Wow. I listened to this episode and I was trying to keep an open mind, but that was desperately unprofessional. Air out someone else’s dirty laundry like that? It’s not a good look. What I walked away with, after listening to your side of the story, is that you monetized Matt’s intellectual property. None of this would exist without the work that he had already done before you guys started any of this. He rewrote the DSM criteria. He redid the autism spectrum graphic concept. He put into place neurodivergent affirming evaluation and care. He shows up with autism research and data. He’s been fighting from the belly of the beast long before you came on the scene. That’s why he deserves respect. That’s why he deserves equal pay.
Meaning that he should have equally put forth his part of the over $50K that Angela put into the project of the past 3 years? That must be what you mean, Lara.
Angela has never paid herself or Matt a penny. So that’s pretty much equal pay.
And I believe Angela herself is still reckoning with what is equal work.
What do you think it Is?
Is his intellectual property worth more than everything that she’s put into this podcast and the book - from looking for sponsorships to promoting the podcast to setting up the Tee public store to looking for speaking engagements to keeping the social media aspect going the Substack, the emails, her marketing genius of 30 years? is that worthy nothing? is that worth less? Is her work of getting his message to a larger audience worth less? How do you determine that?
Sending love to everyone, Angela, Matt, other listeners! 💚💚💚 I re-listened to the grief episode after hearing this, how timely and helpful. Keep being kind to each other and keep supporting each other. I haven’t been part of any other autistic community that felt like home. Sometimes “home” is messy, but at least it is our neurodivergent home where we can all be actually autistic. This community is magic. I came to the community because it reframed autism in a positive and loving light. Then you started moving into issues that dig deep into our collective autistic experiences - mobilizing us and connecting us even more. Whatever comes next, this community has sincerely helped me through a difficult burnout period/car accident recovery and I am so grateful that to be part of it. Love you all, keep moving forward, as is the way :)
I feel very icky about being presented with one side of this conflict, especially because the original google doc shared medical knowledge without consent. This feels like a big intellectual property issue for Matt- it is clear to me from listening to the podcast and seeing the book, how much he brought almost all of the scientific knowledge to the intellectual and imaginative work of ACP, while Angela brought a brilliant and playful understanding of 'autistic culture' as a new category that tied the project together. It feels very unfair to me for him not to be listed as a co-author. I believe Angela is seeing this in terms of work rather than IP, but I think Matt is making an extremely strong IP claim that should be respected as such. I'm sorry that he did not take up Angela's plan for reconciliation, but I also think he totally had the right to not do so without his personal messages being broadcast (in reaction to being blocked from a facebook group). I would have felt very similarly to him in his position. That being said, I think Angela did an awesome job trying to make it right, and I will miss listening to both of you together.
Hi Catherine, I think it’s interesting that you would describe what was being presented as one side of the conflict when Angela very clearly presented every bit of both sides that was available. All of their correspondence was by text and email and she shared all of it both sides.
Are you in the Facebook group? Perhaps you can share what that side of the conversation is?
By 10:47 am any personal medical comments were redacted from the screenshots and from the text.
Can I ask you an honest question? If it felt so icky to you, why would you read it or listen to it? Is it like a car crash? You just can’t look away?
This was a very public facing project and Angela was left in a position to respond. Or she could’ve just gaslit us all, Matt included.
Without knowing what was being shared on a Facebook group that she was blocked from, in her actually autistic style she shared all of the facts that she had.
I hope you do have a chance to read the book so that you could give it a fair assessment and see if you really feel she is taking claim to Matt’s work, whether she presents it as her own, or whether she presents it as the content frequently shared on the podcast giving credit to Matt along the way and throughout the pages. It is obviously a project to promote the Autistic Culture podcast. I don’t think it was an ego project for her.
Thanks Katie. Pretty damn hard to not feel super protective of Angela, my little sis. I’ve been with her every step of the way from the unmasking to the leaning in and embracing and celebrating autistic culture. She loves this project. She loves Matt. She is incredibly hurt by his response by his denial and ghosting of her generous responses and offers to him. Maybe I’ve been in it with her for too long and know even more details than these messages and texts reveal - but again I don’t think it was meant to be hurtful to Matt / I think it was meant to be transparent to the community that she cares about so much.
She desperately wanted everyone to have all of the information that she had. And I think she’s always open to hearing here’s what she may have missed. Heck, I tell her all the time what she gets wrong. (Please note the now redacted medical information that Matt has openly aired on the show, - but it’s removed now from the texts). I really hope y’all continue to support Angela and her mission to bring knowledge about autistic culture contributions and justice for autistic people.
I understand the need to lay it all out there and move on. But I agree with other comments that there was a huge lack of consent in sharing personal information publicly.
Several times you say in your episode how much you love Matt, but the actions you’ve taken to share emails, texts, and screenshots not only felt like I was witnessing a violation, but it was lacking kindness.
We sometimes do not understand social norms and expectations. We sometimes struggle to understand what’s happening in the mind of the other person. But we can always choose to be kind.
Hi Katie, I feel that what wasn't kind was Matt locking Angela out of the facebook group without even finalizing a critical conversation with her - one that impacts us, the listeners and supporters of the show. She was left in a public facing position with many messages coming at her from whatever was being said in the Facebook group. She couldn't even defend it - because she didn't know what was being said - so, she went with facts and truth and full transparency in the most actually autistic way possible. Do you have any idea what a brilliant marketer and writer Angela is? Should could have done some kind of fake PR spin job. But she has more respect for all of us than that. Instead she laid out a timeline of exactly what occurred with the transparency and facts that she has been talking about for more than 100 episodes (and living most of her life). I don't see what was unkind or surprising about her sharing these facts.
The angst on both sides must be tough. It seemed like you and Matt had such a good thing going. The emails/texts you included here reflect that there was so much miscommunication and assumptions made, and instead of stepping back, calming down and moving forward with clarity, the animosity on both sides is what prevailed and just broke everything down. I agree that the truth is key, but I find that it’s important to clear away the rhetoric first to get to the pure issue at hand. With that said, I do wonder if disclosing Matt’s personal information without consent was more aggressive in nature than assertive? Were you sharing this to hurt him? It’s difficult to understand how sharing his health information is beneficial in forwarding the mission of your project as a whole? In your own honest reflection, was malicious intent a wee part of the goal? I hope one day the air clears and you and Matt can have constructive dialogue to bring you both good closure.
