”We asked 10 autistic people if they’d drunken milk before and 100% said yes, therefore more milk causes autism!“ - peta, probably.
I know "what shall we do with the drunken sailor" I just only put the one word to make it clear what I meant
also not to be rude it's minor and I've done it myself plenty but as far as I can tell there's no indication of their gender or pronouns in their bio or comment history should put they not he sorry if you know them from somewhere else don't mean it to sound aggressive I've unconsciously assumed people on the internet are guys too before
I kinda just put it there automatically without thinking. Didn't mean to misgender anyone, in case I did, sorry
yeah that's what I thought I didn't think it was midgendering or anything like I said I've done the same
Love your way of pointing out the accidental gendering. These are exactly the thoughts that are in my head when I want to correct someone on this.
Am I the only Autist who is extremely offended by people saying "this or that" causes Autism?
It's annoying when corporations try to use the condition as a tool to further their bullshit arguments.
You should be offended, and PETA has been doing this forever to make people think eating animal or animal products is bad. But their assertion also implies autism is a negative thing, which is untrue.
You are absolutely right to be offended. I have neurodivergent people in my family. I love them dearly. I wouldn't want them to be any different. My father (likely) had autism. He was a professor who got invited to lecture at the Sorbonne and wrote something like 30 books. My brother has autism. He makes far more money than I do because he's a really good coder and he's happily married. Neurodivergent people can live lives as full of success and happiness (and lack of success and unhappiness) as anyone else. They just do it differently.
Acting like autism is some sort of horror that parents should fear is disgusting.
On my way to work, there's a house I always pass with an "autistic child" sign, a yellow square sign, next to the road. I just feel offended seeing it. Even if the individual in question could be low functioning, inattentive, actually at risk of walking into the street or something, that sign has probably been there past their childhood into adulthood, and a sign to announce your child's autism to drivers is just... something else.
it's ironic because arguably society "causes" autism, if society wasn't so fucked then things like autism and ADHD would just be quirks to take into account.
"oh yeah mary doesn't like speaking to strangers so we tend to hang out together so it's easier for her"
If that was statistically significantly true, Sweden would be autism central. We have since sometime in the 70's been giving our children milk with every meal.
When I was growing up through the 90s in America this was a pretty normal thing too. I drank a lot of milk as a child. Like I have a lot of anxiety now but other than liking trains I don't really seem that autistic.
We had a huge campaign for kids to drink milk in the 80s and 90s. There was the 'Milk: It does the body good' ads, which became a pop culture sensation, and then they did the "where's your mustache" ads where they had all kinds of supermodels and other celebrities drinking milk and showing a milk mustache.
Of course, the dairy industry is hugely subsidized in the U.S.
Basically, everyone in the U.S. born between about 1975 and 2005 should be autistic.
Considering it's from peta, there's roughly a 100% chance it's just total bullshit.
100% of autistic people who have lived past 30 have breathed air and drank water, but nobody is out here drawing the link between air and water…. The real danger.
Thousands of people got severely exposed to Dihydrogen Monoxide during 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami and 2005 Hurricane Katrina, and subsequently died! It's frankly baffling that people don't talk more about this!
This was what lead to the idea that vaccines caused autism, Peta was pushing this crap in the 90s.
I've realized that I poorly worded my earlier post, I meant that the claim that milk causing autism inspired the later claimed that vaccines cause autism, it was the first popularized claim that X consumable caused autism as far as I know of.
studies have shown a link
Is a phrase that could mean anything and is, therefore, meaningless
I wouldn't be surprised if PETA was secretly funded by meat companies as a way to make the image of vegans look bad
Interesting take. I wonder which aspects of their business you have in mind?
As much as I think campaigns like this are counterproductive to the animal rights agenda, I am strongly in favour of euthanasia, even mass euthanasia, as a responsible and humane solution to woefully irresponsible human industry. I believe that life is without intrinsic value, so it is straightforward to me that a life of suffering is worse than simply not existing.
I've been vegan for around 25 years, and in this time I've been interrogated about my beliefs enough times to feel confident saying folks tend to struggle more with the latter. Take, for example, the way no-kill shelters (or even rescue groups) tend to get sanctimonious at traditional shelters - the very same shelters they look to when they find themselves facing tasks too burdensome. btw, bbq fundraiser, guys!!
