Rex Reed Spouts Disgusting Bigotry

For those who are fortunate enough never to have heard of the jerk, Rex Reed is a movie critic with a history of making ignorant and prejudiced remarks. His latest attack, in a review of the movie Adam in the New York Observer, is beyond the pale:


Asperger’s is an incurable neurological disorder similar to autism that turns outwardly normal-looking people into high-class idiot savants. I know at least two people with Asperger’s. They are incapable of thinking of anyone or anything outside of themselves...

…It is lethal to get involved romantically with any person with Asperger’s syndrome, since they care nothing about other people’s feelings, needs or priorities. Almost without exception, they leave you perplexed, riddled with doubt and totally depressed.

observer.com/2009/movies/hugh-dancy-his-way-superstardom

(as usual, I do not post active links to hate speech; you'll need to copy and paste into your browser)


Perhaps nothing better should have been expected from Reed, whose past history amply—and quite ironically—demonstrates how little he cares about others' feelings, etc., especially if those others happen to belong to a minority group. But the Observer certainly should have known better than to print such a revolting display of bigotry, in total disregard of every modern code of journalistic ethics.

Time to fire up those keyboards, folks, and write to editorial@observer.com to let the Observer know what we think. As indicated on their website, letters should be addressed "To the Editor," must include the writer's address or telephone number, and should not exceed 250 words.

Edit, August 18: In response to pressure from ASAN, working with self-advocates and parent allies, FOX Searchlight has taken down its link to the Rex Reed review. Way to go! They really ought to go farther and condemn the review, but it's a start...

IACC Season Again

Otherwise known as the season when good patriotic folks go hunting for ignorant anti-autistic prejudice in the US government, armed (figuratively, of course) with everything from bows and arrows to Thelma's shotgun. For those who have been wondering, I am not an author of that blog, but it does crack me up.

The dates for IACC comments are not actually the same each year, or even in the same season. I still haven't figured out if the committee members are just hopelessly disorganized or if it's some nefarious plot to confuse the auties. Anyway, I've reposted the commenting notice below. As usual, I hope my readers will make it crystal-clear to the IACC that there will be Nothing About Us Without Us.

Request for Information (RFI): Updating the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee Strategic Plan for Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) Research

On behalf of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC), the National Institute of Mental Health is seeking comments to inform the annual update of the IACC Strategic Plan for Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) Research, as required by the Combating Autism Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-416).

The purpose of this RFI is to solicit input from ASD stakeholders to inform the next update of the Strategic Plan. In the RFI form, there will be an opportunity to provide input on each section of the IACC Strategic Plan. Please include suggestions regarding missing or underrepresented knowledge areas, new opportunities needed for advancing research and knowledge about ASD, and suggestions for prioritizing research objectives.

The RFI will close on August 21, 2009.

Responses must be submitted electronically via the web-based form.

Background:

The IACC was established as a result of The Combating Autism Act. The act requires that the IACC develop a strategic plan for autism research and update the strategic plan annually. The IACC is composed of both Federal and public members. The first IACC Strategic Plan for ASD Research was developed through an extensive process engaging a wide range of Federal agencies and public stakeholders. The Strategic Plan is organized around six questions that are important for people with ASD and their families:

I. When should I be concerned?
II. How can I understand what is happening?
III. What caused this to happen and can this be prevented?
IV. Which treatments and interventions will help?
V. Where can I turn for services?
VI. What does the future hold?

Please Note: The responses that you provide will become part of the public record. You have the option of posting your responses anonymously or you may choose to have your name associated with your response. In your responses, please do not include personally identifiable information that you do not wish to make public.

For more information about the IACC, please visit www.iacc.hhs.gov.

Now follow the IACC on Twitter (www.twitter.com/IACC_Autism).

Contact Information:

Attention: RFI on Updating the Strategic Plan for ASD Research
Office of Autism Research Coordination
Office of the Director
National Institute of Mental Health
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 8235, MSC 9669
Bethesda, MD 20892-9669
Email: iacc@mail.nih.gov

Context and Consequences

In response to a recent guest post in the New York Times "Motherlode" blog, which used language such as "nightmare" to describe raising an autistic child, blogger Sarah of Cat in a Dog's World wrote an e-mail pointing out that such descriptions were hurtful to autistic people reading them. Her reply was published as a separate article on Motherlode and received numerous comments, some of which suggested that the mother who wrote the original guest post should not be criticized for honestly expressing her feelings and that it was natural for a parent to feel stressed by a child's disability. Sarah then wrote an entry on her blog in which she explained that she was not accusing the mother of intentionally trying to harm the child; rather, she was addressing the broader issue of the impact of such words in a culture that frequently represents the existence of autistic people as a burden and tragedy.