I’ve read through these comments and I’m stunned by some of them. You didn’t deserve the way Matt spoke to you, or the way he didn’t respond and talk it out - especially not when you handled everything with honesty, grace, and transparency. You could’ve glossed over things or done the PR spin, but you didn’t. You told the truth, shared the facts, and let people come to their own conclusions. That takes courage.
Some people will always choose sides. They’ll pick a favorite and dig their heels in. But to me—and I know to many others—you’re the one who showed integrity here. You’ve consistently shown respect for Matt and the role he’s played, and it’s clear how much you care about the work you did together and how much do you care for him as a friend. You and I have had many conversations about that.
As for the book—that part really baffled me. I know how excited you’ve been about it. You’ve shared early drafts with me, talked through ideas, and connected your own experiences with the writing. This book is deeply yours. And honestly, I watched its earliest spark happen in real time—when I was struggling to get answers around my son’s mental health. Not only did you show up to support me, but your frustration with the vague, unhelpful “diagnosis” we were given lit a fire in you. You’ve told me more than once that that moment helped shape the focus of this book. I saw it evolve as you connected it to our conversations and the realities families like mine face. Offering Matt full revenue and co-credit was incredibly generous, and I know it came from a place of gratitude, not obligation. “With Matt Lowry” felt like the most honest and respectful way to acknowledge his influence.
You’ve always given so much of yourself to this work, and to your listeners. I’ve seen how much this podcast means to you—and how hard you’ve worked to make it something meaningful for others. I wish the ending of this chapter had come more gently. Missteps and miscommunications happen, especially when emotions and money are involved. But none of that makes you the villain.
I’m so proud of what you’ve built, and so grateful for the way your work has helped me understand you more fully—not just as a host, but as a person. And I’m deeply thankful for how it’s helped me show up better for my own kid. Keep going. You are doing important, generous, beautiful work.
I love you. Keep going. We need you.
And listeners, if you’re reading my comment here and you support Angela, please let her know - I know she’s hurting and needs your support as much as Matt does. (Maybe more.)
Hey Angela - my first reaction with all of this was that you and Matt were just not a good professional/business partner match - different communication styles, personalities, and needs. I have loved the podcast because it’s so validating and I get such a sense of belonging listening to it. You gave huge concessions with these disagreements, more than you probably needed to, in an effort to repair this relationship and move forward with a clean slate. I’m sorry you didn’t get a constructive response. I’ve been in this situation with a family member, it’s so devastating to realize that the relationship will never be the same and there’s nothing more you can give to change the other person’s behavior. Sending love, I can hear how difficult it’s been for you and for Matt as well.
Hey, while watching a public meltdown is incredibly validating about the autistic experience, it's also super painful. I'm sure many fans/past fans of this podcast are all too familiar with the way this is going down. It's really obvious to me as an outside observer how this wasn't posted from a place of balance and thoughtful consideration. You posted it without the redaction of sensitive information, including Matt's personal health information and a password which is still, by the way, not redacted in the screenshots. This is really disappointing. I'm not saying I don't see issues on both sides of the exchange, but I am saying that what you've done here kind of trumps the rest of it. Huge bummer.
Could she be any more Actually Autistic? This is exactly what Angela’s been modeling for all these episodes—radical transparency, directness, and respect for her audience’s right to understand the full picture.
This isn’t a meltdown. It’s consistent with everything she’s said all along. She was left with a public project and no communication, so she shared the facts—plainly and honestly.
It may not be everyone’s style, but it’s hers. And it’s exactly why so many people trust her.
She said the password was no longer functioning - because it was shut down.
Do you think that she should redact the parts that you mention? Would that make it better?
I just wanted to say that I appreciate both you and Matt so much for what you’ve given me in my journey as a late-in-life, self diagnosed autistic. And I will continue to appreciate you, Angela, as you move forward with the podcast in whatever new form it takes. 💚💚💚
Oh wow, I am really really sorry to hear this. I honestly haven't quite had time to figure out all my feelings about it, but oh it makes me sad on so many levels for absolutely everyone involved.
I will try to sort out the feelings bits of it later (they are Too Damn Big for right now), but I'd like to ask a purely practical question in the meantime. I had hoped to get a couple of physical copies of the current version of the book, but I can't actually figure out how?
I looked at the Our Book tab, and I see the ebook/audiobook bits, but I'm a paper book person at heart and wanted to get two of those as well. And all I can see is the 'join the substack' stuff. I already am a member (I did the guardians thing last year)! I just don't see where to actually say 'hello, here are some dollars, please send me some slices of dead trees.' I'm sure I'm overlooking it, and I'm sorry to bother you when all of this is going on, but could you point me in the right direction when you have a moment?
I'm sorry again, this whole endeavor was really meaningful to me, and I am so very sad this has happened. I hope everyone finds their way to a less painful place in the days to come.
Hunter, I know, I'm so gutted! But yes, I believe you already filled in the order form for the free guardian book and that is in the mail. The other books can be ordered. There are many places to do this.
If you are logged in with your paid account and you click "Our book" or "Audiobook (Members)" both of those areas have many posts and every single post has a button that says "Order Print Book" - you already got the free signed one (it's in the mail) so any others you need to pay for shipping and printing. It's definitely going to be a collectors item!
I too hope everyone finds their way to a less painful place in the days to come.
I have a funeral, a final exam, and a UK Driver's test so my hands are full but I am grateful for all of the listeners and shows Matt and I did make together and I will always love, trasure, and value that incredible experience!
Gaaah! Totally my fault, thank you. Totally totally happy to pay for the others! I just got distracted by the 'learn more' button at the top and didn't make it all the way down to the bottom to find the thing I was looking for (or maybe I wasn't logged in when I was looking and it shows a different view? I swear substack sometimes betrays me...). Either way, that was me not looking hard enough, so my apologies for bothering you, and thank you for your help. I'll go order more right now.
And good luck with the exams (heck of a combo!). And I can't possibly wish anyone good luck with a funeral, but hopefully it all goes smoothly and there are lots of funny stories and it brings everyone a little bit of peace.
Every Single Thing just feels so much harder than usual right now, for absolutely every single person I know, and it just really sucks. I hate it all. Every tiny little bit. And I'm sorry for everything both you and Matt are dealing with. It really is a lot. Here's hoping for better days ahead!
Hi Hunter, I’m Angela’s sister. She actually put me in the book dedication! And then after her visit to the states and the conference that may have helped to unravel the partnership, she left all the books at my house in North Carolina for me to help in mailing them from the US instead of the UK. And I did that just yesterday! I definitely remember seeing your name on one of the shipping labels. You’ll probably see in a week to 10 days. I hope you’ll continue to support the work of bringing the contributions of autistic culture into the world through Angela‘s continuation of the autistic culture podcast and whatever the next shape it takes. And I’m sure you’ll be able to support Matt’s important work as well. That’s what she would want.
