Category: Autism

The Problem With Autism Acceptance Week

This week is ‘Autism Acceptance Week’, and this is being promoted all over Twitter. Despite not following any irritating autism promotion, neurodiversity, etc accounts, such as the National Autistic Society (who I can’t stick for a number of reasons), I have been seeing ‘Autism Acceptance’ tweets all over the platform. So it seems Elon Musk, despite unbanning some good accounts, is helping to promote the normalisation and glamorisation of autism via ‘Autism Acceptance Week’.

The premise of autism acceptance week is very simple: it is that autism is a natural human variation and actually there’s nothing wrong with it, the only problem is society doesn’t accept it. As readers of this page will probably know by now the author has an autism diagnosis. It’s always very funny to me that woke people in general will say ‘listen to autistic people’ as part of promoting the neurodiversity narrative but the moment I say that I believe it’s vaccine-injury and that it’s miserable they try to shut me up (not going to happen). Or they accuse me of not being autistic, despite the fact I have a diagnosis so I am an actual genuine gold star autist. Honestly I got my diagnosis a year ago and the best thing about it is being able to tell the wokie dope neurodiversity fuckers that I have one so I am a real autist and I still think that they talk shit. But I digress.

Let’s start by looking at some of the examples of autism promotion on Twitter on the #AutismAcceptanceWeek hashtag on Twitter that serve as examples of autism glamorisation.

Response: How can severely ill children & adults with seizures, non verbal and with severe gastroenterological symptoms be ‘ambitious and creative’?

Response: I picked this one as I find it interesting that they appropriated the ‘Authentic Self’ language from transgenderism. And if transgenderism is created by big pharma (it is) what does that say about autism?

Response: I don’t even know how to respond to this, other than to say the Greeks and the Romans did a lot of medical shit, where’s their descriptions of regressive autism? If it’s perfectly normal, I’m sure some upper class Greek or Roman would have had it happen to their child at some point.

Response: I can’t even respond to this except by throwing things. Do I even need to explain how this is grossly offensive to those of us suffering?

Response: There seems to an aversion to talking about those people who have to live in care homes because their autism is so bad. For some reason. Perhaps because it doesn’t fit the narrative?

And finally, someone accused me of not being autistic because I disagree with their glamourisation narrative, which is the only argument these people actually have. I then got blocked. If I wasn’t autistic I’d probably be skipping in the fields blissfully unaware of all this neurodiversity nonsense, because it wouldn’t affect my life. And I probably wouldn’t be arguing on Twitter because I would have things like an actual sex life. So there you go.

Here’s the screenshot from my notifications for posterity:

(Twitter brings out the worst in me. I swear.)

Now for the serious bit. Neurodiversity is extremely easy to debunk. Everyone agrees that severe anxiety, sensory issues and gastroenterological symptoms are a bad thing. Yet when you put the label ‘autism’ on those things, they are magically good? Blatant nonsense. Some neurodiversity promoters (who are not always autistic themselves, by the way) like to talk about the ‘special talents’ of autistic people, or what I call the ‘autistic savant’ trope. Some of the neurodiversity brigade then object to this and claim that autistic people aren’t actually savants.

But the whole concept of neurodiversity is based upon the ‘autistic savant’ trope, whether they admit it or not. In order to make the case that autism is actually a good thing, you need to be able to point to something objective that makes autism actually good. As I said, you can’t point to, say, gastroenterological symptoms and try to glamourise those, because everyone would (rightly) think you were insane. So you have to pick something else. Which means the only fall back is the autistic savant trope – that autistic people have some sort of unique intelligence due to their special interests.

Claiming neurodiversity is good on this basis is also a catastrophic failure, of course. The most obvious reason it is a failure is it ignores the vast majority of autistic people, 78% of whom don’t work, many of whom are non-verbal in care homes because their autism is so severe. These people’s suffering is never mentioned by the neurodiversity activists. They clearly are not contributing to humanity with their special talents. When you have to erase 80% of a thing to make the other 20% of a thing look good, you are clearly off to a non starter.

But even in the case of high-functioning autism, this argument is nonsense, because absolutely everything an autistic person has done in their lives would be easier if they didn’t have autism. For example, if an autistic person lucks out and gets offered a job, it would have been much easier to get a job without autism. Even something as simple as holding eye contact in a job interview has to be forced and managed if you are autistic whereas a normal person would do it automatically. And that is very simple, straightforward, and easy to understand example. If I had to explain how many times sensory issues and anxiety have prevented me from doing things that I could have achieved, or destroyed my enjoyment of things, we would be here all day.

