Comment by ModernMech
8 hours ago
How have I been uncivil to you? I have not called you names, nor have I engaged your arguments in bad faith, nor have I attacked your character, your reputation, nor impugned you in any way. I've done nothing but engage you civilly.
And it is circular because you still haven't given a definition for "profound autism" -- all you have said is that "profound autism" is autism that profoundly disables a person. But what does that mean? Because all autism is profoundly disabling if you ask autistic people.
How does one go about determining if an autistic person is "profoundly" disabled? What's the test? What's the measure? How disabled can one be before they are considered not just regularly disabled, but "profoundly" disabled?
You've already said "you would say someone who headbangs has profound autism" but I headbang, and most people are surprised to learn I'm autistic. So I shouldn't be someone RFK is referring to in his speech, but according to the symptoms he lists off and your apparent concurrence here, I am someone he would be talking about.
Which brings me back to my original point: he was not clear at all in his speech.
The lack of civility I feel is that you’re either not reading what I write before replying or not feeling the need to address the points in the comment you’re replying to.
You’re right there is a spectrum of abilities and this changes over time. However we can define a threshold. I think a self-harming stim as an adult like head banging is sufficient to qualify as profound.