Fantastic, no rush at all! I had just told a couple of folks I'd get them copies and wanted to make sure I did that while they were available. Sorry again for not (sigh, I disappoint myself) actually scrolling to the bottom of the page.
Thanks for mailing them, I'll keep an eye on the mailbox, and I've ordered the others now.
This is all Very Very A Lot for everyone involved. So damn many feelings. Thanks for all the work you're putting in to help keep folks updated. I know no one would have chosen this, and I'm so sorry it happened.
As much as I have had my own difficulties with Matt (which started because of something stupid I did) what you did in publishing his health information without his consent is unethical and quite possibly could be illegal. I have no idea. It is an ugly look. If you have any integrity at all you will redact his health information. You know that consent is important and you do not have his consent to share his health information. I can see that there was wrong on both sides here and a lot of hurt feelings on both sides. However, what you did in posting his correspondence is not autistic authenticity. Especially to publish his health information is cruel. There is 100% a difference between autistic honesty and being vindictive and cruel. I think you could do better. And I no longer feel comfortable listening to this podcast because of this post. I wish both you and Matt good luck but you've done him wrong.
As a fellow autistic professional writer and editor, I’m shocked by this. Surely you understand the professional responsibility, if not a personal one, to respect the privacy of behind the scenes professional conversations, particularly sharing private written communications without consent. This is a very bad look for you as a professional whose job surely often implicitly asks people to trust you with very private details or conversations. No one’s ‘data hunger’ or interest in transparency should erase other people’s right to personal privacy. I understand you must feel very hurt and confused, and I also loathe it when I get this kind of outcome, where someone you were close to cuts you off, and you’re left to make sense of things in a void. It is skin-crawlingly awful. But I don’t think you are helping yourself with this.
Re sharing screen shots from private groups, yes, people do it - but there’s a huge difference between showing private screen shots to a friend and publishing them to a huge subscriber base and making them available on a Google docs to everyone. I think most people would agree it’s not ethical behaviour, nor kind. And as a fan of the show, I think you rightly strive to be both these things.
"This is a very bad look for you as a professional whose job surely often implicitly asks people to trust you with very private details or conversations. No one’s ‘data hunger’ or interest in transparency should erase other people’s right to personal privacy."
I am new here. That being said I don't understand why you are shaming her for being transparent about why Matt left.
He could have done what is "normal" and explained himself in a letter about "sorry we are going our separate ways, I know this is abrupt but with maga, personal stuff, etc. I can no longer do this". He didn't. He blocked Angela from the damn group. So she shared with viewers what happened from her perspective. If she had just told us there would have been many who doubted what she said. It just would have added to people picking sides. This way it's all out in the open.
I guess some stuff was there that was super personal to Matt and it's been redacted. Most of it is stuff he's already discussed in pods. His finances, maga issues, client issues.
Maybe a small part of Angela is/was looking for a bit of revenge or has anger and that drove her decision a bit but I genuinely believe this is just her being transparent. And I truly doubt Matt would have a major issue with this stuff being published. Has he said somewhere that he does?
Jo, Could she be any more Actually Autistic? For anyone who’s been a real listener—whether neurodivergent or neurotypical—how could you not see that Angela is living exactly what she has been talking about for 127 episodes? Radical transparency. Direct communication. Laying things out clearly so people can make their own informed decisions. This is not a new side of Angela or an unprofessional side—it’s the core of her integrity. Honestly, the only shocking part is that she didn’t drop a color-coded spreadsheet alongside the screenshots.
Her decision to share this wasn’t about drama—it was about giving clarity to the people who’ve trusted and followed this project. She wasn’t just ghosted personally, she was left with a public-facing project and hundreds of messages asking what happened. Angela did what she always does - took the questions seriously and responded honestly.
I deeply appreciate your comment and I will continue to study this. I just so strongly personally believe in transparency. I don't understand secrets. They confuse me and I find they often protect the oppressed. I am not saying I am oppressed here but in general, in my perfect world, everyone would share everything.
Obviously I would not have shared this if he agreed to a joint statement. Keep in mind he blocked me and told other people he quit but didn't even tell me he quit. To me that feels unethical. This feels like setting the record straight for our listeners who want or need that clarity.
This is an honest question, I really don't understand why you would need consent in this situation? It wasn't a partial conversation and it wasn't out of context. I stand behind what I said and I have given space for the other party to say that he stands behind what he said or would like to ammend the record. We all have the right to change our minds.
This is an honest inquiry. I am open to learning and understanding but I don't understand how this is a matter of personal privacy. I am open to reading or watching anything you recommend to understand this better. To me, when you announce you have quit to a group and not to your partner and when you don't respond to a settlement offer at all, you are foregoing a right to have your privacy maintained because the conversation was not held in good faith.
Even responding "I quit." would change that for me, but I am very interested in your perspective.
Also no less than 50 people messaged me in 24 hours to ask me what happened and it was taking up a lot of my time sharing the story so assembling everything into a document and saying here - read for yourself and draw your own conclusion was efficient. Not trying to be obtuse, I really don't understand the difference between showing private screen shots to a friend and publishing them to listeners who have a vested interest in knowing.
Viewing personal communication without consent for the sake of transparency feels very unaligned with my values. As a reader and listener, I now feel complicit in the harm. Not only to Matt, but for those of us in the private FB group who deserve the safety and security in knowing screenshots of posts won’t be used as a plot twist by our own people.
I appreciate you sharing that perspective. I am always willing to learn. Do you have anything I can read to understand this more? Philosophy of communications and community? I'm not sure where or how to study this perspective.
I am sad you feel complicit in the harm. I don't really understand that either but I will research and contemplate why that would be but I am open to you sharing more if you would like to.
As someone with tremendous data hunger and who really suffers when I don't understand what happened, I always want to see more direct primary source communication. I often share screenshots from private groups. I thought everyone did that. People share them with me. And then sometimes people pretend they don't. I really struggle with pretending.
I will contemplate the ethics of this. To me, my ethics here are around standing behind your word. I feel like we are only as shameful as our secrets. I think sunlight is the best medicine. And I am fine with you looking at this whole exchange and saying wow, I want nothing to do with Angela rather than what feels to me like weird allistic ritual of hiding facts behind obscure and hard-to-parse statements. I believe in trusting people with the details and to reach their own conclusion which is sounds like you did or are doing and I support that.