So, as long as we aren't including this utterly soul-rending but critical work in our judgement of PETA, I think I'm with you.
Holy shit. That’s bad. There were some very poor quality studies done on whether autistic people had a worse inflammatory reaction to A1 proteins than allistic people ( https://atypicalscience.org/a1-beta-casein/ ) but they were certainly not implying that milk causes autism or that autism has a “cause” that should be avoided.
Dude aside from the wack implication that you can develop autism, this is super fuckin... Like i dont wanna say ableist cause i dont view autism as a disability. obviously it can be but literally anything severe enough can be a disability, but i digress. This ad is just super fuckin agressive to people on the spectrum for no reason. I knew peta was bad but goddamn
Well, it's a disorder, it's right in the name.
If people "liked" it, they wouldn't be taking meds to help them function.
I'm not hating, just think we should take things for what they are
Edit: sorry, thought we were talking about ADHD
There are no meds for "autism", there are meds for health issues that autistic people are more likely to have, which autistic people shouldn't take if they don't have those health issues.
As for it being categorized as a disorder.
Homosexuality was classified as a mental disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) beginning with the first edition, published in 1952 by the American Psychiatric Association (APA).
Would you have said "I'm not hating on homosexuals, just think we should take things for what they are" in 1952?
Not to mention meds to suppress expression of autism traits and behavioral therapies like ABA that make daily existence a constant effort. But hey, they make it less awkward for allistic people to share spaces with autistic people. Or god forbid, have them accept that some folks have different ways of engaging with the world.
I take medication for my ADHD, not my autism. My autism is a part of who I am. ADHD is just annoying.
If people “liked” it, they wouldn’t be taking meds to help them function.
There are no meds for autism
It's bigoted is what it is. Bigoted against neurodivergent people. Who, as you say, are not disabled.
I have done my own study and I also found a link between cows milk and autism. They are both on this image. Spooky stuff.
I found a link between milk and death.
Everyone who has ever drank milk has, or will, die.
Ergo, drinking milk is deadly.
Dihydrogen Monoxide is proven to be toxic to humans when injected and kills thousands of people every year.
Our waterways are completely riddled with this dangerous substance.
Huge regions of the world are mostly lactose intolerant.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/lactose-intolerance-by-country
So there must be no autistic people there, right?
While this claim might turn out to be false, the amount of vitriol hurled towards Peta really is something else.
Even if you've never heard of any of the other terrible shit they've done, you have a live example of outrageous ableism from them, and you still jump to their defence (from 2 people who basically said "fuck peta" on the internet E: not even, they basically said "peta aren't trustworthy" which is demonstrable fact)?
We (because fuck peta) are not the fucking problem here..
Because Peta engaged in ableism & Pseudoscience that later inspired the anti vaccine movement.
A) Exploiting and fuelling fear of a vulnerable group is evil.
B) They don't get the benefit of "may turn out to be false". They get to start at "fuck these bullshit lies".
The people who want us to give up all meat and even not have pets operate the biggest kill-shelter in the United States. They're constantly preachy, condescending, they lie. Fuck em.
Euthanising animals that have nothing to live for any longer, who are dead-sick and are in agony. Compared to the billions of animals raised for animal ag, slaughtered on the daily, just to be sold for pennies in stores. I don't think they're the villain here, my guy.
Miss me with the "my guy" shit. It's smarmy.
The post we're commenting on they're saying milk causes autism, like out of their ass. Just like they did with vaccines. You say they aren't the villain, but making shit up about people with medical conditions doesn't make you a hero.
What I find shocking is you assumed the "before" image wasn't shopped!
I went looking for evidence it was real and just found a bunch of people claiming it was from 2008, no snopes article (which shocked me) and a bunch of people on reddit saying it was teal but very outdated and to argue about something recent.
But both of y'all saw a post that was edited and treated the "before" as real. Remarkable
Or you could get your head out your ass pretending like it isn't exactly the kind of bullshit peta have been pulling for years, put your bias and urge to jump to their defence for who the hell knows why to one side, and actually click some of the results?
