Tuesday, May 4, 2010

neurodiversity hatemongers dish it out can't take it

In the people throwing stones from houses made out of fragile glass department, I just read an interesting post from well known neurodiversity blogger Amanda Baggs. She talks about how two stellar individuals from the neurodiversity movement, Kowalski, and Sadder but wiser girl have closed down their blogs due to bullying. Amanda neglects to go into the specifics, but implies there was stalking and death threats. I am also reminded of Kevin Leitch, owner of the left brain/right brain blog who closed LB/RB for a brief time, when the infamous John Best spent time being his daughter's sockpuppet with a "daddy please cure me" thing, who is another example of an ND blogger who did something similar but not cited by Amanda.

We have to wonder if the old cliche hate begets hate applies here. The first time I had heard of Sadder but Wiser girl, she was writing about how much dissatisfaction she had with your humble blogger's beliefs that autism should be cured, nonverbal autistics should be able to speak. She also went on to compare me to a Jew who helped the Nazis during the holocaust and claimed I was the type who would gladly jump in a crematorium. Kowalski, one half of the Kowalski and Turner duo, wrote a blog post about how parents who support autism speaks and want a cure for autism are like members of the Ku Klux Klan who are forced to raise black children. Sadder but Wiser girl commented how much she agreed with K &T on this point, so in addition to believing that I am like a Jew who helps the nazis, she also believes that parents of autistic children who support autism speaks and want a cure for their children are like KKK members forced to raise black children. Though Amanda is quite vague about the specifics, we have to wonder if whatever bullying these two August bloggers have received, alleged or otherwise, was maybe due to such harsh criticism of individuals who either want a better life or want to improve the life of their children.

Amanda certainly knows about bullying. She is one of the owners of the web page autistics.org who implied that the now defunct organization Cure Autism Now only had as their goal the development of a prenatal test so that autistic fetuses could be aborted with her nasty cartoon with the autistic fetus in a trashcan with the letters CAN written on it and the caption, "The real meaning of autism prevention". Amanda has billed her organization as the real voice of autism.

Neurodiversity complaining about bullying is absurd as the majority of them are incredible bullies themselves. In addition to SBWG's comments about me, I have had my parents insulted, I have been mocked and ridiculed and libeled. One nasty blogger even went so far as to write a libelous post claiming I was at an autism dinner and looked up Portia Iversen's dress and became so enamored, I immediately became a traitor to the autistic rights movement. I have had people use me as a sock puppet and forge my name to saying certain things. I have been cussed out and ridiculed by one stellar individual who also said that I should become the homosexual bed partner of another anti-ND blogger and go to a state where homosexuals can legally marry. Phil Gluyas also created a blog Mitchell's gadfly, just directed to me where he and his friends would constantly insult me. When he realized he could not shut me up, he finally closed down Mitchell's gadfly.

I am proud to say in spite of all this abuse I have endured, I have not closed down autism's gadfly. I am proud to be one of the few voices on the internet to speak out against this ugly cult called neurodiversity.

It seems as if neurodiversity wants to dish it out they should be able to take it. Just shows what a pathetic movement they really are.

22 comments:

Socrates said...

Trust me, Mitchell - Neurodiversity's going to have to learn how to take it and take it Thermonuclear.

And it'll need more than the psychotic Elf's lawyer-bitch and some New Age Weirdy-Beardy from Peterborough to save their asses.

CAPTCHA: booloss

Foresam said...

I am the parent of two sons with austism and have a younger daughter with medical issues. I cant begin to fathom why any parent wouldnt try to cure their children. Would you not give your child oxygen if they couldnt breathe? My sons lives are impaired to the degree that they either cannot talk, cannot cope and basically are not able to have a productive life that should be afforded to every one. I yearn to help my children become more self reliant, hear my one non-verbal son speak so that he can make his thoughts and needs known which is now limited to the very few signs he has learned in his special needs school that he attends in another state. My other son who has aspergers is full of rage always, cannot cope, organize or understand rational thought process he also has ADD and OSD which for those who dont know what OSD is, it is an eating disorder which will further frustrate my son causing him to have meltdowns. Are there really ignorant people out there who think its ok to watch your child put his hands around his neck or grab a knife and hold it to his throat or bite himself repeatedly while banging his head against a wall? Neurodiversity is a crock. They are a cult of ignoramouses who need a severe wake up call to reality. Their "leave them alone so they can keep their essence/personality/aura" crap is hopefully viewed by the sane world as nothing more than what appears to me to be an acid trip.
Karen

The author said...

