In Which A Comment On An LA Times Autism Story Triggers A Shitstorm

Sometimes things happen on the internet. And sometimes the only way you can adequately explain what happened is by using the internet.

Take this bizarre series of events that sprang from an unfortunate and misguided comment left on an LA Times piece on the rise of Autism diagnoses over the past 20 years. The comment was left on the LA Times website by Sue Basko, an LA entertainment attorney.

Here you go:

Many parents today want a diagnosis of autism spectrum for their child, not only because there is a great deal of funding allocated for services for those children, as the news article explains, but also because this qualifies the child or family to collect a good SSI payment each month. If a family can get a few kids diagnosed with such things, the family can live off the payments. This was caused because welfare payments are so low, welfare is so hard to get, and intact families with both parents present do not qualify for welfare.

The real story would be to check out what percentage of families with child with an autism diagnose are collecting SSI. That is where you will find the real secret behind this "epidemic." Also, school districts that will receive extra funding for each child with autism will be far more likely to make such a diagnosis.

When I was a kid, there were kids who kept track of details, counted things, paid little attention to others, and seemed socially awkward. There were called future accountants.

I realize there are actual cases of autism, which seems to be a form of retardation. A lot of this spectrum stuff, I think, is based on wanting to collect available funds, without regard for the fact it stigmatizes the children for life to have such a diagnosis.

Anyone who writes a scathing reply should reveal if their family is collecting SSI or if they or their school is in any way collecting funds based on autism.

Wow, right? I mean, where do you even start?

Enter Liz Ditz, a California dyslexia consultant, autism advocate, writer, and editor. Ditz took offense to Basko's comment, and decided to address the many inaccuracies, misunderstandings, and insensitive remarks in a venue where Basko would be sure to see them. (To be clear, Ditz was hardly the only person who reached out to Basko to address the comment, and Basko claims to have received a pseudonymous voice mail message addressing her post.) Ditz left the following on Basko's public Facebook page (the page is oddly unavailable as of this writing):

Hi Sue. I read your comment yesterday at the LA times piece on autism, and was quite struck by your naiveté about autism.

To begin with, the word "retardation" isn't used any more. The Arc, the largest national advocacy organization, .... [Liz hit return here, falling victim to poor Facebook UI, left that comment, and started over]

First of all: I am not autistic, I do not have a child with autism, and I certainly have not applied for SSI for said non-existent child. Yes the school district in which I live educates children with autism, but since it's a poor and struggling district any marginal payment hardly makes up for the marginal cost of educating said children. I am however, and autism ally an advocate, and a co-founder and editor of The Thinking Person's Guide to Autism (TPGA). Our webpage is here:

http://thinkingautismguide.blogspot.com/

and our Facebook page is here:

http://www.facebook.com/thinkingpersonsguidetoautism

Second, it is too bad you got a pseudonymous message. However, as I said, your comment revealed an immense amount of ignorance about autism.

The arc (http://www.thearcorg/) now refers to "intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Autism is unrelated to retardation. Some autistics have intellectual disabilities, but many have average or above-average intellectual capacities. What we are finding is that even autistics with limited verbal language may have substantial intellectual ability. I'd be glad to share the research if you'd like.

On to SSI and your assertion that the autism diagnosis "qualifies the child or family to collect a good SSI payment each month" and that families can even "live off the payments" and "A lot of this spectrum stuff, I think, is based on wanting to collect available funds."

Your assertion is completely mistaken

I wonder if you had any idea, when you wrote that, how hateful -- vitriolic even-- your assertion would appear to parents of autistic children, or adults with autism?

I invite you and your readers here to come by TPGA and get to know real families dealing with autism and real adults with autism and how they live.

Ditz's comment was soon deleted from Basko's page. (See Ditz's blog post for a screenshot. She has written about this entire episode, much of which I am recounting here).

Ditz also dug up some information on SSI payments: "The princely sums autism parents can get from SSI, per child: the maximum is $674 per month." Some gravy train.

One would think that the Ditz-Basko episode might end there, as internet exchanges often fizzle after someone is adequately schooled.

Not quite.

I have been a follower of of Ditz on Twitter, and I received the following tweet from Basko yesterday:

I was unsure why Basko had reached out to me, as I had never had any interaction with Basko. I also wondered what the hell Liz Ditz did to provoke such a bizarre, accusatory message from someone I did not know. However, after taking a look at Basko's Twitter feed, I noticed that she had sent the same exact message to dozens upon dozens of Ditz's followers.

Plenty more where those came from.

Wow again, right? Who's harassing who, again? According to Ditz, her only 'interactions' with Basko were the initial post to Basko's Facebook page, Ditz's blog post, and a total of five tweets with mentions of Basko.

