What do you hope Trump does to the disabled?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not vote for Trump, and I do not like him. I am also the parent of a child with relatively severe autism. To the modest extent that my experience as an autism parent bears on my political views, it is a push away from the Democrats and toward the Republicans. From my vantage point, the Democrats are (currently) the standard bearers for the legacy system which has made stunningly little progress in improving the lives of the severely autistic. I attribute this to a mix of regulatory/cultural capture and sentimentality that simply does not exist on the right. I am also painfully aware that the Democrats have challenged laws that would prohibit disability-motivated abortions, something that just really saddens me. The Dems seem to think it's self evident that they are the good guys vis-a-vis the disabled, but there are at least some of us out there who smile and nod along but silently scream in their heads. I believe that, if you teleported Democratic voters from 1995 to the present, many who take stock of the current landscape would agree with me.

WTF? I’m a Democratic voter from 1995 who didn’t need to be teleported here. I don’t agree with you. You’re deluding yourself.

It means your head has been up your azz since 1995.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not vote for Trump, and I do not like him. I am also the parent of a child with relatively severe autism. To the modest extent that my experience as an autism parent bears on my political views, it is a push away from the Democrats and toward the Republicans. From my vantage point, the Democrats are (currently) the standard bearers for the legacy system which has made stunningly little progress in improving the lives of the severely autistic. I attribute this to a mix of regulatory/cultural capture and sentimentality that simply does not exist on the right. I am also painfully aware that the Democrats have challenged laws that would prohibit disability-motivated abortions, something that just really saddens me. The Dems seem to think it's self evident that they are the good guys vis-a-vis the disabled, but there are at least some of us out there who smile and nod along but silently scream in their heads. I believe that, if you teleported Democratic voters from 1995 to the present, many who take stock of the current landscape would agree with me.

This is ridiculous.

And you are about to see things for your kid get a WHOLE LOT WORSE.


The Medicaid cuts will be devastating.

I am the person you are quoting. It is this kind of condescension and paternalism that is causing the Democratic party to lose elections to buffoons.

No. Take some personal responsibility for your own ignorance, lack of education and critical thinking ability.

Two people have explained to you that you are comparing democrats “not doing enough” for people with autism to the republicans who, in Project 2025, said people with autism cannot think for themselves and can’t have free will. Anyone who has listened to what they’ve said about autism and disabled people in general and who read history, know you are a fool to compare the two parties as equally bad.

We are tired of coddling your type with gentle education because you DO NOT LISTEN to anything anyone says no matter the delivery. If we’re nice, it’s “patronizing”. If we’re informative, we’re “lecturing”, if we’re firm, we’re “mean.”

No one who understands history and reads real news is confused when we use the word eugenics and tell you the GOP is a threat o your child.

I am the person you are quoting. You misunderstand me. My concern with the Democrats is *not* that they are not doing enough for autism-- I'd imagine they are more generous funding programs, and probably by a lot. My concern is that they have fused the discourse around autism with cultural issues that, in my view, hobbles legitimate discourse. It is increasingly unfashionable to discuss autism as a disability; people like to throw terms around line "neurodivergence" and expound upon the beauty of the condition. I understand this impulse, but the reality is that, for many people, autism very much is a disability and one that entails incredible heartbreak. If you're on Reddit, there is a community for people with more severe forms of autism who can still type; it is a common occurrence to see them rage against quirky influencers who claim to have autism and "explain" that it is not a disability. This impulse--which, if it's political, probably resides more on the left than the right-- chills fresh thinking on how to attenuate the difficulties of the severe forms of autism. On top of that, legitimate concerns about being seen as "anti-vax" dissuades medicinal chemists and other scientists from working on autism therapeutics. Again, this is a function of discourse that, to the extent it's political, doesn't exist on the right.

Your repeated references to eugenics also illustrates the issue. I take it you regard people on the right as somehow sympathetic to eugenics in a way people on the left aren't. That doesn't jibe with me (again, abortion statutes and all that), but your reflexive assumption that I must be misinformed to regard it as a red herring is telling. The extent to which autism is a function of genetics at all is a fascinating scientific question. Surely, the condition is influenced by genetics, but no serious scientist would say that it is *determined* by genes alone; clearly, there are environmental triggers. My concern is that Democrats' thinking on the subject is ossifying into something like yours for political reasons, again, to draw a sharp contract with Trump and RFK or something.

