A careful, forceful 'reverse voxsplaining' essay against the autism-rights movement's 'autism isn't a disease, don't cure it' position. Scott agrees with 99% (treat autistic people decently, expose abuse, right-to-refuse-care) but pushes back on the anti-cure 1%. Arguments: the huge heterogeneity (the 'likes-trains-and-math' autism of his friends vs the nonverbal/violent/self-injurious autism of his patients); treating-people-decently is the movement's own 'One Weird Trick' that won't fix the biological suffering (epilepsy, cognitive disability, self-injury, suicidality — persisting even in well-treated non-institutionalized autistics); the grim outcomes (~10% independent, ~40% institutionalized); institutions are hellish because involuntary communal living is 'beyond us as a civilization' (the nursing-home parallel); taboo 'disease' — talk about SUFFERING ('society is fixed but biology is mutable'); the demon-deal reductio ('one in a hundred children born to exquisite torture... in exchange your slaughterhouses will be more efficient'); and the medical-ethics position (people who want cures should get them) with many caveats (basic income; maybe separate the good/bad genes; the Mora-LeQuivalence 'south of nerds, north of severe autism' footnote).

Quality 76 · Excellent. Excellent: a rigorous, forceful, much-discussed essay grounded in real clinical experience, with a genuine suffering-based argument + the memorable demon-deal reductio + 'society is fixed but biology is mutable' — a defining 'reverse voxsplaining' piece, above the SSC-463/362 tier (74). 76.

Claude’s paradigm shift 56 · Moderate. A strong, original suffering-based argument against the anti-cure position; the demon-deal reframe. B56.

Real-world impact 2 · Minor. Much-discussed within the autism/disability discourse; a notable reverse-voxsplaining piece; no material reach. RWI2.

Against Against Autism Cures