My grandson is autistic. I really resent it when some Republican jerk who will do nothing for autistic people jumps on the bandwagon and lies. So this guy, Dave McCormick, booked some space in North Philly for an autism awareness event…and then instead just does a campaign event for his US Senate run. There was nothing about autism at the campaign stop, just a sleazy Republican handing out cheesesteaks and grubbing for votes.
Max’s Steaks, the cheesesteak place the event was held at, kicked him out. Good.
It was organized by a Republican operative, Sheila Armstrong, who is a member of Moms for Liberty. It’s lies all the way down.
After getting kicked out of the cheesesteak place, the sleazebags went looking for another opportunity to leech off an activist group. They saw that East Bethel Baptist Church was holding a fundraiser across the street for a food ministry…so they blithely went over there to suck off that teat. They got kicked out again.
The Rev. Thomas Edwards Jr., who leads the church, told his campaign to leave because he didn’t want the GOP candidate to use photos of his congregation for campaigning purposes.
“You can Photoshop,” he told the Inquirer. “You can make things seem like they aren’t. Maybe they’re going to post we’re eating dogs or eating cats, like in Ohio. Forgive me if I’m wrong. I don’t trust these people.”
That’s the right attitude. They’re parasites.
As someone on the spectrum, thank you, Max’s Steaks, for responding properly.
They are so very sleazy.
Sorry to learn about your grandson’s condition. Having raised a child who, starting with pre-school, was diagnosed with all sorts of things…ADHD, Aspergers, Autism, among others…I appreciate the challenges he, his parents, and his grandparents face.
Recursive Rabbit@1: Seconded. They did the right thing.
Have to admit, when I read about a Republican and an autism awareness event, I expected even worse. Vaccines, bleach as a cure, you know that crap.
Don’t be sorry. Yes, his parents are facing a lot of challenges, but he is who he is and we don’t want him to be anyone else.
PZ@4: Thanks! It’s good to know there are people who see us as who we are not as a disease that needs to be cured.
Mordred @ 3
For imagining the kind of ‘cures’ the kooks might advocate, see the SNL sketch “Theoderic of York, medieval barber”
At least the various flavors of autism are better understood today, as are the ways of helping the children.
I am horrified by the Merican practice of sending kids with any problems to religious places where they are beaten and maltreated.
OT: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-06-16/ty-article/former-israeli-mk-quotes-hitler-while-discussing-gaza-war/00000190-224f-d231-a1b2-e65f76fe0000
So they know what they’re doing, and they’ve decided it’s fine.
McCormick isn’t even from PA, he’s just another Republican carpetbagger like Oz
Maybe one gentle nudge? People have conditions, they’re not defined by those conditions. Your grandson is a whole, complete human with autism spectrum disorder. Your love and compassion for him is clear. The problem is that others define folks by their diagnosis. I was schooled well and repeatedly in med school that Jim isn’t a schizophrenic, he’s a person with schizophrenia. The constructions can get twisty, but people first language is important.
Love your blog and read it religiously (or agnostically?)
JRV
@10 jrvannorman — I can tell you mean well, but as an autistic person, no, that’s not suitable for us. I have clinical depression. I am autistic. This is about our basic neurology, and as such, it is foundational to us in a way that most diagnoses aren’t. It’s not something layered on top of us, not something that could in theory be stripped away. Even were it possible to “cure” autism, it would amount to killing us and giving our zombified corpses over to an AI to pilot. I am far from the only autistic person to object to person-first language being used on the subject, for all the preceding reasons and then some.
Hi, Jemolk. I will always defer to how you wish to describe yourself. My thinking is mostly not to let a condition define who people are. You process things in ways I might not. There’s nothing to fix or cure. My concern is that some people land on a label rather than seeing the human in front of them.
Jim V
jrvannorman, “I will always defer to how you wish to describe yourself.” is a very nice, presumably genuine sentiment, but fuck me it seems patronising.
(Show, don’t tell!)
[OT]
In passing, when I read Jemolk’s comment I could not help think that the subtle difference to which Jim alludes may be equivalent to the Spanish distinction between ‘ser’ and ‘estar’ — which is rather confusing to native English speakers.
(My wife still does not grok it, and she’s a qualified English teacher and has functional Spanish (and Italian), but we native speakers don’t even have to think about it)
Es un concepto muy difcíl, no? Ser es un condicion esencial a su persona, y estar es un condicion temporal.
But here is the reality, if I go to meet you and you’re “schizophrenic” or “autistic” or “XXX” then I’m not seeing you as a human being. I will always acknowledge you as left handed or brilliant, i just try, try, try not to let my preconceptions get in the way.
Jim V
Jim, I do appreciate your response, but I still think you’re overgeneralising from your own personal perception and making it into some sort of claim about human nature.
Perhaps that’s your reality, but I personally have no problem seeing them as a human being.
It is not my reality.
You are not everyone, of course, and neither am I.
Consider this: presumably, Jemolk believes they are a human being; yet, they wrote
“I can tell you mean well, but as an autistic person, no, that’s not suitable for us. I have clinical depression. I am autistic.”
See, in the space of a couple of comments, you have written both:
“I will always defer to how you wish to describe yourself.”
and
“But here is the reality, if I go to meet you and you’re “schizophrenic” or “autistic” or “XXX” then I’m not seeing you as a human being.”
(See the tension there? Note those comments are in temporal sequence)
—
I’m personally rather sure that the average person does not (even unconsciously) distinguish between your preferred terminology and ordinary terminology. Both the same to them.
Thanks, John. You’ve pretty much got the right of it, from what I can see.
@15 jrvannorman — Would you prefer I referred to you as Jim, based on your sign-off? Regardless, here’s the thing — I object to person-first language regarding autism specifically because it sets it up as something separate from my personhood. I am who I am because of the way my brain operates, and my brain operates the way it does because I am autistic. There’s a reason I brought up the comparison to clinical depression — that is something that can conceptually be applied over the top of what is ultimately a full person. Autism isn’t like that at all. Autism is pointing to a fundamental difference in the foundation. A person cannot become autistic, nor become non-autistic. It is something we simply either are or are not (insofar as the very human strict division between categories holds, at least — realistically, the borders are always fuzzy, and the location of the line may shift, but the underlying traits aren’t going to change themselves).
Person-first language took off because most people explicitly want their diagnoses acknowledged as things separate from the core of who they are as a person. In a great many cases, that is extremely important and well warranted. But, again, autism isn’t like that at all. Were my brain structured fundamentally differently, the “I” who is writing this for you to read would not exist. Were I to not “have autism,” it would be because my brain was structured fundamentally differently. People have things like depression, PTSD, or schizophrenia. Autistic is a thing that I am, in much the same way that I am male, or that you are. It’s just baked in at the ground level by how our physical forms are constituted. Except that, if anything, our neurology is even more foundational to our personhood, less up in the air, and less easily altered. (Hence why trans people modify their endocrine systems, rather than their brain structure.)
Make sense?
I think the internet ate my oh so eloquent response. We doctors tend to lump people into categories. People first language does a little bit to counter that. Except where categories lend evidence to diagnosis, care, or prognosis we try to stay away from those descriptors.
I am really grateful for all your responses. You actually can teach an old doc new trix.
Jim V