To reiterate, I don't actually see this as a political issue, and I am certainly no Trump sympathizer. But you are far more tone deaf than you know, and I think the Democrats are legitimately losing support over this issue and failing to appreciate that the issue just isn't stupidity or something failure of communication.

Not sure who you are following but the Dems I follow are loud about protecting autism as a disability category and not minimizing it because some high-functioning are merely quirky

Those Democrats are wasting American resources.

We’d be much better as a society if we had people bear the cost for their problems. Give each American father some chunk of government spending under his name, the “Dad Grant”. If nothing happens, it goes into his retirement account. If his wife has a disabled kid, that’s what pays for the kid’s care up to the amount distributed. Anything more, he has to bear the cost. Or he can give the kid to the Government to do whatever and keep the Dad Grant for himself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not vote for Trump, and I do not like him. I am also the parent of a child with relatively severe autism. To the modest extent that my experience as an autism parent bears on my political views, it is a push away from the Democrats and toward the Republicans. From my vantage point, the Democrats are (currently) the standard bearers for the legacy system which has made stunningly little progress in improving the lives of the severely autistic. I attribute this to a mix of regulatory/cultural capture and sentimentality that simply does not exist on the right. I am also painfully aware that the Democrats have challenged laws that would prohibit disability-motivated abortions, something that just really saddens me. The Dems seem to think it's self evident that they are the good guys vis-a-vis the disabled, but there are at least some of us out there who smile and nod along but silently scream in their heads. I believe that, if you teleported Democratic voters from 1995 to the present, many who take stock of the current landscape would agree with me.

This is ridiculous.

And you are about to see things for your kid get a WHOLE LOT WORSE.


The Medicaid cuts will be devastating.

I am the person you are quoting. It is this kind of condescension and paternalism that is causing the Democratic party to lose elections to buffoons.

No. Take some personal responsibility for your own ignorance, lack of education and critical thinking ability.

Two people have explained to you that you are comparing democrats “not doing enough” for people with autism to the republicans who, in Project 2025, said people with autism cannot think for themselves and can’t have free will. Anyone who has listened to what they’ve said about autism and disabled people in general and who read history, know you are a fool to compare the two parties as equally bad.

We are tired of coddling your type with gentle education because you DO NOT LISTEN to anything anyone says no matter the delivery. If we’re nice, it’s “patronizing”. If we’re informative, we’re “lecturing”, if we’re firm, we’re “mean.”

No one who understands history and reads real news is confused when we use the word eugenics and tell you the GOP is a threat o your child.

I am the person you are quoting. You misunderstand me. My concern with the Democrats is *not* that they are not doing enough for autism-- I'd imagine they are more generous funding programs, and probably by a lot. My concern is that they have fused the discourse around autism with cultural issues that, in my view, hobbles legitimate discourse. It is increasingly unfashionable to discuss autism as a disability; people like to throw terms around line "neurodivergence" and expound upon the beauty of the condition. I understand this impulse, but the reality is that, for many people, autism very much is a disability and one that entails incredible heartbreak. If you're on Reddit, there is a community for people with more severe forms of autism who can still type; it is a common occurrence to see them rage against quirky influencers who claim to have autism and "explain" that it is not a disability. This impulse--which, if it's political, probably resides more on the left than the right-- chills fresh thinking on how to attenuate the difficulties of the severe forms of autism. On top of that, legitimate concerns about being seen as "anti-vax" dissuades medicinal chemists and other scientists from working on autism therapeutics. Again, this is a function of discourse that, to the extent it's political, doesn't exist on the right.

Your repeated references to eugenics also illustrates the issue. I take it you regard people on the right as somehow sympathetic to eugenics in a way people on the left aren't. That doesn't jibe with me (again, abortion statutes and all that), but your reflexive assumption that I must be misinformed to regard it as a red herring is telling. The extent to which autism is a function of genetics at all is a fascinating scientific question. Surely, the condition is influenced by genetics, but no serious scientist would say that it is *determined* by genes alone; clearly, there are environmental triggers. My concern is that Democrats' thinking on the subject is ossifying into something like yours for political reasons, again, to draw a sharp contract with Trump and RFK or something.

To reiterate, I don't actually see this as a political issue, and I am certainly no Trump sympathizer. But you are far more tone deaf than you know, and I think the Democrats are legitimately losing support over this issue and failing to appreciate that the issue just isn't stupidity or something failure of communication.

Not sure who you are following but the Dems I follow are loud about protecting autism as a disability category and not minimizing it because some high-functioning are merely quirky

Those Democrats are wasting American resources.