Learning about the in's and out's of consent has been very important to me as I grow in adulthood. Especially as someone who craves control amidst a chaotic world.
The FRIES acronym has been helpful for me (Freely Given; Reversible; Informed; Enthusiastic; Specific). It's important to make people feel safe enough to share how they're truly feeling if/when you're checking in on them along the way.
Just as much as transparency is a value I hold dear, so too is consent. For example, I've had friendships where a person shares screenshots of private conversations with other friends to show me, talking poorly about the other person. Or from private FB groups, sharing screenshots and talking about how x, y, z was wrong. It only made me feel more unsafe as a friend because I felt like, well if you're doing that to your other close friends, you're likely doing that to me. By sharing screenshots from a group you are no longer a part of, that makes me feel less safe to share in there.
Asking someone (Matt) who is clearly no longer on board to come back for the season's remaining 10 episodes is an example of not respecting consent and boundaries. Perhaps in response to feeling as if your own boundaries and well-being weren't being respected. But one does not make the other okay.
An example of it not feeling values-aligned for me is that the podcast is continuing at all without Matt. Or that ads by him are still being aired, etc.
Reading your post and transcript to the episode felt like stealing someone's diary and not being able to unsee details that were not mine to be seen. I am not owed that information and it is unnecessary for me to come to my own conclusions.
No one owes anyone anything once consent has left the conversation (despite that being frustrating when so much labor and funding has gone into a partnership). Nor do we owe you philosophies of communications to give strength to our moral compass.
However, I personally enjoy "A Big Shitty Party: Six Parables of Writing about Other People" by Melissa Febos. You can read it for free here (you do have to sign up for a free account with The Kenyon Review): https://kenyonreview.org/piece/melissa-febos/
Here is an excerpt:
"4. Letting the Writer Win
Once, when I was in a conversation with a writer friend, she asked me how I found the courage to write so intimately about the people in my life when I knew my work was likely to upset them. I told her that I always let the writer win. I explained to her that in the course of my daily life, I was generally a very good employee, a good teacher, a good friend, a good daughter. But when any of those roles came into conflict with my writing, or I anticipated that they might, I was a writer first. I always let the writer win.
Some years ago, I had an experience that changed this. I won’t reiterate it here, because I do not want to replicate the harm I caused by writing about this person the first time. I will say that it humbled me more than any other experience I’ve shared in this essay, more than most things over the course of my whole life. It prompted a revision of not only my personal credo for writing about other people but also my entire ethical understanding of that exercise.
It is profoundly unfair that a writer gets to author the public version of a story that has as many true variations as persons involved. When I think of narrative truth—the truth that lies beyond the verifiable facts of an event—I picture a prism, with as many facets as there are people affected. When a writer chooses to publish their version, that facet becomes the one visible beyond the scope of the people involved. Each person who was present for the events about which I have written has a different true story of them. Their depiction of me in many of those stories would surely hurt my feelings. Probably, I would object to some of their truths, because they conflict with my own. But it has been my version that has been published, over and over. It is hideously unfair. I’m not here to say it is wrong, because if I felt that way I wouldn’t keep publishing this kind of work. Lots of things that are unfair are worthwhile. However, I do not want to conflate the value of my work with any moral high ground.
Before this experience, I subscribed to a somewhat shallow, self-interested, and, I now see, heartless perspective on this. A kind of Oh well attitude that was rationalized by a grandiose story I told myself about the moral imperative of an artist’s vision. This attitude was not something I’d come to by way of deep consideration. It was an attitude of convenience that now strikes me as particularly egregious for an artist whose primary form is the essay, which could accurately be described as an artifact of the process of deep consideration.
Here is what I now believe: I do not have free rein to write my story of events that happened to someone else more directly than they did to me. If I want to write about my own experience of such events, then I ought to talk with that person about them before I begin writing. I should publish only an account with which that person is comfortable. There are lots of little qualifications to this, but they can be resolved using common sense and one’s own particular moral compass.
There are good essays that there are good reasons not to write. Sometimes, it’s important to let the writer lose."
If I could highlight, I'd bold this portion: "I do not have free rein to write my story of events that happened to someone else more directly than they did to me. If I want to write about my own experience of such events, then I ought to talk with that person about them before I begin writing. I should publish only an account with which that person is comfortable. There are lots of little qualifications to this, but they can be resolved using common sense and one’s own particular moral compass."
This is incredibly helpful and I will read and absorb everything. Thank you so much!
Also we are pulling all the ads and intros and all that... and renaming and rebranding the podcast. It's a lot of work, but we are on it. Had there been a response directly, of course, that all would have been negotiated, but by not responding I'm left to navigate on my own and I have laid out the time line for that. When we come back in October it will all be rebranded and the feed cleaned and everything edited etc. That said keep in mind I have other obligations that also need prioritizing so I will go as quickly as possible but this is what feels reasonable and do able with my budget and time.
I do see what you mean about asking him to do the remaining epsiodes, but again - any of that is negotiable. He could have just said what his counter terms were and we could have discussed it. I don't think it's wrong or not values-aligned to ask or to reply with what feels right to you.
I appreciate your disagreement and the discussion!
Beyond the blatant lack of care about consent, I also don't align with the way you have broadcasted Matt's personal health as if you have any ownership over him. *Even if* Matt has previously mentioned his health explicitly on previous episodes, that should always be his choice to share or not share.
I also have a hard time seeing the ways in which you put down "neurotypical" folks or Allistics. This is a gentle reminder that we are not better than others who you have individually described as "dumb, top down NT." Using ableist language to put down others whose brains work differently is not a culture I wish to celebrate.
Phew, this is messy. While I understand the sentiment, I don't think it's smart to air all your "dirty laundry" in public. As a fellow autistic, I understand the urge to be 100% transparent, but I think this should have been given some time and reflection first, before "the show must go on." This one-sided and hasty reaction now makes me seriously question my commitment as a listener to a podcast that has been so, so important to me in my journey as a late diagnosed autistic. Your earlier episodes still mean the world to me, but this isn’t it.
I think transparency is important personally and as a podcast listener I’ve had 2 host breakups - Reply All and Sounds Like a Cult where I felt like I was in the dark and I needed to understand what happened to grieve and move on. This was something I really struggled with because the hosts were my special interest.
I understand you might not need this to grieve but it’s what I needed as a listener. I became consumed by searching Reddit to try to understand what happened or trying to parse statements. I felt like I deserved an answer and I feel like our listeners deserve that.