Jonathan, firstly I do not censor you, I did delete one of your posts recently and could not restore it, but I did put the text of it up in a post my own as I recall.

I do censor some posts, I get spam, also, I have recently joined the long list of bloggers in the UK, who have to be careful what they post, because of our libel laws that would hold me responsible for libel if I allowed an actionable post on my blog.

I am pretty much disgusted with the current state of affairs all round it does none of us any credit, you, me, Socrates, Clay, Amanda, John Best, and Harold Doherty included, as what happens is what ought to be civilised debate, becomes an all out bar room brawl of a discussion with one or more of the posters befuddled by alcohol.

The past is irretrevable (however you spell that)

Your take on autism is anathema to me, but then I can't force you to agree, that would make me like Lovaas wouldn't it?

There are no sides in this, no us and them, we are all threatened by the same issues, you ought to know that and so ought every body else.

And if you don't know what a Punch and Judy show is, let me enlighten you. I'd like to see some evidence that the exchanges between noted hub and anti neurodiversity bloggers diverge from this standard: -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oM4sYxH_o4g&feature=related

jonathan said...

Larry, when I wrote a post about your criticism of autism speaks and your not criticising Mottron and Michelle Dawson for accepting money from the organization you hate, you censored me. Also, when Socrates, who likes to start fights started attacking me and I did not feel like turning the other cheek you censored me.

It is not just you, but Mike Stanton also who put me in moderation when he could not stand up to my criticism of neurodiversity.

However, I will not discuss the issue with you further.

Of course, I have tried to avoid barroom brawls myself, though admittedly I have not always been perfect. I agree there has been too much of that on the internet. Likewise, your views are anathema to me as well, but I respect your right to have them as well as your right to free speech.

The author said...

I apologise for any posts that got lost in the system back there. I have only found one post, relating to Socrates that I did not let through, but if you care to look I just have.

With respect to Michelle Dawson, surely you are not unaware that I have had my disputes with her? you cannot be unaware that she regards me as being critical of the whole basis of her research. This goes back to a long exchange in 2006, archived on the AWARES site which regrettably you have to pay to access. This was before any revelations as to how Mottron et al are funded, I just disagree with the Upharsinist premise on which they base there "science" that is all. I don't need to disapprove of the funders when I disapproved of other aspects of the research altogether.

It is not my business to criticise you as a human being, you do enough of that yourself and I don't think it does you justice at all.

I do think if you forgot about the straw man conception of Neurodiversity and realised what it is really about in the world beyond the internet, and what it has done to restore self esteem out there in the community you would change your opinion.

If I have one thing to be angry at the hub about it is the way that it has calumniated neurodiversity by distorting the principles the idea was originally based upon, and if you remember when I last criticised the hub for that I got kicked into the gutter because of it.

Socrates said...

Mitchell, you know were I am if you want to argue.

Larry, what can I say? What's a boy to do when ND promotes Ethics and the Truth as their sea-marks and then totally fail (not even attempt) to apply the same standards to themselves, they demand from others?

Should Amanda Baggs be allowed to continue as Neurodiversity's LFA, anti-cure Poster Girl?

Should she and her cronies have a louder voice in the debate than say Karen Best?

The author said...

Yes, and I do wish that people would keep there individual disputes off my blog.

I know now why I didn't allow the original post through, and I am not intending to allow an infinitely regressive right of reply because it has to end somewhere.

Yes I have turned NIMBY (not in my blogging yard) but this is quite serious you might suppose you can say what you like, and indeed you do, but I could get sued for being the publisher.

The blogosphere is not as even handed as it appears, what can be said in the USA cannot be responded to in the UK, (never mind other countries with rigid censorship)

I didn't think I would ever have to say that but I have good reason to now.

Ender said...

Anyone else think that this a little like the Isreal/Palistine conflict. It started so long ago that people forget who started it or why, they just keep attacking each other and getting a clear goal or whatever is impossible. If you were a governmental worker who would you listen to here. You listen to Jonathon you are shutting out, thosands... maybe millions who disagree with everything he says. Same thing vice-versa. And with these attacks going on it impossible for anyone to ever come to any sort of agreement. This is actually Jons worst nightmare because without any sort of agreement any sort of true dreams are unlikely to be realized.