We’d be much better as a society if we had people bear the cost for their problems. Give each American father some chunk of government spending under his name, the “Dad Grant”. If nothing happens, it goes into his retirement account. If his wife has a disabled kid, that’s what pays for the kid’s care up to the amount distributed. Anything more, he has to bear the cost. Or he can give the kid to the Government to do whatever and keep the Dad Grant for himself.

What about sociopaths, like you? Can we adopt a policy that rounds up sociopaths for medical experiments since they typically add little of positive value in civilized societies?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MAGA want people with disabilities gone because they are just a suck on the system. They contribute nothing.

It's amazing to me, because most of the people I know who voted MAGA have disabilities and don't realize they are voting against themselves and their children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not vote for Trump, and I do not like him. I am also the parent of a child with relatively severe autism. To the modest extent that my experience as an autism parent bears on my political views, it is a push away from the Democrats and toward the Republicans. From my vantage point, the Democrats are (currently) the standard bearers for the legacy system which has made stunningly little progress in improving the lives of the severely autistic. I attribute this to a mix of regulatory/cultural capture and sentimentality that simply does not exist on the right. I am also painfully aware that the Democrats have challenged laws that would prohibit disability-motivated abortions, something that just really saddens me. The Dems seem to think it's self evident that they are the good guys vis-a-vis the disabled, but there are at least some of us out there who smile and nod along but silently scream in their heads. I believe that, if you teleported Democratic voters from 1995 to the present, many who take stock of the current landscape would agree with me.

This is ridiculous.

And you are about to see things for your kid get a WHOLE LOT WORSE.


The Medicaid cuts will be devastating.

I am the person you are quoting. It is this kind of condescension and paternalism that is causing the Democratic party to lose elections to buffoons.

No. Take some personal responsibility for your own ignorance, lack of education and critical thinking ability.

Two people have explained to you that you are comparing democrats “not doing enough” for people with autism to the republicans who, in Project 2025, said people with autism cannot think for themselves and can’t have free will. Anyone who has listened to what they’ve said about autism and disabled people in general and who read history, know you are a fool to compare the two parties as equally bad.

We are tired of coddling your type with gentle education because you DO NOT LISTEN to anything anyone says no matter the delivery. If we’re nice, it’s “patronizing”. If we’re informative, we’re “lecturing”, if we’re firm, we’re “mean.”

No one who understands history and reads real news is confused when we use the word eugenics and tell you the GOP is a threat o your child.

I am the person you are quoting. You misunderstand me. My concern with the Democrats is *not* that they are not doing enough for autism-- I'd imagine they are more generous funding programs, and probably by a lot. My concern is that they have fused the discourse around autism with cultural issues that, in my view, hobbles legitimate discourse. It is increasingly unfashionable to discuss autism as a disability; people like to throw terms around line "neurodivergence" and expound upon the beauty of the condition. I understand this impulse, but the reality is that, for many people, autism very much is a disability and one that entails incredible heartbreak. If you're on Reddit, there is a community for people with more severe forms of autism who can still type; it is a common occurrence to see them rage against quirky influencers who claim to have autism and "explain" that it is not a disability. This impulse--which, if it's political, probably resides more on the left than the right-- chills fresh thinking on how to attenuate the difficulties of the severe forms of autism. On top of that, legitimate concerns about being seen as "anti-vax" dissuades medicinal chemists and other scientists from working on autism therapeutics. Again, this is a function of discourse that, to the extent it's political, doesn't exist on the right.

Your repeated references to eugenics also illustrates the issue. I take it you regard people on the right as somehow sympathetic to eugenics in a way people on the left aren't. That doesn't jibe with me (again, abortion statutes and all that), but your reflexive assumption that I must be misinformed to regard it as a red herring is telling. The extent to which autism is a function of genetics at all is a fascinating scientific question. Surely, the condition is influenced by genetics, but no serious scientist would say that it is *determined* by genes alone; clearly, there are environmental triggers. My concern is that Democrats' thinking on the subject is ossifying into something like yours for political reasons, again, to draw a sharp contract with Trump and RFK or something.

To reiterate, I don't actually see this as a political issue, and I am certainly no Trump sympathizer. But you are far more tone deaf than you know, and I think the Democrats are legitimately losing support over this issue and failing to appreciate that the issue just isn't stupidity or something failure of communication.

Not sure who you are following but the Dems I follow are loud about protecting autism as a disability category and not minimizing it because some high-functioning are merely quirky

Those Democrats are wasting American resources.