If someone wants to know what happened they can read every single word directly with no edits. Primary source info. The recording is one sided I agree. And I regret that Matt wouldn’t come on. But the document of correspondence is not one sided at all and it’s there for people who want to judge for themselves.
I don’t know if the don’t air your dirty laundry thing is an allistic communication value but it doesn’t align with my understanding of the direct nature of detailed bottom up autistic communication.
I appreciate your perspective and commenting. I’m not sure there is a right way to do a public break up but personally I hate antiseptic and cryptic statements. They send my data hunger into overload.
My goal is only to help our listeners make sense of the change for themselves whatever that looks like for them.
Hey Angela, thanks for replying to these comments.
I agree that the “dirty laundry” line sounds a bit allistic, language barriers may also play a role here.
My point is:
There is a BIG difference between direct communication and bluntly putting private coversations out there for thousands of people to see, without (I assume) the other person’s consent.
Trust me when I say that I have made similar mistakes. But never on a public platform, and never around a disagreement with a friend.
Ofcourse we want ALL the details, but that doesn’t mean it’s okay to just share them with us.
You could have told us your side of the story, without publishing your conversations with Matt.
But the best option, I think, would have been to take a breather and give yourself and Matt some time to reflect and respond by sorting this out between yourselves first.
Again, I have made similar mistakes on a smaller scale, and I get the sense of urgency to react and respond immediately. But I’ve also learned that this, for me, often comes from a place of fear and self defence, instead of a well-considered step ahead that takes into account the other people (like Matt) who are involved.
Wow. I listened to this episode and I was trying to keep an open mind, but that was desperately unprofessional. Air out someone else’s dirty laundry like that? It’s not a good look. What I walked away with, after listening to your side of the story, is that you monetized Matt’s intellectual property. None of this would exist without the work that he had already done before you guys started any of this. He rewrote the DSM criteria. He redid the autism spectrum graphic concept. He put into place neurodivergent affirming evaluation and care. He shows up with autism research and data. He’s been fighting from the belly of the beast long before you came on the scene. That’s why he deserves respect. That’s why he deserves equal pay.
Meaning that he should have equally put forth his part of the over $50K that Angela put into the project of the past 3 years? That must be what you mean, Lara.
Angela has never paid herself or Matt a penny. So that’s pretty much equal pay.
And I believe Angela herself is still reckoning with what is equal work.
What do you think it Is?
Is his intellectual property worth more than everything that she’s put into this podcast and the book - from looking for sponsorships to promoting the podcast to setting up the Tee public store to looking for speaking engagements to keeping the social media aspect going the Substack, the emails, her marketing genius of 30 years? is that worthy nothing? is that worth less? Is her work of getting his message to a larger audience worth less? How do you determine that?
Sending love to everyone, Angela, Matt, other listeners! 💚💚💚 I re-listened to the grief episode after hearing this, how timely and helpful. Keep being kind to each other and keep supporting each other. I haven’t been part of any other autistic community that felt like home. Sometimes “home” is messy, but at least it is our neurodivergent home where we can all be actually autistic. This community is magic. I came to the community because it reframed autism in a positive and loving light. Then you started moving into issues that dig deep into our collective autistic experiences - mobilizing us and connecting us even more. Whatever comes next, this community has sincerely helped me through a difficult burnout period/car accident recovery and I am so grateful that to be part of it. Love you all, keep moving forward, as is the way :)
I feel very icky about being presented with one side of this conflict, especially because the original google doc shared medical knowledge without consent. This feels like a big intellectual property issue for Matt- it is clear to me from listening to the podcast and seeing the book, how much he brought almost all of the scientific knowledge to the intellectual and imaginative work of ACP, while Angela brought a brilliant and playful understanding of 'autistic culture' as a new category that tied the project together. It feels very unfair to me for him not to be listed as a co-author. I believe Angela is seeing this in terms of work rather than IP, but I think Matt is making an extremely strong IP claim that should be respected as such. I'm sorry that he did not take up Angela's plan for reconciliation, but I also think he totally had the right to not do so without his personal messages being broadcast (in reaction to being blocked from a facebook group). I would have felt very similarly to him in his position. That being said, I think Angela did an awesome job trying to make it right, and I will miss listening to both of you together.
Hi Catherine, I think it’s interesting that you would describe what was being presented as one side of the conflict when Angela very clearly presented every bit of both sides that was available. All of their correspondence was by text and email and she shared all of it both sides.
Are you in the Facebook group? Perhaps you can share what that side of the conversation is?
By 10:47 am any personal medical comments were redacted from the screenshots and from the text.
Can I ask you an honest question? If it felt so icky to you, why would you read it or listen to it? Is it like a car crash? You just can’t look away?
This was a very public facing project and Angela was left in a position to respond. Or she could’ve just gaslit us all, Matt included.
Without knowing what was being shared on a Facebook group that she was blocked from, in her actually autistic style she shared all of the facts that she had.
I hope you do have a chance to read the book so that you could give it a fair assessment and see if you really feel she is taking claim to Matt’s work, whether she presents it as her own, or whether she presents it as the content frequently shared on the podcast giving credit to Matt along the way and throughout the pages. It is obviously a project to promote the Autistic Culture podcast. I don’t think it was an ego project for her.
We love you and support you Angela.
This is super tough and definitely no easy way to explain this without being totally open and honest of the whole thing.
Thanks Katie. Pretty damn hard to not feel super protective of Angela, my little sis. I’ve been with her every step of the way from the unmasking to the leaning in and embracing and celebrating autistic culture. She loves this project. She loves Matt. She is incredibly hurt by his response by his denial and ghosting of her generous responses and offers to him. Maybe I’ve been in it with her for too long and know even more details than these messages and texts reveal - but again I don’t think it was meant to be hurtful to Matt / I think it was meant to be transparent to the community that she cares about so much.
She desperately wanted everyone to have all of the information that she had. And I think she’s always open to hearing here’s what she may have missed. Heck, I tell her all the time what she gets wrong. (Please note the now redacted medical information that Matt has openly aired on the show, - but it’s removed now from the texts). I really hope y’all continue to support Angela and her mission to bring knowledge about autistic culture contributions and justice for autistic people.
I understand the need to lay it all out there and move on. But I agree with other comments that there was a huge lack of consent in sharing personal information publicly.
Several times you say in your episode how much you love Matt, but the actions you’ve taken to share emails, texts, and screenshots not only felt like I was witnessing a violation, but it was lacking kindness.
