Can Genetic Curiosity Kill the Autistic Cat?

NOTE: Eugenics, physical abuse, and depression will be discussed.

Public knowledge of autism is...let's call it a mixed bag. There are people who see autism as a blow to a human development and a burden to those around them that needs "curing". There are people who see autism as a unique gift that gives them a different perspective of the world they can share and shouldn't be "cured". There are people who argue that autism is far more complicated than either of those binaries. I don't want to litigate what perspective is "correct" but needless to say it's a thorny issue. And I personally find the conversation so toxic that I just choose not to talk about it lest I subject myself to people yelling at me at how "wrong" I am. Besides, I've always stated from the outset that this blog is just my own opinion and I don't expect others to be the same but just to respect it.

Then I read about a big initiative that scared me so thoroughly that I need to weigh in.

A collaborative initiative between the University of Cambridge, the Autism Research Center, and University of Los Angeles called Spectrum 10K  launched as the biggest autism research project to examine environmental and biological factors impacting autistic people's well-being. Its stated goals is to look at and address physical and mental health issues autistic people can have to better address their needs and "alleviate unwanted symptoms and co-occurring conditions". It seems like the bulk of the research will be reliant on participants filling out online questionnaires and providing health records and DNA samples via salvia swabs. About 10,000 autistic people were set to participate in this project. The proponents of Spectrum 10K claim that this study will help improve the lives of autistic people and thus further the cause of neurodiversity (a celebration of brain diversity I talked about way long ago).

Why do I feel like this isn't so much championing for bettering the lives of autistic people but a sneaky way to "cure" people like me?

Gus Walz and Neurodivergent Emotional Response

As a political junkie, I watched the Democratic National Convention this week. A lot has happened in the past few months from a disastrous first presidential debate, an attempted assassination attempt on Republican nominee Donald Trump, a chaotic Republican National Convention, and President Biden dropping out of the race in favor of Vice President Kamala Harris. I watched as Democrats gave their speeches in support of Harris and on Wednesday night, her pick for Vice President Tim Walz spoke. In the middle of his speech, Walz gave a shout out to his family after speaking about his and his wife's struggles to start one and cameras cut to his supportive family. A close up of his son, Gus, particularly stood out with tears in his eyes he appeared to say, "That's my dad."

What was clearly a moment of joy and support from Walz's son gained traction as right wing social media (including conservative media pundit Ann Coulter) mocked him for his especially emotional display. They made fun of his tears as signaling male weakness and fodder for online meme culture. This ridicule of Gus felt especially cruel as people pointed out that Gus has a non-verbal learning disorder and the contempt could very well be ableist.

There's so much in this moment to unpack. I think there's a larger conversation to be had about conservatives embracing a particular brand of toxic masculinity that devalues expressions of love, support, and collaboration. Tim Walz himself is a popular subject for writers in talking about how he's an antithesis towards the right's idea of manhood. But for me, Gus' unabashed (and frankly warranted) emotional response hits home for me as notable because it felt bigger than what people are used to. As a neurodivergent person myself, I know what it feels like to have big emotions. And that's what I want to talk about.