I have just read another work of jake crosby . At some point, I may not publicize his individual essays as he certainly does not need my help given the relatively large circulation at age of autism and thankfully they are publishing even more of his essays; therefore it might be hard to keep up.
But once again, he writes of the struggles of a high functioning autistic, the fact he only got a C on one of his college term papers because his autism impairs his ability to multitask. I realize this is trivial in comparison to the problems of the connor dohertys, russell rollens, dov shestacks and john belmontes, who barring an improbable miracle, will never be able to dream of going to a university like Brandeis that Jake attends and never be able to take care of themselves or live independent lives or be able to communicate at anything but the most rudimentary level. I am thankful to Jake for both letting us know about how flawed a concept neurodiversity is in a forum that will get good exposure and for the final line of his essay discussing about the antipathy that society has towards those of us on the spectrum and our delegation to the figurative wood pile.
One thing that I would like to elaborate on and slightly take Jake to task for is not being specific enough. What I mean by this is that often the problems of persons at the less severe end of the spectrum such as Jake and myself are not acknowledged. I agree with Harold Doherty when he criticizes the NDs who want to speak for all autistics, including his son whose problems are far more severe than theirs. However, this does not mean that those of us at the upper end don't suffer. I agree barely passing a history term paper might seem trivial compared to other issues that befall certain autistics on the spectrum, but it still hurts me (and apparently Jake also) that we can't do as well at things as those without a disability.
Joseph (one of the more prominent ND bloggers) has apparently felt that I am making a big deal about my mediocre academic performance in college claiming that I should be content with being average. This is in spite of the fact that I nearly flunked out of college, my ambitions to go to graduate school did not pan out, so I could not be an autism researcher like Matthew Belmonte or Lindsay Oberman and the others, he and the rest of the ND crowd just want to trivialize that. Yet Joseph in one of his old posts comes up with some figures projecting a 70% employment rate for all autistics at some future point. When there will be a 70% employment rate for autistics, I am not sure and Joseph not surprisingly is quite vague about the timeline. Also I am not sure where Joseph gets this figure, other than the fact that maybe 70% of autistics diagnosed today are not intellectually retarded and then a tacit assumption that all autistics without retardation will be able to work. Then Joseph goes on with the disclaimer that he is not claiming all nonretarded autistics will be able to work. So I am mystified where Joseph comes up with this figure. So, he seems to think I complain about nothing, yet my problems have impaired me from making a living and I have not been employed for some time, so according to Joseph's projections I am in the bottom 30th percentile.
Temple Grandin has a similar attitude about mildly versus severely autistic persons. She favors a cure for those on the severe end of the spectrum, but apparently wants to preserve autism in mildly autistic people, because she believes that autism genes are responsible for invention and creativity.
Simon Baron Cohen also wrote an essay claiming that high functioning autism should not be considered a disability as opposed to low functioning autism. The demarcation between functioning levels is not made clear by SBC. I notice he consulted David Andrews for this essay, someone who stoops to the nastiest insults and most abusive language you could imagine towards anyone who dares to disagree with his view on autism. Andrews' participation in this essay should certainly diminish its credibility.
SBC also takes a view about autism genes being advantageous in society that is similar to Grandins. I have refuted their reasoning in this essay.
So don't forget those of us with mild autism. Even if our problems are not as bad as Connor Doherty's and John Belmonte's, they are still bad enough. The inability to do well academically and in employment and in romantic relationships does make life hard for at least some of us. This is a fact that should not be forgotten.