Like the Time article that includes the following quote from peta:
But even in light of the criticism and the science that shows no such effects of milk, the group stands by its insupportable claim, saying, in a statement, “PETA’s website provides parents with the potentially valuable information that researchers have backed up many families’ findings that a dairy-free diet can help kids with autism.”
Hey. Put that shit away. I'm not experiencing a "bias" because I tried to confirm something I saw in an image macro before I got into a diatribe.
Are you okay? I've never seen you be this pissy on the fediverse before.
E: And because apparently it bears saying, even though I never indicated otherwise, fuck Peta. Seriously don't know how "please make sure the thing you're arguing about is worth arguing about" made me a Peta apologist. I've literally never met anyone, even online, who liked that organization.
You're right, I didn't verify it. I also didn't email them about it or show my ass about it in public, just the discussion here where it was presented. Sounds like your research was inconclusive but thanks for looking into it.
Remarkable
I agree with you. I don't think this is a particularly useful spending of their time and resources since there's a plethora of reasons not to consume dairy. However, you did bring up their kill shelters which I responded to.
Again, I am not defending them using their don't-consume-dairy-to-prevent-autism shtick. I don't agree with their outright villainisation in regards to everything else they do, which is definitely heaps more than the average non-vegan does in terms of pro-animal advocacy.
I don’t agree with their outright villainisation in regards to everything else they do, which is definitely heaps more than the average non-vegan does in terms of pro-animal advocacy.
What specifically have they achieved? What is all of this lying and showboating they constantly do getting them? Has there been a major societal shift toward veganism caused by PETA that I missed?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/17/peta-sorry-for-taking-girls-dog-putting-it-down
They kidnapped a healthy dog from it's home and euthanized it.
Unlike milkautism, when I looked into them killing animals years ago, it sounded essentially defensible. What do you remember about it?
I might’ve looked it up because they took some family pet off a porch or something. Yikes.
—
OK, Newsweek confirms they kill plenty of animals, and includes PETA’s reasoning. They’re not operating a hamburger factory or anything two faced that I can tell.
PETA's overtly confrontational approach was likely driven by empathetic people struggling to just live their lives knowing humans are 'passively' responsible for incomprehensible suffering around the world. In this scenario, how could you not feel compelled to wake people up? Unfortunately, as sure as we struggle to transcend our primitive tribal instincts, even the most altruistically motivated groups develop their own identities that need to be fed.
Despite this, and as someone who is on the spectrum, I struggle to relate to the idea of being offended by any of this. Perhaps I am in a weird bubble, but I also find it very difficult to imagine any of the autistic people I know being offended - whether it's real or not. In my experience, autistic people tend to be able to be a bit more detached and able to hold opposing views in simultaneity. Obviously I could be wrong, but to me this supposed anger seems more like defensive NT virtue signalling: PETA makes me so fuckinmad because I am unwilling to work on understanding my actual emotions -> omg PETA is attacking the autists I normally make fun of?-> not on my watch!
It is interesting to me that people can take such a hard-line stance against an organization like PETA, while having unlimited mental gymnastics for countless other organizations - including those with no hint of morally redeeming character - just because they personally find them convenient and/or enjoyable.
Your ideas about euthanasia are dumb.
I have autism and I fucking hate peta for this, I also hate peta for other reasons but I also hate them for this
Neurotypicals always make assumptions about us from misinformation, disinformation and what they think is best for us
So you said a lot things I'm not going to address, but what strikes me as unfortunate is that you assume anyone who is not autistic but expresses concern on their behalf would normally mock you. That seems like a pretty far reach and a pretty lonely way to view the people who only seem to be expressing empathy for you, even if it is misguided. You must be pretty jaded to come to that conclusion so quickly.
I'm glad you and your friends aren't offended. Good for you guys.
Despite this, and as someone who is on the spectrum, I struggle to relate to the idea of being offended by any of this.
I'm surprised that you aren't offended by an organization treating neurodiversity as a handicap that parents want to avoid at all costs. They're saying you're a lesser person.
Yes. You should care when someone dehumanizes you. It's the first step that goes towards rounding you and people like you up. But maybe you like the idea of being put in a death camp?