We’d be much better as a society if we had people bear the cost for their problems. Give each American father some chunk of government spending under his name, the “Dad Grant”. If nothing happens, it goes into his retirement account. If his wife has a disabled kid, that’s what pays for the kid’s care up to the amount distributed. Anything more, he has to bear the cost. Or he can give the kid to the Government to do whatever and keep the Dad Grant for himself.

I'm the poster who started this current back and forth. Just chiming into say this "Dad Grant" guy is def not me, and I find it uncaring and cringe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not vote for Trump, and I do not like him. I am also the parent of a child with relatively severe autism. To the modest extent that my experience as an autism parent bears on my political views, it is a push away from the Democrats and toward the Republicans. From my vantage point, the Democrats are (currently) the standard bearers for the legacy system which has made stunningly little progress in improving the lives of the severely autistic. I attribute this to a mix of regulatory/cultural capture and sentimentality that simply does not exist on the right. I am also painfully aware that the Democrats have challenged laws that would prohibit disability-motivated abortions, something that just really saddens me. The Dems seem to think it's self evident that they are the good guys vis-a-vis the disabled, but there are at least some of us out there who smile and nod along but silently scream in their heads. I believe that, if you teleported Democratic voters from 1995 to the present, many who take stock of the current landscape would agree with me.

This is ridiculous.

And you are about to see things for your kid get a WHOLE LOT WORSE.


The Medicaid cuts will be devastating.

I am the person you are quoting. It is this kind of condescension and paternalism that is causing the Democratic party to lose elections to buffoons.

No. Take some personal responsibility for your own ignorance, lack of education and critical thinking ability.

Two people have explained to you that you are comparing democrats “not doing enough” for people with autism to the republicans who, in Project 2025, said people with autism cannot think for themselves and can’t have free will. Anyone who has listened to what they’ve said about autism and disabled people in general and who read history, know you are a fool to compare the two parties as equally bad.

We are tired of coddling your type with gentle education because you DO NOT LISTEN to anything anyone says no matter the delivery. If we’re nice, it’s “patronizing”. If we’re informative, we’re “lecturing”, if we’re firm, we’re “mean.”

No one who understands history and reads real news is confused when we use the word eugenics and tell you the GOP is a threat o your child.

I am the person you are quoting. You misunderstand me. My concern with the Democrats is *not* that they are not doing enough for autism-- I'd imagine they are more generous funding programs, and probably by a lot. My concern is that they have fused the discourse around autism with cultural issues that, in my view, hobbles legitimate discourse. It is increasingly unfashionable to discuss autism as a disability; people like to throw terms around line "neurodivergence" and expound upon the beauty of the condition. I understand this impulse, but the reality is that, for many people, autism very much is a disability and one that entails incredible heartbreak. If you're on Reddit, there is a community for people with more severe forms of autism who can still type; it is a common occurrence to see them rage against quirky influencers who claim to have autism and "explain" that it is not a disability. This impulse--which, if it's political, probably resides more on the left than the right-- chills fresh thinking on how to attenuate the difficulties of the severe forms of autism. On top of that, legitimate concerns about being seen as "anti-vax" dissuades medicinal chemists and other scientists from working on autism therapeutics. Again, this is a function of discourse that, to the extent it's political, doesn't exist on the right.

Your repeated references to eugenics also illustrates the issue. I take it you regard people on the right as somehow sympathetic to eugenics in a way people on the left aren't. That doesn't jibe with me (again, abortion statutes and all that), but your reflexive assumption that I must be misinformed to regard it as a red herring is telling. The extent to which autism is a function of genetics at all is a fascinating scientific question. Surely, the condition is influenced by genetics, but no serious scientist would say that it is *determined* by genes alone; clearly, there are environmental triggers. My concern is that Democrats' thinking on the subject is ossifying into something like yours for political reasons, again, to draw a sharp contract with Trump and RFK or something.

To reiterate, I don't actually see this as a political issue, and I am certainly no Trump sympathizer. But you are far more tone deaf than you know, and I think the Democrats are legitimately losing support over this issue and failing to appreciate that the issue just isn't stupidity or something failure of communication.