The last time I checked, discussing someone's very public comments on the internet publicly on the internet without invoking threats does not constitute stalking/harassment, and most certainly doesn't require the attention of the FBI. (Read Ditz's comments on the accusations here.)

I have a lot of sympathy for Ditz in this instance. I, too (along with many other fellow skeptics and rational, science-minded folks), have a hard time not speaking up when witnessing injustices, fallacious claims, propaganda, or general batshittery/douchebaggery. I just can't let it go unchecked. I'm sure Freud might have a lot to say about this compulsion, but so would Batman. Sometimes we are compelled to fight the good fight, regardless of glory or reward -- often a Sisyphean task on the internet.

A story like this would not be complete without a moral, would it? Well, you're in luck. The above episode inspired a post from writer/blogger Todd W. at Harpocrates Speaks, entitled How Not to Make a Fool of Yourself on the Internet: A PSA. The post is very much worth your time, and includes such advice as: Think Before You Type, Don't Go Orwell, Don't Deny You Said What You Said, Don't Libel Your Critics.

The great thing about such advice is that if we all followed the first rule, 'Think before you type,' there would be no need to follow the rest. And when such rules are broken, we often have no choice but to invoke Thomas Jefferson:

"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions."



For more discussion on this whole episode:

Left Brain Right Brain

Caffeinated Autism Mom

Colorado Moms

Louis CK: 'People Who Argue Against Evolution Sound Really Stupid'

From Louis CK:

This is an experpt or outtake from my new special "Louis C.K. Live at the Beacon Theater" which will be available exclusively on my website http://www.louisck.com starting on December 10th for 5 dollars via paypal. You can stream or download the special or both. It is only available on the site. This clip does not appear on the special. I feel very fat today.

Enjoy:

Rick Perry Doubles Down On Homophobic, Theocratic Ad, Still Doesn't Understand Things

Rick Perry responded to the public reaction to his homophobic theocratic abomination of a political ad in an interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN.

In the interview, he doubled down on his anti-gay rhetoric, stating that he'd reinstate DADT if elected. He also defended discrimination against gays by the Boy Scouts and Catholic charities.

When pressed by Wolf on the issue of DADT, Perry served up one of his famous 'gut feeling' answers (if you recall, when Perry was asked how he knows abstinence works, he replied that he knows it works, "from my own personal life."

BLITZER: But military commanders tell me, in the past few months since the policy has changed, they’ve had no problems. Including the commandant of the Marine Corps, who was originally opposed.

PERRY: Well, I’m just telling you the members of the military I talked to, when this was being talked about, I didn’t talk to anyone who was for it…

When pressed on the topic of Obama's 'war on religion,' Perry didn't fare much better, and resorted to McCarthy-esque absurdity, ignoring the many instances of Obama publicly embracing religion.

PERRY: We’ve got a federal judge, for instance, in San Antonio that said these kids can’t say an invocation at school. I mean, they say you can’t even use the word “invocation” at their commencement.

BLITZER: Is that President Obama’s war on religion?

PERRY: I’m just giving you some examples of what we’re seeing from the left, of which, I would suggest to you, President Obama is a member of the left and, uh, substantial left of center beliefs, that you can't even have a Christmas party. You can't say a prayer at school.

Rick Perry is ignorant, ladies and gentlemen. He is dumber than a bag of hammers. Sure, we hear the old 'why can't my kids pray to Jesus at their public school' thing from our ignorant uncle on Facebook, but this guy is the Governor of Texas, and a potential (although unlikely, at this point) candidate for the highest office in the country.

PERRY: I ask people, 'Which one of the Ten Commandments do you not like?' I mean, why aren't our children allowed to pray in school? Why can they not celebrate Christmas? Those are, I think, traditional and solid American values that we're seeing trampled upon by this Administration.

Well, Rick, I'll tell you the problem with the ten commandments. Four of them are solely religious edicts that have nothing to do with ethics or law, and three of them are one-dimensional prohibitions that are irrelevant to modern law. So, as a non-religious tax-paying American citizen, I don't care for the enshrinement of religious edicts. That kind of reeks of theocracy. You're not crazy about Sharia Law, so I'd think you'd be able to get your head around this.

Why aren't our children allowed to pray in school? They can pray all they want. Prayer is very much protected in public schools by our Constitution. There are simply some restrictions -- mostly that prayer can't be mandatory, and you can't have 'sanctioned' prayers during school time or school events. Because, see, that would be forcing it on someone who has the right to not be proselytized to as part of a captive public school audience. I am sure that if you imagine a teacher leading the class in an Islamic prayer, you can understand how this might not be cool, Rick.