Looking at these posts and comments, I was reminded of a news article I read many years ago about five little Korean girls who attempted suicide because they felt unwanted after a younger brother was born into their family. The sisters overheard their father, on many occasions, talking about how glad he was to finally have a son after so many years of having had only daughters. Believing that their father did not value them as they were, the girls concluded that he would be happier if they were dead.

The reporter did not interview the father for the article, but I would guess that he did not in fact have any ill-will toward his daughters and that he was horrified by what happened. He probably never had any idea that his daughters could feel hurt by his words; after all, wasn't it entirely natural for a father to want a son?

And indeed, many parents want children who are like themselves—whether we are talking about a father who longs for a son, a ballet-loving mother who wishes her athletic daughter were more feminine, or a non-autistic parent who would prefer a highly social child. Having such expectations is not at all unusual, and parents often do find it stressful and confusing when a child turns out to be different from what they had anticipated.

In most such cases, the prevailing cultural expectation is that the parents will quickly put aside their feelings of disappointment and accept the child that they actually have. Descriptions of life with a child who differs from one's expectations as a "nightmare," or similar extreme language, would not as a general rule be considered socially acceptable and would not appear in the mainstream media unless the article had to do with learning to appreciate and value a child's differences. The potential for harm would be immediately recognized.

But as Sarah's blog entry discusses, although modern society has recognized as a general rule the importance of understanding and accommodating diversity, the autistic population often does not get the benefit of the rules that apply to everyone else. Numerous articles have described autistic people in derogatory terms that would never make it into print if applied to any other minority group. The excuse usually given for publishing such articles is that parents naturally feel that way.

It's not a very good excuse.

Turnabout

In my last post, I described a phone conversation involving a Cassandra group leader who saw nothing wrong with diagnosing a woman's husband with Asperger syndrome over the phone, based entirely on the wife's description of their marital problems and without ever talking to her husband, who was in fact not autistic.

There's more to the story. The husband separately contacted a Cassandra counselor, who was closely affiliated with the person to whom his wife had spoken. He described the problems in their marriage from his point of view. The counselor told him that she understood completely and that his wife's undiagnosed Asperger syndrome was clearly the cause of all the difficulties in the marriage. (In reality, she's not autistic either.)

The counselor invited the husband to attend a partner support group meeting to gain more insight into what he could do to alleviate his suffering from Cassandra disorder. Once there, he was encouraged to tell the group all about his wife's inability to understand how normal people felt, the misery that her affliction had brought upon him, and so forth. The group members told him that they had sympathy and compassion for him and that sharing his experiences was a necessary part of healing. Then they ranted about how incapable their own spouses were of giving them any emotional support.

And of course, nothing said could be disputed, no matter how hateful or absurd, as it was so important to validate the experiences of the poor Cassandra sufferers who had endured so many years of never being believed…

Cassandra Promoter Punked

I recently learned via e-mail that a Cassandra group leader was drawn into a long and very revealing conversation by way of a prank phone call from a neurodiversity supporter. The woman who made the call pretended that she thought she might be suffering from CADD because of her husband's undiagnosed Asperger syndrome. (In fact, he is clearly not autistic.)

She accurately described problems at various times in their marriage and her feelings of stress and depression. The Cassandra counselor assured her that all of her experiences were very typical of women in relationships with AS men and that there was no doubt her husband (whom the counselor had, of course, never met) had AS.

Like all such men, he was incapable of understanding his wife's feelings because of his disorder, the Cassandra group leader declared authoritatively. It wasn't his fault of course, but he had no empathy. That was the reason for all her suffering. To get on a path to healing, she would have to learn more about CADD and start taking back her life from the havoc caused by her husband's tragic disorder.

And of course, there would be many workshops, books, DVDs, etc., available to help her on this long journey, all quite affordably priced…

The Pinocchio Podcast

For my readers' amusement, I've put together a short list of famous lies in recent history:

-- Bill Clinton, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman," 1998.

-- Richard Nixon's denial of any knowledge about the Watergate break-in, 1972.

-- Barry Bonds' claim that he never used steroids, 2003.

