So... let me get this straight... the last article she wrote, in which she described her son's catatonia and violence, and then his recovery and rehabilitation after detoxing from meds, was complete made-up bullshit lies?

First of all let me say that I sympathize greatly with all those who have written about their own personal tragedies and about the lack of services to help and support families who have mentally ill members.

But I still don't like the way Bauer writes. Her articles are full of contradictions and she is not fundamentally honest with her readers.

She refuses to acknowledge or accept that diagnostic labels in psychiatry are somewhat meaningless, and that her son shows signs and symptoms that are usually associated with schizophrenia, mood disorders, and personality disorders--and probably ought to be treated as such.

I spent many years working in psychiatric hospitals, and there is nothing in the behavior of her son that she has described that I have not seen a hundred times in psychiatric hospitals in patients who have not been diagnosed as autistic. For example, intellectual deterioration from earlier levels is very typically seen in schizophrenia. Many of these people have been treated quite successfully with medication and a carrot and stick approach to shaping behavior towards socially acceptable levels. Sometimes, of course, it is just a case of waiting until testosterone levels drop with age and the illness slowly burns out.

Her thesis that medications made her son go crazy are shared by numerous parents of people with mental illness, and while I would be the first to accept that side effects of psychotropic medications can be unpleasant, it is hard to avoid the fact that he was given psychotropic medications because he was exhibiting irrational psychotic behavior in the first place.

Even though she now seems to be admitting that her earlier feeling that autism was kind of cute is a gross mistake, her remarks about her son's stealing meals from restaurants are absurd. She seems to forget that her son was damn lucky not be be arrested and charged. Or maybe he was, and this will be revealed in the next installment.

I see that many letter writers here were highly moved by the author's effective writing style. She is a good writer to be sure.

But I would commend to everyone the following outstanding letter by DonaQuixote: http://letters.salon.com/mwt/feature/2009/03/26/bauer_autism/permalink/f11779ca6425963d9ff1824c2804484f.html

You see, with a mere one hour of research, Dona has achieved a more sophisticated level of understanding and shared it with us than anything contained in the feature article.

I also agree with this. I have followed Ms. Bauer's series of articles with interest, and it seems to me that she has repeatedly misled her readers and that she has failed to do even basic fundamental research into the nature and treatment of mental illness. From time to time she has expressed some very bizarre ideas.

This is not to say in any way that Ms. Bauer must not have suffered terribly in trying to come to terms with dealing with her son's developmental problems, mental illness, and antisocial tendencies.

The trouble with ideas about feminism is that interpretations vary so much according to context.

Some posters including Brightstar, and myself to a lesser extent, find the kind of strident feminism represented by Broadsheet ludicrously absurd, based on what we know of life and of the balance of power of the sexes, but, on the other hand, having spent the last couple of days in the company of several correctional officers, I was made more aware of the totally Neandertal attitudes of substantial swathes of the male population that I don't usually hang out with.

So maybe some of the extreme patriarchy-theory feminist attitudes are based in a reaction to experiences of women that men who read Salon don't often have to deal with.

...and do something you have always wanted to do.

...that many female teenagers see Rihanna as a rival for the affections of the much-desired Mr. Brown, which colors their perceptions. They don't identify with Rihanna.

A bar is in business to make money by selling drinks, so hen parties are good business, and by going to gay bars women can wear penis hats and act crude without giving the impression that they are actually interested in penises.

Personally I don't drink, but I can't see why gay drunks can't marry like anyone else, but they have to remember to marry someone of the opposite sex. This is not really discriminatory, because lots of heterosexuals also have to marry people they don't love in the least and hardly ever have sex with. Britney Spears, for example, got married while drunk Las Vegas, a city set up for this kind of thing, then immediately tore up the license when she noticed what she had done.

Personally right now with the state of the economy I would relish the idea of marrying a wealthy older man.Why should Anna Nicole Smith be able to do this, but not me? Isn't that a violation of my human rights? Yes, but its not allowed, so I shall have to continue a life of drudgery supporting my lovely female wife until Prince Charming comes along.

So join the club, gays.