comment they've placed on their wall; I did not include the profile picture they did (and note they offer no substantiation that this random photo is indeed of the woman who tried to get the PSAs pulled --do they mean Elyse from Skepchick.org? Indeed they do.).
The commenters then launch into the typical attacks, in which Stag feels the need to post the following:
Yes, if that were true, she wouldn't have left the comment that triggered this up there.
So, if we read their site and disagree with them we are "pro vaccine injury bloggers." If someone works to keep movie theaters from showing fearmongering ads designed to keep people from vaccinating, wolves are better for tending children than this person.
These folks are exactly who I'm talking about when I reference the fog and truthiness in my post last week. This is nasty business. Oh, and despite the attempts at revamping oneself as an autism advocate, there's not one bit of autism advocacy here. Despite assertions that she respects all parents despite what treatments they choose or what they believe about causation, that's not going on here at all. There may be a whole lot of truthiness going on here, there's certainly a whole lot of nastiness, that's for damn sure, but I see little truth, and nothing in the way of being supportive of the autism community.
That profile picture, despite the fact that it is publicly available, should not be on the AoA facebook fanpage. It shouldn't matter whether you agree with AoA or not; it doesn't belong there.