the Tone Argument, is it?

So you’re saying that if an autistic person stays calm, level-headed, and reasonable during a heated discussion, while still maintaining their right to a different opinion, that proves autistic people lack empathy and the ability to relate to other people or understand human emotions.  That they are mind-blind. And therefore should not be heard.

(Such as under the subheading “Different standards for autistic and non-autistic people” here·)

But if an autistic person gets fired up during a debate, that proves autistic people are irrational, simple-minded, and way too child-like for them or their points to be considered.

Convenient, that.

I can practically see you rub your hands together with glee at the prospect of taking down an autistic woman.  Will you dismiss her for being a robot with no feelings or for being a hysterical female?  For being both?  In any case, nobody needs to listen to her.

Maybe you’ll claim that the fact the autistic person is making so much sense proves they’re not really autistic at all!  And therefore should not be included in this (or any) conversation.

Your tone argument is not proof of anything except that you will make up any excuse necessary to keep autistic voices from being heard.  Your tone argument is just a weak, pathetic, transparent excuse, and we’re throwing it in the trash where it belongs.