Storytime With FAAAS

In reading various discussions of FAAAS on the Internet, I have seen several people try to defend the organization. The following post is an attempt to refute these FAAAS apologists, using the very simple technique of quoting things which FAAAS people have said. I am not yet inspired to write my own poetry, not feeling very inclined towards writing poetry, even bad poetry. So instead I'll give my readers a few snippets of FAAAS' "brilliance." These quotes are from the book Asperger's and Adults...Is Anyone Listening?, edited by Karen Rodman and with an introduction from none other than Tony Attwood. (Note: The link to the Amazon.com page for this book is not an endorsement). I am fortunate enough to have access to an excellent university library system, which allows me electronic access to many titles published by Jessica Kingsley. Fortunately, this means I can read through Rodman's book without having to pay for it myself.

So, here are a few choice quotes from Asperger's and Adults. I think these words do a nice job refuting FAAAS' own recent assertion that it is not a hate group. Please note that these are just a small sample of possible excerpts. Were I to record every anti-autistic statement made in this work, I would end up having to copy practically the entire text. I hope this entry will be useful to those trying to explain to skeptics why FAAAS is, in fact, a hate group.

His or her inability to respond to you emotionally robs you of your self-esteem, friends, family, confidence in yourself and your confidence in others. It steals a “normal life” away from “normal” people. Those born with the affliction of Asperger’s Syndrome survive at the emotional and psychological expense of others. Of course, this is not done consciously on their part! (42)

Short version: Autistic people are (unintentional) parasites.

Like an object,
I was chosen by you.
Like a leech you clung,
I hadn’t a clue. (47)

Again with the parasites.

Oh, unless [the author's son] had a fever of 105. Then he was so normal it was scary. He was concerned about others, empathetic, kind, understanding, gentle. Very strange – one doctor suggested that since neurotransmitters react in an enzyme environment, and since enzymes are heat sensitive, this phenomenon should be researched. My sister suggested we just put C’s head in a microwave and see what happens! We have learned to laugh about a lot of things. (53)

How hilarious. Tell me again who's supposed to be abusive here.

And he revealed to me for the first time that he was a cross-dresser. In trying to work out our relationship in view of this, his inability to understand someone else’s feelings is shown most dramatically. He told me that he can’t understand why this would be such a big deal for me. (68)

Being anti-autistic with a side of homophobia and gender policing.

Our lives are incompatible
Trying to find some way to manage our relationship has made me ill
I do not have the energy or stamina to continue trying
Neither do I have any desire to try
You have beaten me
Congratulations (83)

And FAAAS tries to claim that they don't ascribe malintentions to the autistic partner?

I just want to sit down and cry.
O I know I should stop being so negative.
Besides, I should be used to it, I’m a universal donor.
Everyone wants my blood. (155)
(From piece entitled "O Negative.)

And again with the blood-sucking metaphors. Asperger's/Autism: It's like vampirism, in a way.

I could go on with more excerpts from this whiny, self-pitying book, but I won't. I do find it interesting, however, that from my observations, so many of the contributors to this collection have partners who are not formally diagnosed with an autism spectrum condition. Now, I happen to believe that self-identification is valid, but there seems to me a double-standard at work. How much credibility would a collection of writings by self-diagnosed autistic people be given?

Like I said earlier, I'm not up to writing poetry. But--after subjecting my readers to so much crappy poetry--I'll provide a bit of poetry that's both good and aspie-esque:

Such was that happy garden-state,
While man there walked without a mate :
After a place so pure and sweet,
What other help could yet be meet!
But 'twas beyond a mortal's share
To wander solitary there :
Two paradises 'twere in one
To live in Paradise alone.
--Andrew Marvell, "The Garden"

There, that should help cleanse all of our palletes after reading some of the worst poetry I've ever had the misfortune to read. And somehow I think that many of the partners and children of the FAAAS writers can relate to this state of mind.

Selling Science Without Sex

Several Hub bloggers have blogged about the new anti-Jenny McCarthy website, Rethinking Autism. While anyone who reads this blog knows how I feel about Jenny, and I do appreciate the site's pro-neurodiversity message, I cannot support its methods of advertising. I understand that the site's use of a frankly gorgeous young woman to transmit pro-neurodiversity messages is a parody of Jenny's use of her sex appeal and celebrity status. But at the same time, I don't think neurodiversity activists should be engaging in a mode of activism that turns women into sex objects, even if this is done satirically--which I am not sure that the website successfully pulls off, in any case. I notice that none of the site's videos feature a conventionally attractive man selling sex. These videos are problematic to me as a feminist, no matter how pro-neurodiversity. When we argue for the inherent equality of autistic people, we shouldn't be objectifying women and venerating a particular kind of appearance (read white and thin) as the epitome of female attractiveness.