-- Tony Attwood, in Donna Williams' recent podcast, only slightly exaggerated for parody purposes: "I have never used the term CADD, and anyone who says otherwise is a militant extremist and jealous of my success, and it was just too hard for me to find Ari Ne'eman's very prominently posted contact information."

Gee Tony, do you think your nose will still fit through the conference center doors?

A Brief History of Cassandra

As Tony Attwood begins his US speaking tour at a conference in Hartford, Connecticut, where he is scheduled to appear tomorrow, autistic rights advocates from ASAN New England are making it clear that the bogus concept of "Cassandra Affective Deprivation Disorder" is discrimination based entirely on neurology and that the autistic community cannot stand for that.

Because some people are still wondering what the controversy is about, I'm providing a brief explanation of the history and nature of this purported disorder, directly from a primary source: The Asperger Couple's Workbook (Maxine Aston, Tony Attwood; Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 2009).

Chapter 9 of the book (viewable in part through Google Books) explains that the term "Cassandra" comes from a Greek myth and refers to a prophet who was cursed with never being believed. You can find more information here about the Cassandra story and the actual characteristics that were attributed to Cassandra and Apollo in classical mythology. I've quoted a short excerpt (which is fair use under US copyright law) from the book below:


"This feeling of not being believed is typical of how many NTs feel when living with a person with undiagnosed Asperger Syndrome.

Over the years the terminology for the effect of Cassandra has changed. Before Cassandra it was referred to as the mirror syndrome by the Families of Adults Affected by Asperger Syndrome (FAAAS) and then referred to as the Cassandra phenomenon (Rodman 2003). Terminology has since progressed from Cassandra affective disorder and now more appropriately Cassandra affective. The Cassandra phenomenon was first made public at the Families of Adults Affected by Asperger Syndrome (FAAAS) conference in 2003 as Cassandra affective disorder (CAD) (Aston 2003b) and finally Cassandra affective deprivation disorder (CADD) (Aston 2007).

…CADD is the result of emotional deprivation due to the fact that one partner, affected by Asperger syndrome, is unable to provide the emotional support the NT partner needs to stay healthy within the relationship."


It bears repeating that no legitimate research has ever been conducted to support "Cassandra Affective Deprivation Disorder." Maxine Aston simply made it up. Although it's likely that she never would have gotten into print and would have been widely dismissed as a crank if she had made such claims on her own, her association with Tony Attwood over the years has enabled her to feed off his professional reputation and thereby gain an appearance of credibility.

And sadly, judging by Attwood's continued unwillingness to repudiate the crankery and bigotry of Aston and FAAAS, it seems he's a willing participant in their schemes.

Dowries, Trust Funds, and Independence

I read an article by Kristina Chew yesterday discussing new legislation in West Virginia that will give tax credits to parents who contribute to trust funds for their autistic children's support as adults. Autism professional Barbara Becker-Cottrill gave an interview discussing parents' worries about what will happen to their children as adults, stating that trust funds can provide families with a sense of security.

In seeking to help families who worry about their children's future, this legislation addresses what has become a widespread concern. Because today's society is so poorly adapted to the needs of its autistic citizens, a trust fund often can be a reasonable option. I once wrote a post on this blog suggesting that parents who were spending large amounts of money in pursuit of miracle cures would be much better advised to put that money into trust funds instead.

From a broader cultural perspective, however, the idea that it could become routine to create a trust fund for the lifelong care of every autistic child leaves me feeling very uneasy. Such a system would be based on the assumption that children labeled autistic could not become self-supporting. By characterizing autism itself as the sole source of the problems encountered by autistic people in our culture, this would divert society's attention away from the many areas where it ought to be focused—miseducation, discrimination, ignorance, and lack of suitable accommodations. These are not the result of autism, but of socially constructed prejudice.

The practical effect of such a system would resemble the old custom of providing a dowry for a daughter so that she would not be left destitute if her husband died. In those days, it was taken for granted that a woman was not capable of supporting herself. Being an independent woman, to the extent that it was possible to be one, meant having inherited money from a husband or other male relative.

For many of us in the modern world, it's hard to imagine that there was once a time when a young girl, simply because of her gender, was thought to be inevitably destined to a lifetime of never being able to provide for herself. That idea seems absurdly primitive now. And yet, there are many people today who see nothing wrong with making the same assumption about a young autistic child. As we celebrate Independence Day here in the United States, I'd say that it is time to give that assumption a lot more critical scrutiny.