" would be the tool they'd need for that If this does not at the minimum give pause to consider how societies historically have acted towards people who have not conformed, then I don't think you actually understand the discrimination most people with asd-1 face on a daily basis You can argue all you want that it's good for people with asd-3. I have agreed with that at every step. Using it to silence genuine concerns from people with asd-1 is kind of proving my point, that our concerns will not be listened to and we could end in a situation where people are pressured to treatment through negative social control

ProfessorLayton 2mo ago
> "Using it to silence genuine concerns from people with asd-1 is kind of proving my point..." If you believe advocating for ASD3 means silencing ASD1 then we'll just agree to disagree, but I do appreciate the conversation.
- Scandiravian 2mo ago
  I don't, but your argument as presented is that the concerns expressed by myself and others with asd-1 are irrelevant because a "cure" could help people with asd-3 Since people with asd-3 can't speak for themselves, others are allowed to speak for them and as a result everyone is essentially allowed to ignore the concerns of people with asd-1 as long as they hide behind representing asd-3 I've argued for asd-3 throughout, so if you respond with a disagreement, the only part you're essentially disagreeing with is my expression of concern about how it will impact asd-1. Pitting me as opposed to treatment of asd-3 is a complete and utter strawman