I'm not the person you're responding to, and I'm not sure why you're trying to thread this needle. Absolutely your kid is disabled and not quirky. I disagree on the therapeutics, you can't fix stupid, that's the issue. Yes, it's awful for the parent, but this is an not a new issue, just a shift in name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not vote for Trump, and I do not like him. I am also the parent of a child with relatively severe autism. To the modest extent that my experience as an autism parent bears on my political views, it is a push away from the Democrats and toward the Republicans. From my vantage point, the Democrats are (currently) the standard bearers for the legacy system which has made stunningly little progress in improving the lives of the severely autistic. I attribute this to a mix of regulatory/cultural capture and sentimentality that simply does not exist on the right. I am also painfully aware that the Democrats have challenged laws that would prohibit disability-motivated abortions, something that just really saddens me. The Dems seem to think it's self evident that they are the good guys vis-a-vis the disabled, but there are at least some of us out there who smile and nod along but silently scream in their heads. I believe that, if you teleported Democratic voters from 1995 to the present, many who take stock of the current landscape would agree with me.

This is ridiculous.

And you are about to see things for your kid get a WHOLE LOT WORSE.


The Medicaid cuts will be devastating.

I am the person you are quoting. It is this kind of condescension and paternalism that is causing the Democratic party to lose elections to buffoons.

No. Take some personal responsibility for your own ignorance, lack of education and critical thinking ability.

Two people have explained to you that you are comparing democrats “not doing enough” for people with autism to the republicans who, in Project 2025, said people with autism cannot think for themselves and can’t have free will. Anyone who has listened to what they’ve said about autism and disabled people in general and who read history, know you are a fool to compare the two parties as equally bad.

We are tired of coddling your type with gentle education because you DO NOT LISTEN to anything anyone says no matter the delivery. If we’re nice, it’s “patronizing”. If we’re informative, we’re “lecturing”, if we’re firm, we’re “mean.”

No one who understands history and reads real news is confused when we use the word eugenics and tell you the GOP is a threat o your child.

I am the person you are quoting. You misunderstand me. My concern with the Democrats is *not* that they are not doing enough for autism-- I'd imagine they are more generous funding programs, and probably by a lot. My concern is that they have fused the discourse around autism with cultural issues that, in my view, hobbles legitimate discourse. It is increasingly unfashionable to discuss autism as a disability; people like to throw terms around line "neurodivergence" and expound upon the beauty of the condition. I understand this impulse, but the reality is that, for many people, autism very much is a disability and one that entails incredible heartbreak. If you're on Reddit, there is a community for people with more severe forms of autism who can still type; it is a common occurrence to see them rage against quirky influencers who claim to have autism and "explain" that it is not a disability. This impulse--which, if it's political, probably resides more on the left than the right-- chills fresh thinking on how to attenuate the difficulties of the severe forms of autism. On top of that, legitimate concerns about being seen as "anti-vax" dissuades medicinal chemists and other scientists from working on autism therapeutics. Again, this is a function of discourse that, to the extent it's political, doesn't exist on the right.

Your repeated references to eugenics also illustrates the issue. I take it you regard people on the right as somehow sympathetic to eugenics in a way people on the left aren't. That doesn't jibe with me (again, abortion statutes and all that), but your reflexive assumption that I must be misinformed to regard it as a red herring is telling. The extent to which autism is a function of genetics at all is a fascinating scientific question. Surely, the condition is influenced by genetics, but no serious scientist would say that it is *determined* by genes alone; clearly, there are environmental triggers. My concern is that Democrats' thinking on the subject is ossifying into something like yours for political reasons, again, to draw a sharp contract with Trump and RFK or something.

To reiterate, I don't actually see this as a political issue, and I am certainly no Trump sympathizer. But you are far more tone deaf than you know, and I think the Democrats are legitimately losing support over this issue and failing to appreciate that the issue just isn't stupidity or something failure of communication.

I'm not the person you're responding to, and I'm not sure why you're trying to thread this needle. Absolutely your kid is disabled and not quirky. I disagree on the therapeutics, you can't fix stupid, that's the issue. Yes, it's awful for the parent, but this is an not a new issue, just a shift in name.

Thanks for responding. What do you mean that you disagree on the therapeutics? Do you disagree descriptively that research is being chilled? Or do you disagree normatively that there is value in researching potential therapeutics?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not vote for Trump, and I do not like him. I am also the parent of a child with relatively severe autism. To the modest extent that my experience as an autism parent bears on my political views, it is a push away from the Democrats and toward the Republicans. From my vantage point, the Democrats are (currently) the standard bearers for the legacy system which has made stunningly little progress in improving the lives of the severely autistic. I attribute this to a mix of regulatory/cultural capture and sentimentality that simply does not exist on the right. I am also painfully aware that the Democrats have challenged laws that would prohibit disability-motivated abortions, something that just really saddens me. The Dems seem to think it's self evident that they are the good guys vis-a-vis the disabled, but there are at least some of us out there who smile and nod along but silently scream in their heads. I believe that, if you teleported Democratic voters from 1995 to the present, many who take stock of the current landscape would agree with me.