Why can't they celebrate Christmas at school? Well, first of all, Christmas has in no way been banned in public schools. Again, there are simply rules that are appropriate to follow to avoid alienating students or identifying them with a religion not their own. Because, Rick, aside from the above issues relating to proselytizing, we live in a melting pot. It's not as homogeneous as it was when you were a kid. If you want the kids to celebrate Christmas in school, then maybe we need to provide equal time for other religions. Here you go -- here's an inclusive, interfaith calendar of several dozen holidays and festivals observed by Americans. Good luck getting any actual teaching done.

Here's the Blitzer-Perry video, for those who are interested in killing a few brain cells:

Conservatives Fear Rampant Bestiality In The Military

Religious right nutjobs Michele Bachmann and Bryan Fischer are very worried that our military is going to start having sex with animals.

Yes, really.

Last week, the US Senate voted to repeal Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The repeal was part of a larger piece of legislation, the National Defense Authorization Act.

While the Defense Act has certainly been controversial, bestiality hasn't been the reason.

You see, Article 125 is an archaic statute which bars troops from engaging in consensual sodomy, and its repeal was tacked on to the defense act (hardly unusual in legislation) -- a move applauded by LGBT rights advocates.

However, since the article defines sodomy as "unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal," the nutjobs read this as the military condoning bestiality.

Here's World Nut Daily asking White House press secretary Jay Carney if the president approves or disapproves of sex with animals:


Last night, Michelle Bachmann and Glenn Beck watched that video together on Beck's web show.

Bachmann reacted:

It’s absolutely abhorrent, reprehensible and you think, this is the kind of thing parents try to keep from their children because parents want to have their children enjoy innocence. Children need that latency period, they need innocence and your own government legalizes this? … Are we really going to say ho hum and laugh and go back to sleep? There’s got to be something we stand for...So the big question is, is there anything that’s wrong? That’s my question. If that’s not wrong, Glenn what’s wrong? Is there anything that’s wrong? Then you have a very serious problem on your hands.

Here's that clip:


Bryan Fischer, of hate group American Family Association, stated:

You have an instance of bestiality now, and the military has no legal way to deal with it. That's been now normalized...Once you cross the threshold that sexual intimacy is between for a husband and a wife in marriage...once you cross that boundary, there is no place to stop."

Here's that clip. It's a little long and painful, but feel free to watch if you're so inclined:


Next thing you know, military animals will be requiring separate shower and bathroom facilities.

Hi, I'm Rick Perry, And I Don't Understand Things

The Rick Perry campaign released a Hail Mary ad yesterday. It's a doozy -- thirty seconds of gay-bashing, patronizing declarations of faith, anti-Christian accusations, and a fundamental misunderstanding of constitutional law.

The video features a Marlboro Man-esque Perry (and his belt buckle) walking in nature, perhaps somewhere on Niggerhead Ranch.

He states:

"I’m not ashamed to admit that I’m a Christian, but you don’t need to be in the pew every Sunday to know there’s something wrong in this country when gays can serve openly in the military but our kids can’t openly celebrate Christmas or pray in school. As President, I’ll end Obama’s war on religion. And I’ll fight against liberal attacks on our religious heritage. Faith made America strong. It can make her strong again.”




There's so much here, it's hard to know where to start. It's sad, but not surprising, that Perry would take a swipe at our gay and lesbian service members (although you'd think he might realize that many Christians actually support the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell), but last time I checked, kids can pray in school, and there's no law stopping them from celebrating Christmas. The difference, Rick, is in something called the Establishment Clause of the Constitution. Certainly the governor of a state with one of the highest immigration populations might understand that when people become citizens of America, they aren't required to leave their entire culture behind. Many immigrants - maybe not so much in Texas -- practice other religions. Perhaps the 22% of the population who don't call themselves Christians should be forced to recognize and take part in a religion that is not their own.

Rick, kids can pray. They can celebrate Christmas. They just can't have public school prayer-a-thons or Jesus parties. They simply need to refrain from pushing their religion on other kids. That's called being a dick. It's also kind of a violation of rights. Public schools are not in the business of endorsing religion, and are prohibited by the Establishment Clause from endorsing one religion over the other. This is basic stuff -- something that a president should understand and respect. Do we want a leader who disregards the rights of nearly a quarter of the US population?

And that thing about Obama's 'war on religion'? You mean like when he retold the story of Jesus' birth? Or his speech on prayer at the National Prayer Breakfast? Or maybe when he issued a National Day of Prayer proclamation? Perhaps when he expanded Bush's faith-based initiatives? How about when he invited Rick Warren to pray at his inauguration? Or opening rallies with prayer?