Unfortunately, for psychological reasons, the ‘neurodiversity’ narrative is appealing to some people with autism. This is because it allows them to psychologically compensate for what they cannot have because of autism (healthy sexual relationships, for example, or peace of mind due to horrific anxiety and sensory issues) by flipping the script and claiming that their autism actually gives them a deeper understanding of the world or makes them special.

Non-autistic people often promote it on the level of ‘be kind’, or naively believe it’s just about ‘diversity’. In some cases, they have been misled by propaganda, and believe in the ‘autistic savant’ trope. This is why stuff like The Big Bang Theory is so destructive as it portrays this very narrow view of autism as being ‘savant with a PhD who is maybe just a bit weird and has problems getting laid, and oh by the way is extremely witty and cutting’. (I have a pet conspiracy theory that TBBT is actually some form of big pharma propaganda.)

Or perhaps, people believe that autistic people may as well believe neurodiversity than see the truth of how bad we have it. They don’t believe our lives are actually good, and there is no way in hell they would be us, but they will let us blather on about how special we are and nod along because they think it may ease our psychological burdens. Clayton Atreus, a paraplegic who later committed suicide, highlights this phenomena.

You’ll notice that I haven’t mentioned the vaccine-autism link in this argument. That’s because everything above does not require the vaccine-autism link. Autism could be 100% genetic, and neurodiversity would still be nonsense.

Here’s the antivaxxer bit.

We need some antivaxxer counter propaganda, to oppose this godawful narrative that is glamourising the horrors of autism. I propose ‘Autism is Unacceptable Week’, where we highlight the facts that the neurodiversity brigade want you to ignore.

For example:

Establishment Imprison Autistic Man and Force Him to Have Covid-19 ‘Vaccine’

I don’t usually put out short commentaries/news type posts as I generally like to keep the blog as a place for long posts or protest coverage. However in this case, this news story is so worthy of note, and I have seen very little on it out there so far, and I am so angry about it, that I am making an exception.

The media today in the United Kingdom have just reported the below story, headlined:

Autistic son, 32, of anti-vaxxers who was one of the children in disgraced Andrew Wakefield’s MMR vaccine study 25 years ago is ordered to have Covid jab by court in Jersey

The article goes on to say:

The 32-year-old, who can’t be named for legal reasons, spent lockdown in his room at a care home because his parents refused to let him be vaccinated, Jersey’s Royal Court heard.

To translate this from mainstream media bullshit to English, the care home locked him in his room because his parents did not want him to be harmed by a ‘vaccine’. When he had already been harmed by vaccines. His parents should have had him removed from the care home, if possible, although some of these care homes have put obstacles in the way of getting people out and I don’t know if that’s the case here.

Jersey’s Royal Court granted the vaccination order, saying that it was ‘the right best interests decision’ for B who had been in ‘groundhog day’.

In other words, this man is stuck because the care home won’t let him out because he’s not jabbed so they want to force him to be jabbed. When they could get rid of the problem by simply not treating him as subhuman for not being jabbed.

This also involves denying him treatments, according to the Times:

He is not able to attend the treatments, such as hydrotherapy, which soothe him, or the ones that cheer him, such as watching the Christmas lights being turned on, stuck in what his nurse describes as a “shrunken world”.

These people make me sick.

Circuit Boards and Hammers: Thoughts on Vaccination Abolition

Introduction

Vaccination is touted as the biggest success of modern medicine. Fundamentally, it it seen as a victory over nature, where the powers of man’s inventiveness have conquered the evils of disease. Unfortunately, such ‘victories’ over nature are more hubris than reality.

Vaccination as Victory over Nature?

“Let us not, however, flatter ourselves overmuch on account of our human victories over nature. For each such victory nature takes its revenge on us. Each victory, it is true, in the first place brings about the results we expected, but in the second and third places it has quite different, unforeseen effects which only too often cancel the first.”

Friedrich Engels

The official narrative on vaccination is as follows.

In the past, human beings died of preventable diseases because the pathogens that they were exposed to were inherently extremely deadly. This mass death could not have been significantly prevented by factors such as better living conditions or diet, even if those would have had a positive effect. It wasn’t until the introduction of vaccination, starting with Edward Jenner’s smallpox vaccine, that the mass death caused by disease began to subside. The introduction of mass vaccination for diseases like polio, measles, etc. in the 20th century saved millions of lives. The further development of vaccination to encompass influenza, rotavirus, etc., are a positive development for humanity and we should try to develop vaccines for all human diseases. This includes things like HIV and RSV. mRNA vaccines, as developed for Covid-19, are a new and highly promising step forward in the development of the technology. Vaccines are safe and effective outside of very rare cases of anaphylaxis. Taking any vaccine that you are offered is the best thing that you can do for your health.

