Your points are irrelevant to my argument. I suspect you misunderstood me, and a reread will help you.

There are two important things to reflect upon what you said: the first is a misconception regarding my argument, and the second is ignorance. For the first one, a reread will surely help (I'm not defending "stop the treatment" of the ones that are sick). Allow me to explain. There are, currently, a lot of autistic individuals suffering from a myriad of psychosomatic diseases, which need treatment. Being in the spectrum or not, if you get depressed, you'll enhance the likelihood of getting other diseases — but not in the mind, this time in the body. But most of those diseases (if not all) could have been prevented if provided a safe environment for development, which autistic individuals, currently, do not have. Because the world doesn't provide a safe environment for neurodiversity — this is my argument.

80% don't have a job; and what about women? Sexual abuse is doubled. You'll find other metrics like this if you research Simon's work.

As for the second, there's plenty of information out there about the history of autism (which shows that the current understanding of it, it's confusing, for a lack of a better word). We have to keep this in mind when talking about it. Your definition of it is just following this confusion. It's not contributing to the discussion.

O contagioso amor Brasileiro, disfarça o sofrimento de uma grandiosa nação

O contagioso amor Brasileiro, disfarça o sofrimento de uma grandiosa nação