Search This Blog

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

A Response to Moi?

Some days back I wrote a post about not choosing sides in the autism community . I argued there were too many variables and points of view, most of which carry validity, in order for many of us to attach ourselves to one single philosophy. It doesn't mean I don't have a leaning or preference for some positions over others. But that I don't want to be locked in or pigeonholed by a single ideology before Iv'e had time to consider them all fully. If that's even possible. And as time goes on I find myself gravitating towards a 'middle road' for want of a better description.

Today an autism mum/scientist/fellow feminist (amongst other labels) whose opinions I normally respect posted this (see below) on her informative blog. I can't help feeling it may be a response to my post. If not directly,  it still raises an interesting counter argument to the points made so I reproduce it here for others to reflect and comment on should they feel inclined.


  1. I think Emily would have referenced you as bloggers etiquette requires if that was the case.
    I'm like you, If I find out that someone I respected is a vax-blamer, it's akin to learning they are a scientologist. It's not that I don't remain open to hearing some scientifically evaluated and empirical reviewed proof that something may cause Autism, it's just that I'm not prepared to take the word of "natural" over a Professor of epidemiology from the Mayo clinic.
    I also think that the earth is round and it revolves around the sun, we are descended from apes, man did walk on the moon in 1969 and the Twin Towers were hit by aeroplanes piloted by Terrorists - but hey I'm gullible that way.

  2. Hi Hammie
    Perhaps you are right, I'm not so sure.
    I think all those things too BTW. x

  3. Okay, if there was a way for me to "like" Hammie's comment, I would. The last paragraph made me giggle. Thank you.

    I'm sorry it sounded like this other post was referring to TTT.... For what it's worth, I've been *lurking* for some time, reading about this whole hoopla with great interest. I've been following the links you've posted, read the comments and all that.

    I don't feel nearly informed enough to give a properly thought out opinion of my own (especially not with my 15 month old daughter suddenly deciding she's a "party girl" and wanting to stay up all hours of the night!! Someone kill me now).

    But I have to say, of all the opinions I've read, yours seem to be the most thought out and OPEN, and is hence, the one I most agree with.

  4. Thanks MM, that's very kind.

  5. Heh heh. I don't know what to say. I've been starting all sorts of fights these last couple weeks. But I am a little disheartened by the idea that some people choose to set ground rules before having any sort of discourse. Civil discourse just cannot equal silence. If I yell, does that mean I hate? Does that mean I'm disrespectful? Or are we all just very emotionally charged because we are all coming from different places, and we're very passionate about our differing opinions? At what point do we say we are going to give our fellow human beings the benefit of the doubt, and even when we are seriously offended, we will continue to try to communicate with one another?

    (Shrug) to each, their own, honestly. But as far as I'm concerned, my blog rules are, you know, try to be honest. Haha, that's my one line, and it's a little blurry. We won't get anywhere unless we're willing to respond to those who anger, offend, insult, and disappoint us, in my opinion.

  6. Yep SS. Honesty, but always better when coupled with integrity. By that I mean that opinion is one based on having really thought about a gven issue and being honest with yourself about what is driving your position. That's a tough call, and I fall short on this criteria, just like everyone else.