So, what are the problems of this official narrative? There is data from alternative sources demonstrating that at least some of these claims are clearly false. For example: measles vaccination was only introduced after measles mortality had massively declined and thus vaccination could not have been responsible for the decline. Newer vaccinations, such as the Gardasil vaccine, have clearly unfavourable risk-benefit profiles, to the extent that some countries have stopped using it, or do not include it on official vaccine schedules.

However, I would like to go beyond this and state that there is a problem with the whole concept of vaccination. I use an analogy to illustrate the point. As it is a Computer Age analogy, hopefully, it should be understood by those most technology obsessed invokers of the Cult of Vaccination:

Vaccination is like trying to fix a circuit board with a hammer.

The reality is the human immune system is extremely complex and multifaceted. It has been developed by millions of years of Mother Nature to protect us from disease. It does that job superbly well, so long as the environment supports it, that is, that it is not undermined through poor living conditions, exposure to toxic chemicals, and poor diet.

To give an idea of how complex the immune system actually is, we can look at the scientific literature. This article gives this description of immune response:

Immune cells sense infection and other environmental cues through a variety of extracellular and intracellular receptors. Ligation of these receptors leads to signaling cascades consisting of many dynamic processes including signal‐induced protein binding, phosphorylation, degradation, and nuclear localization. These signaling events lead to changes in gene expression, and subsequently to the production of both effector proteins required to combat infection and proteins involved in regulation of the ensuing, potentially host‐damaging, response. The number of molecular players or variables involved in any such activity can vary from hundreds to thousands, making immune responses immensely complex. This complexity is amplified by the multiscalar nature of the immune system, as these signaling and transcriptional responses occur in the context of diverse and dynamic cell–cell interactions.

Vaccination is essentially trying to ‘hack’ this extremely complex system through the extremely crude method of antigen and adjuvant injection. Vaccination sees the natural immune system as ‘insert A = get B’ or ‘insert needle = get antibodies = protection against disease’. The complex cascades of multiple interlinking factors are not present in this equation. Nor are factors such as route of exposure, and that injection of a dead/attenuated pathogen is a fundamentally different mechanism to the natural exposure which would be through, for example, aerosol. And here I am talking only of what we know or can surmise, because there is a large number of things about the immune response that we probably do not know.

There are certainly some individuals who are pushing vaccination for sinister motivations. An excellent example is Bill Gates, who is interested in vaccination as a means of depopulation. But the system of vaccination could not have gained such success in society without a massive degree of hubris on the part of scientists, governments, and everyone else in society who is going along with the vaccination narrative. Instead of being driven by the specific desire to do evil, they are blinded by the hubris of a victory that is impossible.

This hubris, of course, comes back around to us when we see massive levels of vaccination injury in our population. It is difficult to estimate how much vaccine injury there is in our population, given that all information about vaccine injury is suppressed. But there is enough evidence to link vaccination to a large number of health problems including autism, anxiety and mental health problems, autoimmune diseases, heart problems, brain inflammation, narcolepsy, and multiple other conditions.

A Note on the mRNA ‘Vaccines’

I trust nature more than I trust scientists like Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield

In some respects, the mRNA ‘vaccines’ do not belong here, as they are not vaccines by the actual definition of the term, however they are promoted as vaccines by the establishment.

The hubris discussion, however, is even more relevant when it comes to the mRNA concoctions. The hubris of traditional vaccination was bad enough, with the direct injection of an antigen and adjuvant, expecting the ‘hacking’ of the immune system to function effectively to create the antigen and not to have adverse long term reactions. The mRNA injections, on the other hand, mess with this system in an even deeper and more intrusive – and more dangerous – way by making the body produce the spike protein itself. This kind of immune hacking has caused disastrous consequences, with spike protein running rampant in the body and causing myocarditis, pericarditis, blood clots, and neurological injury, along with a massive amount of ‘sudden death‘ that is otherwise unexplained. The mRNA experiment is portrayed as, and considered to be by insane scientists, a ‘way cool’ experiment where they get to play God.

Conclusion

The concept of vaccination has always been a fundamentally flawed method to prevent disease. Instead of having to endure natural exposure to the pathogen, vaccination allows human beings to ‘cheat’ the process of gaining natural immunity through infection. In this way, ‘victory’ over disease can be declared. The price of this hubris is a skyrocketing of chronic illness.

Note: I was inspired to write this article by Toby Rogers and his piece on ‘Why I’m an Abolitionist’. This article is a massive expansion of something I dropped in the comments over at the uTobian substack.