Kent Adams said...

"It started so long ago that people forget who started it or why,"

It started with Amanda Baggs bullying of Thomas McKean back in 2005 (before pictures surfaced of a perfectly typical girl with boyfriends, advanced placements in colleges and post the now infamous
and ironic website "Getting the Truth Out" which was anything but) when she decided he wasnt a good autistic person anymore when he suggested that diagnostic papers be submitted for speaking at one of the autism conferences. She then promoted a petition against him online because she knew she didn't have any prior to 2005 that would show autism.

Kent Adams said...

Let's not forget the bullying of Sharisa Kochmeister, recent president of Autcom, who resigned over the bullying and expulsion of Droopy from attending Autcom because Ms. Baggs didn't want her there. Ms. Baggs might as well tattoo bully on her forehead, along with "Autistic Minstrel".

Socrates said...

Pantomime Autistic?

The author said...

Punch and Judy.

I don't think anybody was bullying Thomas McKean as I recall, I think the use of the word "Bully" is becoming devalued, it's another stick to beat your opponent. As I recall Thomas seemed to be peeved that the market for autistic speakers at conferences had expanded beyond him and Temple Grandin. He seemed to have a grudge against Donna Williams too, had implied that he did not consider her autistic. (I'm going back to my recall of ASA posts here)

You know what, it's like policemen innit. Autistic spokespersons seem to be getting younger :)

BTW Karen (or whoever you are) I am not the worlds greatest grammarian, but the plural is Ignorami, not ignoramuses ......

The false notion of neurodiversity as created by the collective error of hubsters is a crock, but true neurodiversity is something that flourishes because it has to.

Kent Adams said...

Larry, I call circulating a petition against an individual to hundreds of people bullying. If anyone is confused about what cyber bullying is, you are the one that is confused.

Donna Williams is not autistic, never was and certainly never was LFA as she has claimed.

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/helthrpt/hstories/hr290796.htm

Comparing Temple Grandin's very open life, including early interviews of her mother and others in her life is something that Ms. Baggs or Ms. Williams has never allowed to happen and won't allow to happen. Both Baggs and Williams suffer from devoteeism and borderline personality disorder. No less authority than Volkmar has expressed doubt as to Ms. Williams diagnosis.

Kent Adams said...

Larry, in case you are confused, this is what Thomas wrote about reaction to the petition and I agree with it 100%, not that would mean anything to you:

http://www.thomasamckean.com/articles/speaking.htm

Here is some of the bullying by Amanda Baggs of Thomas McKean:

http://www.autistics.org/library/whoisautistic.html

You need to get your facts straight old man. Ms. Baggs is the biggest bully of autistic advocates that the internet has had simply for how many borg-like followers she has in the self advocacy movement. Don't be a borg Larry.

Kent Adams said...

For the newbies, Thomas McKean is an "old school" autistic advocate having first served on the board of directors for the Autism Society of America in 1992, long before most in the ND community as represented in the now suspended autism hub, even knew what autism was. Thomas was autistic before autistic was "cool". I think Thomas was an advocate even long before Larry was.

The author said...

Interviews with my mother is something you are never going to get, she crossed over to the other side before her time.

It's degenerated into that old game again, one that has been played out amongst many impairments, indeed many differences before. It's social psychology by way of politics.

You want to destroy your opponent, you accuse them of not being "one of us" The soviets played that game par excellence with there dissidents.

I'm not taking the bait.

Raun Kaufmann was never autistic (when it suits the argument) Donna was never autistic, even Temple Grandin if you are on Harold Doherty's side is not autistic. There is an old saying, that people in glass houses ought not to throw stones. It's not a sound argument without any genuine evidence such as would stand up beyond this narrow Punch and Judy world. For all I know Stephen Hawking is faking ALS, I mean how many people with that condition survive as long as he has?!

Kent Adams said...

"You want to destroy your opponent, you accuse them of not being "one of us" The soviets played that game par excellence with there dissidents."