You're right, of course. I do not agree with the message, nor am I even completely indifferent to it - but at the same time, I find it difficult to care how they or most other organizations express themselves. I suppose it is at least partially a consequence of growing up feeling alienated from society, or more literally an alien to society; I am just too detached to identify with any of this enough to feel anything here. Whether this is another divisive PETA ad that missed its mark, or an unusually clever campaign against PETA ... whatever.
Even politics in general, putting energy into making our communities and consequently our lives better, what could be more important? But does it matter how strongly I feel about a given issue, when the entire system - whether by design or wonderful, serendipitous emergence - is a fucking sham? There is no shortage of the type of selfish behaviour on the individual (i.e. tangible) level to keep it fed and elevate us to the next dimension of cultural horror.
I suppose this might be becoming cliche by now (and I don't know if this is progress?), but I think it is pretty clear that what we've been calling 'democracy' is a symptom; a sham borne out of, sustaining, and masking some rather fundamental deficiencies. Our ability to communicate breaks down almost completely the moment we introduce even superficial and theoretically inconsequential differences: how the fuck can we ever hope to tackle something like the illusory gains of selfishness?
Essentially, I've compartmentalized where I could, and let go where I couldn't. Day to day I don't feel like I have given up, but I suppose to some degree I probably have. And without Camus, or Sartre, or Dostoevsky, I'm really not sure where I'd be. I've always just accepted this for myself, but... if I had to choose between giving my children hope, or acceptance? I mean, don't get me wrong, I want them to have both, but I know one will serve them well.
I do care deeply about people (and animals, of course), and do not want to contribute to the suffering of either - so thank you for reminding me it is all connected. I probably needed that. I need to be mindful that even though I am neither hurt by nor influenced by others' idiotic expressions of insecurity, a lot of people actually do buy into these things, and given our tendency toward majoritarian ideational validation, well...
I do understand where you're coming from and it does make sense to want to compartmentalize on this sort of thing. I react strongly to it when I see it not only because there are people in my family who are neurodivergent (I mentioned my father and brother elsewhere in the thread, but they are not the only ones), but because I come from a traditionally marginalized and dehumanized minority that did end up being put in death camps. And we're seeing so many calls to dehumanize marginalized populations as it is.
They didn't have the understanding of neurodivergence in Nazi Germany that we do now, but I guarantee you that they would have put every non-neurotypical person in a camp if they could have done so along with all the other people they determined to be mentally unfit.
So I don't mean to sound harsh when replying to you. It just scares me to see people from a specific group, be it an ethnic group, a sexual identity, or a group of people united by the consequence having their minds work differently from the "norm," being depicted like there is something wrong with them when there's nothing wrong with them.
I'm vegan for a decade now and for a while I felt like I have to support peta because they fight for the right cause. But seeing all the shit they publish, I'm not that sure anymore
Do you have examples? I've been under the impression that they're the good guys in most cases
You can just look at this post and see how they try to scare people into not drinking cows milk through fear of autism, which is some ablest bullshit. This is literally no better than anti-vax rhetoric.
I mean, not trying to defend this as this is pretty bad, but I guess it gets people talking and thinking about their consumption of animal products?
No, it doesn't. It makes people discount anything you say because all you're trying to do is draw attention to yourself. You end up being ignored and nobody cares about your message since the things you say are terrible.
Autism is not a bad thing, but they are acting as if it is.
How would you feel if the campaign said: "Drinking milk makes your child gay?"
Would it still be okay because it gets people thinking about their consumption of animal products?
I remember a cat adaptation campaign with the slogan "Grab them by the pussy" right after Trump said it (or when it came out) which is tasteless at best
It is pretty tasteless, I'll give you that. But it's meant to be provocative, I think, and shocking, so the slogan did accomplish its goal.
Yes, they accomplish their goals, but (to come back to my first comment) is it really the right cause or does it alienate people?
Do they accomplish their goals? How many people can you point to who have said that they became a vegan because of PETA?
That's my point. Their goal is provocation, the right cause would be to convince people which they don't do
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/17/peta-sorry-for-taking-girls-dog-putting-it-down
They kidnapped and killed someone's dog.