This is ridiculous.

And you are about to see things for your kid get a WHOLE LOT WORSE.


The Medicaid cuts will be devastating.

I am the person you are quoting. It is this kind of condescension and paternalism that is causing the Democratic party to lose elections to buffoons.

No. Take some personal responsibility for your own ignorance, lack of education and critical thinking ability.

Two people have explained to you that you are comparing democrats “not doing enough” for people with autism to the republicans who, in Project 2025, said people with autism cannot think for themselves and can’t have free will. Anyone who has listened to what they’ve said about autism and disabled people in general and who read history, know you are a fool to compare the two parties as equally bad.

We are tired of coddling your type with gentle education because you DO NOT LISTEN to anything anyone says no matter the delivery. If we’re nice, it’s “patronizing”. If we’re informative, we’re “lecturing”, if we’re firm, we’re “mean.”

No one who understands history and reads real news is confused when we use the word eugenics and tell you the GOP is a threat o your child.

I am the person you are quoting. You misunderstand me. My concern with the Democrats is *not* that they are not doing enough for autism-- I'd imagine they are more generous funding programs, and probably by a lot. My concern is that they have fused the discourse around autism with cultural issues that, in my view, hobbles legitimate discourse. It is increasingly unfashionable to discuss autism as a disability; people like to throw terms around line "neurodivergence" and expound upon the beauty of the condition. I understand this impulse, but the reality is that, for many people, autism very much is a disability and one that entails incredible heartbreak. If you're on Reddit, there is a community for people with more severe forms of autism who can still type; it is a common occurrence to see them rage against quirky influencers who claim to have autism and "explain" that it is not a disability. This impulse--which, if it's political, probably resides more on the left than the right-- chills fresh thinking on how to attenuate the difficulties of the severe forms of autism. On top of that, legitimate concerns about being seen as "anti-vax" dissuades medicinal chemists and other scientists from working on autism therapeutics. Again, this is a function of discourse that, to the extent it's political, doesn't exist on the right.

Your repeated references to eugenics also illustrates the issue. I take it you regard people on the right as somehow sympathetic to eugenics in a way people on the left aren't. That doesn't jibe with me (again, abortion statutes and all that), but your reflexive assumption that I must be misinformed to regard it as a red herring is telling. The extent to which autism is a function of genetics at all is a fascinating scientific question. Surely, the condition is influenced by genetics, but no serious scientist would say that it is *determined* by genes alone; clearly, there are environmental triggers. My concern is that Democrats' thinking on the subject is ossifying into something like yours for political reasons, again, to draw a sharp contract with Trump and RFK or something.

To reiterate, I don't actually see this as a political issue, and I am certainly no Trump sympathizer. But you are far more tone deaf than you know, and I think the Democrats are legitimately losing support over this issue and failing to appreciate that the issue just isn't stupidity or something failure of communication.

You sound like ChatGPT, but I’ll make one attempt to respond anyway. Just one.

You are upset that the profession of psychology has broadened the definition of autism. You are upset that people are encouraging acceptance of differences, even when they’re not obvious. You are upset that internet influencers have found that pop psychology sells? I agree with you on the latter.

Autism is a disability. It can be modest, or it can be severe. It’s called a spectrum. It’s is both a disability and neurodivergence.

My rage is focused on the DEI rollback because my “low needs” kid now can’t get what little support they needed to succeed in school and their trajectory and lifetime earning potential just changed. My “low needs” kid is already having an anxiety about RFK’s “therapy camps.”

I have zero reason to be angry at democrats, the medical field, or psychologists. We have learned a lot about autism in the past 20 years. That could have continued.

I have no reason in the world to think that a guy who tortured animals in his basement, killed a bear in Central Park and tried to hide it, whose own family called him a psychopath and begged America not to hire him, and has no medical background whatsoever, who has repeatedly cited junk fake studies, and believes in “therapy camps” is going to find a “reason” or a “cure” that previously funded and seriously staffed studies didn’t.

Any democrat who was “turned away” from the party over this is being manipulated like Jill Stein voters.