Larry, that's because you are probably never around real autism. I have a subscription to the NAS magazine where "real" hardcore autism, like exists in my son, are not covered by your organization. You are part of the problem as I see it, in as much as you have supported NAS and failed to get the "hardcore autism" needs addressed by NAS in both their public announcements and publications. The NAS is all about those like you and me, the AS folks. However, some of us AS folks have children with AD that are not being represented. You see Larry, I see AD everyday, just now, I can hear my son screaming in the background and laughing uncontrollably. I understand it, certainly, but at his age, I understood some social rules about it, however, he does not.

You may think you're funny, in a geek sort of way, a good advocate and all, but really, you have no real clue. Unlike your parents, Donna Williams parents were alive when she started her minstrel show. Her original diagnoser, Bartek (I think) never even interviewed her family or looked through her public school records to diagnose. You see Larry, its not possible to diagnose an adult properly without that input from childhood resources. As for Amanda Baggs, her parents are still alive as are her siblings. Never heard a peep out of them have we? However, we do know from her former lover that she was fully typical in speech, in cognition and in social interaction at the age of 14 at least. You see Larry, you can support fraud if you want to and call it autistic advocacy because you have some Machiavellian belief in advocacy, but its important to me that those that represent autistics are authentic. Perhaps that's not something you much care about, but I do.

The author said...

I have been a disability advocate since the International Year of Disabled People in 1981 as it happens, I have even had para legal training. That is why I try to bring a wider perspective to neurodiversity and autism, because as I have said elsewhere, nothing is new under the sun.

When I became a Board member of the NAS, part of my mission was to bring that wider understanding and experience to the Board. I wasn't elected onto the Council and the Board because I came from nowhere.

Bev said...

This link provided by Kent: http://www.autistics.org/library/whoisautistic.html is not an example of bullying. It is a civil statement of disagreement signed by several people. This (claiming that a civil statement of disagreement is the same as bullying) is one of those things that has caused, to borrow Larry's phrasing, the devaluing of the word.

Kent Adams said...

"This (claiming that a civil statement of disagreement is the same as bullying) is one of those things that has caused, to borrow Larry's phrasing, the devaluing of the word."

Civil statements in this case are a sophisticated way to bully. I suggest Bev read Thomas McKeans reaction to this statement. I assume that the need to have multiple signatories was meant to give the document some weight, I see it as sophisticated bullying meant to leave the impression it was civil discourse. If it was a discourse, then they would have invited him to respond. The bottom line, Bev, is the statement created a hostile atmosphere. They could have made their argument without naming Thomas, but they chose to make it personal .

Anonymous said...

"Neurodiversity complaining about bullying is absurd as the majority of them are incredible bullies themselves."

Makes me wonder what definition of bullying they're using. Could it be the "you're bullying me if you don't pander to me no matter how anti-socially I treat you" version?

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/magazine/articles/2010/05/02/the_secret_to_stopping_a_bully/?comments=all&plckCurrentPage=5

"...We have/had a third grade bully (little boy) on my son's bus. He pushed and threatened kids who tried to sit with him. Nobody tries to sit with him amymore or even within two rows of him -- and now he cries everyday saying nobody likes him. All of the other kids now 'feel sorry' for the bully and want to be his friend. We'll see what happens....the kid is probably a sociopath, but I was proud to see age 7-8 year old kids take matters into their own hands and disarm this bully without violence or fear or even adult intervention."

I wonder how many other people claim that threatening kid was the bullied one.

http://boston.com/community/blogs/crime_punishment/2010/04/life_sentence_for_odgren_is_no.html?comments=all&plckCurrentPage=5

"The idea of bullying and ostracizing has been beyond overstated. If some people stayed away from him because he made comments about perfect crimes, that's not bullying. He was never quite as 'in the fold' as others may have been, but that doesn't mean he was being targeted."

http://boston.com/community/blogs/crime_punishment/2010/04/life_sentence_for_odgren_is_no.html?comments=all&plckCurrentPage=7

"...We have so many examples of his threatening studens at LS. I reiterate from the message that was removed earlier ... Odgren was the bully. Kids at LS were justifiably scared of him."

Some other people *do* claim that threatening kid was the bullied one.

Hugo Wagner said...

Amanda Baggs isn't Autistic, she's a person with psychogenic autism who used Droopy as her model. I am also an Aspie supporter of True Neurodiversity and believe that Aspies, Auties, other NDs, and NTs all deserve equal respect.