> Again, I'm not sure you're reading what I wrote. These message boards discourage social interaction.

Do they? The one example you provide doesn’t in fact do this.

> That is straight up a counterproductive response, and it leads to people developing bad coping techniques that worsen their situation in the long run.

You say this but don’t have evidence for it. You are claiming that these discussions lead to bad outcomes, but there is nothing indicating that this causality is true.

> What I have repeatedly wrote is that those types of responses, which permeate the neurodiversity movement, are bad.

Agreed.

> I never said that the solution was for people to instead write generic comments telling the person they should socialize.

You might not be saying other people should write such comments, but you did yourself say that people should compromise with their friends, and socialize with their families.

> You are again painting this as a false choice between two extremes when it is not.

No - as far as I can see you are the one doing that. You are saying your advice is the only correct advice, and that what people are discussing on the message boards is bad.

I claim you are wrong and that although your suggestions may be helpful for some people, so are the discussions on the message boards.

> People should be encouraged to seek help which will likely end up involving more socializing, but that is not the same thing as suggesting people should be aimlessly told to socialize.

You don’t just claim they should be encouraged to seek help. You also claim that encouraging people not to socialize when they don’t want to is harmful.

> I even repeatedly said that it is not about overwhelming the person right off the bat or forcing them into every social situation. Because again we shouldn't be talking about two extremes here. Building up these skills is a process, but it requires acknowledging the deficit before the process can begin.

This is a view that applies to some people.

> Neurodiversity movement is often found denying there is a deficit at all,

Not just the neurodiversity movement. Many scientists who study autism reject the deficit model.

There is certainly no scientific consensus that autism itself is a deficit. Obviously some people on the spectrum are very disabled, but these are not contradictory ideas.

> and for ASD people in particular suggesting they should socially withdraw as much as they'd like.

For some people this is appropriate.

> That is not the way to build the close relationships you describe. Every relationship short of your immediate family begins with pleasantries.

Of course, but nobody needs to be constantly starting new relationships. Have you considered that not all autistic people need more relationships?

> I am not advising anyone with ASD to do anything at all besides seek professional help for anything they are struggling with, if it is at all possible. Different treatment plans will obviously be used for different people, and I have no idea where you got the idea that I said there are only a few things that can help.

Treatment for autism generally doesn’t have great outcomes. It would be great if it did.

> Exercise can help some people!

And it can harm some people!

> By the way, not eating any food is also harmful dude, so your comment about obesity falls pretty flat.

This opposite is true. This just shows how poor the analogy is.

> I'm not sure why you think that because there theoretically could be too much socialization that it's okay to tell people they don't have a problem and they should carry on with their shitty defense mechanisms.

That seems like a dishonest representation of what I said. If you can show me a quote where I said something like that, I owe you an apology, but I am fairly certain I did not.

> Because that's exactly what happens when social withdrawal is treated as a perpetually good thing, which is exactly what you will find among the "neurodivergent" preachers.

I have never seen anyone say social withdrawal is perpetually good. Are you sure this is an accurate representation of anyones claims.

> Since it seems I have to reiterate: Discouraging people from addressing their symptoms is actively harmful.

What symptoms is anyone discouraging people from addressing? This is the first time anyone has mentioned discouraging people from addressing symptoms as far as I can tell.

> Telling ASD people that it's okay if they avoid socializing as much as they'd like is one such example.

How does that relate to symptoms?

> That's it. I will happily provide you dozens of links showing that lack of socialization correlates with numerous bad outcomes in both the general population and ASD folks.

Lack of socialization, and being free to socialize as much or as little as one wants at a given time are two entirely different things.

> As I've already discussed socialization-based therapies have been shown to improve outcomes in numerous studies. It would be unethical for a clinician to advise people to not socialize,

It would be unethical for a clinician to advise an entire population to do anything. Clinicians give advice to individuals based on their specific presentation.

There are certainly cases where it would be unethical for a clinician not to advise certain individuals to avoid socializing for at least some period.

> so there is no way to do a causal experiment that shows that discouraging socialization is bad, but there are many reasons to believe so.

Not really.

> and even further claimed that ERP has no evidence in ASD people.

This isn’t true. I indicated that the evidence isn’t conclusive enough to make a blanket recommendation, not that there is no evidence.

> It seems much of your info is outdated.

You write a lot about how things ‘seem’, where you respond to what you have read into them rather than what is actually presented.

> You also seem to not have a good grasp on what kinds of things get posted in these neurodiverse "support" groups.

Perhaps I just understand them differently from you. You are assuming that not agreeing with you means I don’t have a good grasp. That’s one possibility.

> It is not about advice to withdraw from a particularly distressing situation, it is literally a blanket cultural value.

Is it? The example you provide doesn’t support such a claim.

> People will get likes for posting shit like "I try to avoid neurotypicals as much as possible".

This is not an example of discouraging people from socializing, and yet it is the only example you have provided.

> I'm not saying that person should be lambasted for the post, I'm sure there are very legitimate reasons they came to that defense mechanism.

> But it's straight up an unhealthy attitude and it is a sign the person needs help.

Is it?

> Not something to encourage and joke about.

Why not? The ability to view one’s predicament through a humorous lens is generally considered psychologically healthy.

The idea that a support community must remain serious and grave at all times is odd, as is the idea that you can say what autistic people should or should not joke about.

> And believe me there are people that really feel this way, it is not simply people being edgy on the internet. IMO it is a much broader, worrying cultural trend, that has happened to also affect the way some ASD communities interact.

Feel what way? Autistic people who prefer autistic company? Is that all this is about? That’s not some secret.

It’s widely discussed in the literature.

Autistic relationships with other autistic people are widely recognized to be more successful.

> I'm also not sure why you keep writing half responses and then editing lol,

Responding from my phone and needing to copy and paste so that I quote you accurately.

> I really don't think this is getting anywhere, certainly I haven't gotten anything out of it, so let's both stop wasting our time.

I encourage you to withdraw from this social interaction and any other that you aren’t getting anything out of. Look after yourself. There is no need for you to apologize or compromise.