We sometimes do not understand social norms and expectations. We sometimes struggle to understand what’s happening in the mind of the other person. But we can always choose to be kind.
We are what we do. And this was not kind.
Hi Katie, I feel that what wasn't kind was Matt locking Angela out of the facebook group without even finalizing a critical conversation with her - one that impacts us, the listeners and supporters of the show. She was left in a public facing position with many messages coming at her from whatever was being said in the Facebook group. She couldn't even defend it - because she didn't know what was being said - so, she went with facts and truth and full transparency in the most actually autistic way possible. Do you have any idea what a brilliant marketer and writer Angela is? Should could have done some kind of fake PR spin job. But she has more respect for all of us than that. Instead she laid out a timeline of exactly what occurred with the transparency and facts that she has been talking about for more than 100 episodes (and living most of her life). I don't see what was unkind or surprising about her sharing these facts.
I agree that it also wasn’t kind of Matt to remove her and block her.
And I appreciate how you are coming to your sister’s defense and helping her through this.
But calling the harmful actions that anyone did “the most actually autistic way possible” is hurtful.
Being autistic is not an excuse for violating someone’s privacy or being unkind.
I hope that Angela & Matt are able to have a PRIVATE conversation to gain some closure and move forward.
The angst on both sides must be tough. It seemed like you and Matt had such a good thing going. The emails/texts you included here reflect that there was so much miscommunication and assumptions made, and instead of stepping back, calming down and moving forward with clarity, the animosity on both sides is what prevailed and just broke everything down. I agree that the truth is key, but I find that it’s important to clear away the rhetoric first to get to the pure issue at hand. With that said, I do wonder if disclosing Matt’s personal information without consent was more aggressive in nature than assertive? Were you sharing this to hurt him? It’s difficult to understand how sharing his health information is beneficial in forwarding the mission of your project as a whole? In your own honest reflection, was malicious intent a wee part of the goal? I hope one day the air clears and you and Matt can have constructive dialogue to bring you both good closure.
I’ve read through these comments and I’m stunned by some of them. You didn’t deserve the way Matt spoke to you, or the way he didn’t respond and talk it out - especially not when you handled everything with honesty, grace, and transparency. You could’ve glossed over things or done the PR spin, but you didn’t. You told the truth, shared the facts, and let people come to their own conclusions. That takes courage.
Some people will always choose sides. They’ll pick a favorite and dig their heels in. But to me—and I know to many others—you’re the one who showed integrity here. You’ve consistently shown respect for Matt and the role he’s played, and it’s clear how much you care about the work you did together and how much do you care for him as a friend. You and I have had many conversations about that.
As for the book—that part really baffled me. I know how excited you’ve been about it. You’ve shared early drafts with me, talked through ideas, and connected your own experiences with the writing. This book is deeply yours. And honestly, I watched its earliest spark happen in real time—when I was struggling to get answers around my son’s mental health. Not only did you show up to support me, but your frustration with the vague, unhelpful “diagnosis” we were given lit a fire in you. You’ve told me more than once that that moment helped shape the focus of this book. I saw it evolve as you connected it to our conversations and the realities families like mine face. Offering Matt full revenue and co-credit was incredibly generous, and I know it came from a place of gratitude, not obligation. “With Matt Lowry” felt like the most honest and respectful way to acknowledge his influence.
You’ve always given so much of yourself to this work, and to your listeners. I’ve seen how much this podcast means to you—and how hard you’ve worked to make it something meaningful for others. I wish the ending of this chapter had come more gently. Missteps and miscommunications happen, especially when emotions and money are involved. But none of that makes you the villain.
I’m so proud of what you’ve built, and so grateful for the way your work has helped me understand you more fully—not just as a host, but as a person. And I’m deeply thankful for how it’s helped me show up better for my own kid. Keep going. You are doing important, generous, beautiful work.
I love you. Keep going. We need you.
And listeners, if you’re reading my comment here and you support Angela, please let her know - I know she’s hurting and needs your support as much as Matt does. (Maybe more.)
Hey Angela - my first reaction with all of this was that you and Matt were just not a good professional/business partner match - different communication styles, personalities, and needs. I have loved the podcast because it’s so validating and I get such a sense of belonging listening to it. You gave huge concessions with these disagreements, more than you probably needed to, in an effort to repair this relationship and move forward with a clean slate. I’m sorry you didn’t get a constructive response. I’ve been in this situation with a family member, it’s so devastating to realize that the relationship will never be the same and there’s nothing more you can give to change the other person’s behavior. Sending love, I can hear how difficult it’s been for you and for Matt as well.
Hey, while watching a public meltdown is incredibly validating about the autistic experience, it's also super painful. I'm sure many fans/past fans of this podcast are all too familiar with the way this is going down. It's really obvious to me as an outside observer how this wasn't posted from a place of balance and thoughtful consideration. You posted it without the redaction of sensitive information, including Matt's personal health information and a password which is still, by the way, not redacted in the screenshots. This is really disappointing. I'm not saying I don't see issues on both sides of the exchange, but I am saying that what you've done here kind of trumps the rest of it. Huge bummer.
Could she be any more Actually Autistic? This is exactly what Angela’s been modeling for all these episodes—radical transparency, directness, and respect for her audience’s right to understand the full picture.
This isn’t a meltdown. It’s consistent with everything she’s said all along. She was left with a public project and no communication, so she shared the facts—plainly and honestly.
It may not be everyone’s style, but it’s hers. And it’s exactly why so many people trust her.
She said the password was no longer functioning - because it was shut down.
Do you think that she should redact the parts that you mention? Would that make it better?
I just wanted to say that I appreciate both you and Matt so much for what you’ve given me in my journey as a late-in-life, self diagnosed autistic. And I will continue to appreciate you, Angela, as you move forward with the podcast in whatever new form it takes. 💚💚💚
Seconded.
also seconded!
Oh wow, I am really really sorry to hear this. I honestly haven't quite had time to figure out all my feelings about it, but oh it makes me sad on so many levels for absolutely everyone involved.
I will try to sort out the feelings bits of it later (they are Too Damn Big for right now), but I'd like to ask a purely practical question in the meantime. I had hoped to get a couple of physical copies of the current version of the book, but I can't actually figure out how?
I looked at the Our Book tab, and I see the ebook/audiobook bits, but I'm a paper book person at heart and wanted to get two of those as well. And all I can see is the 'join the substack' stuff. I already am a member (I did the guardians thing last year)! I just don't see where to actually say 'hello, here are some dollars, please send me some slices of dead trees.' I'm sure I'm overlooking it, and I'm sorry to bother you when all of this is going on, but could you point me in the right direction when you have a moment?