I guess we shouldn't be surprised. It's not like Rick Perry has been the poster boy for factual accuracy. This was quite simply a desperate attempt to court Christian conservatives, to raise tired (and misguided) questions about Obama's faith, and to curry favor with the segment of the population that is anti-LGBT, who feel that white Christians are being persecuted, and who believe Obama is a Muslim.

Pat Robertson Ruminates On Time, God Speaks to Jim Bakker & Rick Joyner Via Thunder

Today is a banner news day for televangelist batshittery.

Here we have Pat Robertson ruminating on precognition and the mystery of time:




And if that didn't blow your mind, sit back and watch as God speaks to Jim Bakker and Rick Joyner through thunder:




You're welcome.

Anti-Science: In Which 'Age of Autism' Boos Me, And A Scientist Responds

This morning I criticized the website Age of Autism by way of a tweet highlighting their site as part of a list of the 10 worst anti-science websites. They subsequently blocked me, and tweeted 'Boo!' back to me.

As a big fan of free speech, peer review, and dissent, it peeved me that a benign public tweet mentioning AoA as part of a list, would result in being blocked. This is, after all, an organization who, in their own 'About Us' section, condemns those who "aren't interested" in other points of view, and who "don't listen."

Their choice of words, "Boo!", while annoying, perfectly distilled the essence of AoA's willful ignorance. It was the twitter equivalent of sticking fingers in ears and exclaiming, "Lalalalalalalalaaa!"

The science writer, biologist, and autism activist Emily Willingham was also peeved. (Full disclosure: I am one of Emily's followers on Twitter (and she is one of mine), and we have several mutual acquaintances. She has been featured in these pages, and I happen to think she kicks ass.)

Emily wrote a post on her blog, The Biology Files, where the AoA 'Boo!' episode served as a jumping-off point for a screed on the anti-science movement and the value of real science.

She writes:

This nadir of discourse is a perfect example of why the anti-science movement in this country is so damaging. The refusal to think critically, to alter conclusions as necessary based on new evidence, to budge from some pre-set notion regardless of information to the contrary--that "BOO!" sums it all up. It says, "We do not care that you think we're anti-science, and we have taken our ball and gone home." It says, "We are incapable of defending our position, as usual." It says, "We are childishly adherent to our cause, no matter its level of failure, no matter evidence to the contrary." That "BOO!" encapsulates well the attitude and argumentative capacity of those who promote anti-science values.

Yes, I said, "Values." Because the anti-science crowd operates together on a fundamental set of values, whether they're evangelizing against evolution, climate change, or vaccines. They place more emphasis on boastful "gotchas" than they do on getting it right. They use half-truths to get buyers for what they sell--and yes, they're usually selling something--and make people forget that the yin to a half-truth's yang is a half-lie. They value the power of emotion and testimony over method and evidence, and they use emotion and testimony cynically and unabashedly. But most of all, they value the opportunity to say "BOO!" to the folk who rely on the long-term, unemotional, data-gathering process we call "science" to form conclusions.

We see denialism everywhere these days. You can't turn on a news channel today without being bombarded with anti-science sentiment: climate change is a hoax, evolution is 'a theory that's out there,' a blastocyst is a person, Gardisil causes mental retardation. The list goes on and on.

Willingham on the damage caused by anti-science:

This clash of values between science and anti-science intersects every sphere of our lives. People turn to the anti-science practitioners and place their health and lives and their children's health and lives in jeopardy. People turn away from the conclusions of science based on available evidence and endanger everything from the food we eat and water we drink to the very balance of the biosphere. People turn away from educating our children in science, preferring the value of ignorance over the value of knowledge. People turn our nation away from being competitive by making a mockery of the value of knowledge and emphasizing instead the anti-science value of embracing half-truths and promoting scientific illiteracy. Were they able to spin in graves, our founding fathers, many of whom were extraordinary critical thinkers, would be spinning like tops to see the people of this nation they founded so proud in their emphatic and willful ignorance.

We live in a world in which, more than ever, critical thinking abilities and a broad and deep knowledge across the spheres of life and the rest of the physical world will be required tools for function and advancement. The anti-science emphasis on and exploitation of values of half-lies, ignorance, and illiteracy can only endanger us and the world around us, sometimes fatally. It's difficult for me to understand the mental processes of a person or a group of people who prefer ignorance and failure over method and evidence. But then again, my values don't involve resorting to playground childishness like "BOO!" as a retort to legitimate criticism.

Read Emily's entire post here. Share it. Tweet it to AoA, if you want. Warning: you will be blacklisted.