Besides, as the videos point out, we have science on our side. No, it's not as "sexy," but that's okay. Leave the sleazy appeals to the Jennys of this world. Let's make our arguments as reasonable people who respect the equality of all people. And, for goodness' sake, how about more videos which position autistic people as true authorities? "Leanne" from the videos may well be autistic, but in the videos her appeal rests upon her sex appeal, not empowerment as a self-advocate.

EDITED TO ADD: In the comments, hollywoodjaded brings up another important objection to these ads, namely their unquestioning support of behavioral therapy. I would not consider this viewpoint, as expressed in the glib, abbreviated format of these ads, to be pro-neurodiversity or soundly scientific. (I'm not saying that one has to oppose all forms of behaviorism to be pro-neurodiversity, but I don't think that a truly thoughtful neurodiversity advocate can uncritically advocate it, either.)

EDITED AGAIN TO ADD: Another reader has brought another good point to my attention, which is that the videos do mention the importance of "recognizing natural differences" in the context of behavioral therapy. I do applaud that--along with the videos' debunking of other anti-autistic nonsense--but nevertheless wish these publicists had found a more empowering way of imparting their message. Sexy ads are not the proper forum for a nuanced discussion of the ethics of ABA.

AoA Surprise--and a Predictable Response

Shockingly, Age of Autism blogs a response from Dr. Simon Baron-Cohen. Though I certainly have some quibbles with Baron-Cohen's theories, the content of this letter is quite sound. I particularly appreciate how he pointed to inadequacies in services as the real problem--and not a faux "epidemic." I am certainly surprised that AoA would post such a sensible post, especially given the organization's history of silencing dissent.

The blog's comments, however, remain (unsurprisingly) mind-numbingly assinine. It only took two posts for this particular gem to appear:

Simon Baron-Cohen is no different than a 60s era sheriff in a Mississippi town who logs local lynchings as "suicides". He's every bit as much a killer as the mob with the rope. Does it matter that lynchings were targeted and deliberate and vaccine and toxic injuries are collateral? Dead is dead, maimed is maimed. The cover-up is precisely the same.

Yes, you saw that right. The suggestion that the autism "epidemic"* might be an artefact of broadened diagnostic criteria and greater awareness is now akin to justifying and covering up lynching. And, of course, someone else inevitably compares this position to Holocaust denial. Truly lovely. I wouldn't ordinarily post on blog comments, but I found these particular comments to be especially odious on several levels, and thus worthy of commentary. As Katie Miller recently told the IACC, language matters. And using this kind of language to discuss autism suggests that the existence of autistic people is, on some level, comprable to lynchings and the Holocaust. This gross representation of autistic lives--and the co-option of the historical experiences of marginalized groups--cannot pass without commentary. Dr. Baron-Cohen called attention to the problems of inadequate services and discrimination; AoA readers chose to respond by continuing to wallow in a fabricated sense of victimhood which doesn't actually do a single thing for autistic people.

*As Baron-Cohen points out, "epidemic" would be inappropriate language in reference to autism even if incidence was truly increasing. "Epidemics" are contagious by definition, despite various fear-mongers trying to re-define the word.

Being Against Autism--Charitably, Of Course

I and other neurodiversity proponents have long known that a lot of "autism advocates," including those from Autism Speaks, are actually against autism--and autistic people, by the transitive property. So it's not altogether shocking to see a new Autism Speaks initiative which calls itself Athletes Against Autism (AAA). The organization claims that its celebrity athlete members are "personally touched by autism." Whatever the heck that actually means, these athletes clearly are not for any autistic people who may be in their lives, and I find that tragic. To clarify: you cannot be against autism without being against the continued existence of autistic people. Let's save the antagonistic language for conditions which do need to be cured and prevented--cancer, HIV/AIDS, diabetes, etc.

The good news is that, as far as I can see, there aren't really that many big names associated with AAA, at least in MLB. (I do not follow other sports and hence cannot comment on that.) The even better news is that one noticeable name is missing--Dan Marino's. While Autism Speaks and the athletes now associated with AAA promote a damaging view of autism perpetuated by (presumably) non-autistic people, at least one athlete who has a family member with autism is willing to listen to actual autistic people. (This is not meant as an endorsement of The Dan Marino Foundation, necessarily, though I do applaud its willingness to listen to self-advocates.)

What the long-term impact of this development remains to be clear, but this new initiative definitely further highlights the problems with Autism Speaks as an organization. It continues to be "against" autism, and thus autistic people. And it continually refuses to make any kind of outreach to autistic adults. Autism Speaks is quite eager to announce its alliance with "celebrity athletes" (including several weak-hitting middle infielders), but it ignores people who are actually autistic. After four years of the organization's existence, there are no excuses.

And in my book, the letters AAA still only signify a kind of battery, the highest level of minor league baseball, and the place you call when you have a flat tire.