I'm sorry again, this whole endeavor was really meaningful to me, and I am so very sad this has happened. I hope everyone finds their way to a less painful place in the days to come.
Hunter, I know, I'm so gutted! But yes, I believe you already filled in the order form for the free guardian book and that is in the mail. The other books can be ordered. There are many places to do this.
If you are logged in with your paid account and you click "Our book" or "Audiobook (Members)" both of those areas have many posts and every single post has a button that says "Order Print Book" - you already got the free signed one (it's in the mail) so any others you need to pay for shipping and printing. It's definitely going to be a collectors item!
I too hope everyone finds their way to a less painful place in the days to come.
I have a funeral, a final exam, and a UK Driver's test so my hands are full but I am grateful for all of the listeners and shows Matt and I did make together and I will always love, trasure, and value that incredible experience!
Gaaah! Totally my fault, thank you. Totally totally happy to pay for the others! I just got distracted by the 'learn more' button at the top and didn't make it all the way down to the bottom to find the thing I was looking for (or maybe I wasn't logged in when I was looking and it shows a different view? I swear substack sometimes betrays me...). Either way, that was me not looking hard enough, so my apologies for bothering you, and thank you for your help. I'll go order more right now.
And good luck with the exams (heck of a combo!). And I can't possibly wish anyone good luck with a funeral, but hopefully it all goes smoothly and there are lots of funny stories and it brings everyone a little bit of peace.
Every Single Thing just feels so much harder than usual right now, for absolutely every single person I know, and it just really sucks. I hate it all. Every tiny little bit. And I'm sorry for everything both you and Matt are dealing with. It really is a lot. Here's hoping for better days ahead!
Hi Hunter, I’m Angela’s sister. She actually put me in the book dedication! And then after her visit to the states and the conference that may have helped to unravel the partnership, she left all the books at my house in North Carolina for me to help in mailing them from the US instead of the UK. And I did that just yesterday! I definitely remember seeing your name on one of the shipping labels. You’ll probably see in a week to 10 days. I hope you’ll continue to support the work of bringing the contributions of autistic culture into the world through Angela‘s continuation of the autistic culture podcast and whatever the next shape it takes. And I’m sure you’ll be able to support Matt’s important work as well. That’s what she would want.
Fantastic, no rush at all! I had just told a couple of folks I'd get them copies and wanted to make sure I did that while they were available. Sorry again for not (sigh, I disappoint myself) actually scrolling to the bottom of the page.
Thanks for mailing them, I'll keep an eye on the mailbox, and I've ordered the others now.
This is all Very Very A Lot for everyone involved. So damn many feelings. Thanks for all the work you're putting in to help keep folks updated. I know no one would have chosen this, and I'm so sorry it happened.
As much as I have had my own difficulties with Matt (which started because of something stupid I did) what you did in publishing his health information without his consent is unethical and quite possibly could be illegal. I have no idea. It is an ugly look. If you have any integrity at all you will redact his health information. You know that consent is important and you do not have his consent to share his health information. I can see that there was wrong on both sides here and a lot of hurt feelings on both sides. However, what you did in posting his correspondence is not autistic authenticity. Especially to publish his health information is cruel. There is 100% a difference between autistic honesty and being vindictive and cruel. I think you could do better. And I no longer feel comfortable listening to this podcast because of this post. I wish both you and Matt good luck but you've done him wrong.
As a fellow autistic professional writer and editor, I’m shocked by this. Surely you understand the professional responsibility, if not a personal one, to respect the privacy of behind the scenes professional conversations, particularly sharing private written communications without consent. This is a very bad look for you as a professional whose job surely often implicitly asks people to trust you with very private details or conversations. No one’s ‘data hunger’ or interest in transparency should erase other people’s right to personal privacy. I understand you must feel very hurt and confused, and I also loathe it when I get this kind of outcome, where someone you were close to cuts you off, and you’re left to make sense of things in a void. It is skin-crawlingly awful. But I don’t think you are helping yourself with this.
Re sharing screen shots from private groups, yes, people do it - but there’s a huge difference between showing private screen shots to a friend and publishing them to a huge subscriber base and making them available on a Google docs to everyone. I think most people would agree it’s not ethical behaviour, nor kind. And as a fan of the show, I think you rightly strive to be both these things.
"This is a very bad look for you as a professional whose job surely often implicitly asks people to trust you with very private details or conversations. No one’s ‘data hunger’ or interest in transparency should erase other people’s right to personal privacy."
I am new here. That being said I don't understand why you are shaming her for being transparent about why Matt left.
He could have done what is "normal" and explained himself in a letter about "sorry we are going our separate ways, I know this is abrupt but with maga, personal stuff, etc. I can no longer do this". He didn't. He blocked Angela from the damn group. So she shared with viewers what happened from her perspective. If she had just told us there would have been many who doubted what she said. It just would have added to people picking sides. This way it's all out in the open.
I guess some stuff was there that was super personal to Matt and it's been redacted. Most of it is stuff he's already discussed in pods. His finances, maga issues, client issues.
Maybe a small part of Angela is/was looking for a bit of revenge or has anger and that drove her decision a bit but I genuinely believe this is just her being transparent. And I truly doubt Matt would have a major issue with this stuff being published. Has he said somewhere that he does?
Jo, Could she be any more Actually Autistic? For anyone who’s been a real listener—whether neurodivergent or neurotypical—how could you not see that Angela is living exactly what she has been talking about for 127 episodes? Radical transparency. Direct communication. Laying things out clearly so people can make their own informed decisions. This is not a new side of Angela or an unprofessional side—it’s the core of her integrity. Honestly, the only shocking part is that she didn’t drop a color-coded spreadsheet alongside the screenshots.
Her decision to share this wasn’t about drama—it was about giving clarity to the people who’ve trusted and followed this project. She wasn’t just ghosted personally, she was left with a public-facing project and hundreds of messages asking what happened. Angela did what she always does - took the questions seriously and responded honestly.
I would expect nothing less from my sister.
I deeply appreciate your comment and I will continue to study this. I just so strongly personally believe in transparency. I don't understand secrets. They confuse me and I find they often protect the oppressed. I am not saying I am oppressed here but in general, in my perfect world, everyone would share everything.
Obviously I would not have shared this if he agreed to a joint statement. Keep in mind he blocked me and told other people he quit but didn't even tell me he quit. To me that feels unethical. This feels like setting the record straight for our listeners who want or need that clarity.
