Im not for eugenics so let's get that out of the picture but shouldn't it be discouraged for autistic people especially men to procreate? I feel that it is just wrong and unnatural.
>>84006068Legitimate evil, psychopathic and dark-triad-traits people have children, why shouldn't autismos.
>>84006083sure but I think that activities that are just all around bad for society should be discouraged.
>>84006105Good luck with that, personality disorders are usually on a genetic level. And autismos have a right to exist, and autismos are pretty low on the threat to society level if we're talking about societal harm. So many more avenues to consider before autismos are even on the chopping block, and even then, they have some usefulness by being able to become human bug-men who hyper focus on one thing.
>>84006166>Good luck with that, personality disorders are usually on a genetic level. And autismos have a right to exist,Of course autistic people have the right to exist. Im not a eugenisist. In fact I have the tism myself>and autismos are pretty low on the threat to society level if we're talking about societal harm.Right but many autistic people do not grow up to be self sufficient. Many require daily assistance just to live. Im fine with that but let's not pretend that this isn't expensive. Sure there are way worse people, take criminals for example. Im not disagreeing with you.
>>84006200>Right but many autistic people do not grow up to be self sufficient. Many require daily assistance just to live.And what percentage of autismos are of the population? And then, of that percentage, what are the extreme outliers that require them to need daily assistance. Versus dealing with mass immigration, illegal immigrants, criminals, eternal didnus, national debt, cancer, unemployment, homelessness, mental illness, falling birthrates, and a slew of other issues that could be focused on that would give a far better return on investment rather than trying to slap down autismos.
i think it's fine. especially since they already do.
>>84006247Also, to add to note, the worldwide population of autismos are 0.80% to 1% of the entire world's population. Of that amount, within that percentage of that percentage of a percentage, 25% to 30% of autismos need extreme help or intervention.
>>84006281And, to add on to that as well, how many of the super-autismos are even procreating if they even can? Hell, autismos already are pretty socially akward and inept. It's not like they are slaying pussy, which really brings into question, wtf is even the original questioning about? I would bet that a lot of autismos never have children anyways since it gives women the "ick".
>>84006068>i'm not for eugenics but shouldn't we be for eugenics?i know this is a bait thread but god damn what a retarded sentence you wrote
>>84006247>And what percentage of autismos are of the population?One to two percent i believe. >>84006352Explain what part of my post supported eugenics.
>>84006534It's 1% or less, depending on how overly diagnosed autism was and probably still is. And it still begs the other questions of why even deal with it when there are far more pressing issues in the society. Unless this is a retarded thought experiment, and even then, the same questions would arise. Would solving a non-existent problem solve anything? Is autism even that big of an issue that would warrant low-key eugenics? Would autismos not procreating fix anything substantial? No. Your tax dollars would go farther with fixing the fucking medical system being in bed with big pharma and insurance companies and breaking that monopoly than worrying about less than a percentage of a percentage of a percentage procreate. Since autismos aren't procreating at high levels and are already handicapped in the dating market. So it's such a non-issue to even start with. What is your argument then, if favor of it?
