“Do you think you’re neurodivergent at all?” Dax Shepard asked Edward Norton on a recent episode of Armchair Expert — a question aimed at a man who exemplifies the complexity of being a talented, singular human being. Norton’s answer was rare: selfless honesty.
“Not in a claimable, namable way,” he said. “This is a pet peeve. I may not be right about this, but I feel like Silicon Valley has done a lot of cool things and a lot of really negative things to our society. One of the ones that I find kind of aggravating is what I would call the romanticization of the idea of being on the spectrum.”
Shepard offered a long, uneasy “uhhh,” unsure how to respond to the naked emperor — or how the algorithms might react to being on the wrong side of neurodiversity. Norton kept going anyway. “You get all these people who are basically just a**holes.” Shepard laughed a nervous, airless laugh, looking for an exit as Norton pressed on: “wanting to credit that to them being on the spectrum. It’s like — you’re not on the spectrum. Shut up.” Another strained “uh-huh” from Shepard. “Stop it. Don’t casually” — Shepard tried to finish the thought, “write off your bad behavior” — but Norton wasn’t interested in the interjection. “Don’t casually try to claim as a superpower a thing that for a lot of people is a real thing.”
The real thing. The weight of it hung in the air. If I had any authority to grant awards, I would give Norton one for telling the truth — for naming, by proxy, the propaganda machine that Big Tech has built, sponsored by Big Pharma and protected by the U.S. government. What Norton said out loud is what parents of the profoundly vaccine-injured have not been allowed to say: the self-identifying neurodivergent population is not injured. It is injuring.
I have watched four decades of the corruption of the word “autism” — in medicine, in education, in culture. What was once D-Day for us, the death-sentence weight of a diagnosis, became a badge of honor for people with none of our children’s limitations to celebrate on social media. That is why what Norton said was heroic. He exposed a lie the culture had quietly agreed to tell.
Mike Rowe recently called autism, in weary disillusionment, the “ambiguous infirmity” — the catch-all badge for any behavior anyone wants to get away with, a word that no longer means anything except to the people who use it to excuse rudeness or reframe social conformity as “masking.”
It wasn’t always like this. Autism used to mean something very specific, and there was nothing romantic about it. For decades, parents have testified to horrifying, debilitating regression in previously healthy infants: loss of motor function, sensory dysfunction, grotesque bowel disease, toe-walking, hand-flapping, hands clamped over ears, loss of eye contact and lost skills, sores and skin conditions, seizures, self-injury, elopement — some of it ending in drowning — sleeplessness, screaming, debilitating OCD, and the total inability to communicate. It was medically obvious. It got categorized as psychological anyway — the get-out-of-jail-free card for the industry holding the needle. Pediatricians passed the buck to psychology, a field built on theory no one could prove, offering families nothing but fatalism and drugs.
Parents couldn’t get straight answers to plain questions. Why does chronic diarrhea and blood in a child’s stool mean he’s intellectually disabled? Nothing we can do. Try drugs. Why does smearing feces mean he isn’t smart? Nothing we can do. Try drugs. Why, when a child’s own immune system is destroying his blood platelets, and he is bleeding internally after a vaccine, is he not worth treating? Nothing we can do. We don’t have anything. Why, when a nonverbal child is screaming, slamming his head on the floor, and biting himself, is the conclusion that the parents simply passed down a genetic disorder? Nothing we can do. Sorry.
Our observations were dismissed just like our children were. Psychology offered pedigree, doctorates, university affiliations, powerful ties to government and industry — and no evidence. We were told they were right because they’d gone to school. Our children’s bloodied bodies were our responsibility; their careers and reputations were not at risk. Their success soared while ours died trying to care for our injured kids. This was our reality: autism as a terminal diagnosis.
At age three, parents were told that no matter what horror their child was suffering, the answer was psychotropic drugs and institutionalization. Done. End of story. While this system destroyed our lives, it simultaneously condoned — and helped elevate — the self-diagnosing neurodiverse community, ushering them toward accolades, accommodations, grants, and online platforms for cruelty dressed up as advocacy. There was nothing about their experience that resembled our injured children’s, because it was never meant to. The propaganda machine had, in effect, created a self-proclaimed neurodiverse social-media mob to help attack anyone who told the truth.
Some of these self-proclaimed “neurodiverse” voices — not autistic in any clinical sense — are lauded on Love on the Spectrum and given TED Talks, reportedly receive money from Big Tech, to run accounts that mock the profoundly injured, delegitimize severe cases, and insist they are the only legitimate voice for autism. My answer is always the same: if you have full control of your speech, you do not speak for my son.
It is genuinely absurd when you say it plainly. On what moral ground do we let people who can hear speak for the deaf, or people with sight speak for the blind? This isn’t stolen valor. It’s stolen injury — and Part 2 traces exactly how it happened, from a 1943 case study to a Wired magazine article, a rewritten diagnostic manual, and a fraud case now working its way through federal court.
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy PJ Media’s conservative reporting exposing the radical left and woke media? Support our work so we can keep bringing you the truth.
Join PJ Media VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