This is an honest question, I really don't understand why you would need consent in this situation? It wasn't a partial conversation and it wasn't out of context. I stand behind what I said and I have given space for the other party to say that he stands behind what he said or would like to ammend the record. We all have the right to change our minds.
This is an honest inquiry. I am open to learning and understanding but I don't understand how this is a matter of personal privacy. I am open to reading or watching anything you recommend to understand this better. To me, when you announce you have quit to a group and not to your partner and when you don't respond to a settlement offer at all, you are foregoing a right to have your privacy maintained because the conversation was not held in good faith.
Even responding "I quit." would change that for me, but I am very interested in your perspective.
Also no less than 50 people messaged me in 24 hours to ask me what happened and it was taking up a lot of my time sharing the story so assembling everything into a document and saying here - read for yourself and draw your own conclusion was efficient. Not trying to be obtuse, I really don't understand the difference between showing private screen shots to a friend and publishing them to listeners who have a vested interest in knowing.
Viewing personal communication without consent for the sake of transparency feels very unaligned with my values. As a reader and listener, I now feel complicit in the harm. Not only to Matt, but for those of us in the private FB group who deserve the safety and security in knowing screenshots of posts won’t be used as a plot twist by our own people.
I appreciate you sharing that perspective. I am always willing to learn. Do you have anything I can read to understand this more? Philosophy of communications and community? I'm not sure where or how to study this perspective.
I am sad you feel complicit in the harm. I don't really understand that either but I will research and contemplate why that would be but I am open to you sharing more if you would like to.
As someone with tremendous data hunger and who really suffers when I don't understand what happened, I always want to see more direct primary source communication. I often share screenshots from private groups. I thought everyone did that. People share them with me. And then sometimes people pretend they don't. I really struggle with pretending.
I will contemplate the ethics of this. To me, my ethics here are around standing behind your word. I feel like we are only as shameful as our secrets. I think sunlight is the best medicine. And I am fine with you looking at this whole exchange and saying wow, I want nothing to do with Angela rather than what feels to me like weird allistic ritual of hiding facts behind obscure and hard-to-parse statements. I believe in trusting people with the details and to reach their own conclusion which is sounds like you did or are doing and I support that.
Learning about the in's and out's of consent has been very important to me as I grow in adulthood. Especially as someone who craves control amidst a chaotic world.
The FRIES acronym has been helpful for me (Freely Given; Reversible; Informed; Enthusiastic; Specific). It's important to make people feel safe enough to share how they're truly feeling if/when you're checking in on them along the way.
Just as much as transparency is a value I hold dear, so too is consent. For example, I've had friendships where a person shares screenshots of private conversations with other friends to show me, talking poorly about the other person. Or from private FB groups, sharing screenshots and talking about how x, y, z was wrong. It only made me feel more unsafe as a friend because I felt like, well if you're doing that to your other close friends, you're likely doing that to me. By sharing screenshots from a group you are no longer a part of, that makes me feel less safe to share in there.
Asking someone (Matt) who is clearly no longer on board to come back for the season's remaining 10 episodes is an example of not respecting consent and boundaries. Perhaps in response to feeling as if your own boundaries and well-being weren't being respected. But one does not make the other okay.
An example of it not feeling values-aligned for me is that the podcast is continuing at all without Matt. Or that ads by him are still being aired, etc.
Reading your post and transcript to the episode felt like stealing someone's diary and not being able to unsee details that were not mine to be seen. I am not owed that information and it is unnecessary for me to come to my own conclusions.
No one owes anyone anything once consent has left the conversation (despite that being frustrating when so much labor and funding has gone into a partnership). Nor do we owe you philosophies of communications to give strength to our moral compass.
However, I personally enjoy "A Big Shitty Party: Six Parables of Writing about Other People" by Melissa Febos. You can read it for free here (you do have to sign up for a free account with The Kenyon Review): https://kenyonreview.org/piece/melissa-febos/
Here is an excerpt:
"4. Letting the Writer Win
Once, when I was in a conversation with a writer friend, she asked me how I found the courage to write so intimately about the people in my life when I knew my work was likely to upset them. I told her that I always let the writer win. I explained to her that in the course of my daily life, I was generally a very good employee, a good teacher, a good friend, a good daughter. But when any of those roles came into conflict with my writing, or I anticipated that they might, I was a writer first. I always let the writer win.
Some years ago, I had an experience that changed this. I won’t reiterate it here, because I do not want to replicate the harm I caused by writing about this person the first time. I will say that it humbled me more than any other experience I’ve shared in this essay, more than most things over the course of my whole life. It prompted a revision of not only my personal credo for writing about other people but also my entire ethical understanding of that exercise.
It is profoundly unfair that a writer gets to author the public version of a story that has as many true variations as persons involved. When I think of narrative truth—the truth that lies beyond the verifiable facts of an event—I picture a prism, with as many facets as there are people affected. When a writer chooses to publish their version, that facet becomes the one visible beyond the scope of the people involved. Each person who was present for the events about which I have written has a different true story of them. Their depiction of me in many of those stories would surely hurt my feelings. Probably, I would object to some of their truths, because they conflict with my own. But it has been my version that has been published, over and over. It is hideously unfair. I’m not here to say it is wrong, because if I felt that way I wouldn’t keep publishing this kind of work. Lots of things that are unfair are worthwhile. However, I do not want to conflate the value of my work with any moral high ground.
Before this experience, I subscribed to a somewhat shallow, self-interested, and, I now see, heartless perspective on this. A kind of Oh well attitude that was rationalized by a grandiose story I told myself about the moral imperative of an artist’s vision. This attitude was not something I’d come to by way of deep consideration. It was an attitude of convenience that now strikes me as particularly egregious for an artist whose primary form is the essay, which could accurately be described as an artifact of the process of deep consideration.
Here is what I now believe: I do not have free rein to write my story of events that happened to someone else more directly than they did to me. If I want to write about my own experience of such events, then I ought to talk with that person about them before I begin writing. I should publish only an account with which that person is comfortable. There are lots of little qualifications to this, but they can be resolved using common sense and one’s own particular moral compass.
There are good essays that there are good reasons not to write. Sometimes, it’s important to let the writer lose."
If I could highlight, I'd bold this portion: "I do not have free rein to write my story of events that happened to someone else more directly than they did to me. If I want to write about my own experience of such events, then I ought to talk with that person about them before I begin writing. I should publish only an account with which that person is comfortable. There are lots of little qualifications to this, but they can be resolved using common sense and one’s own particular moral compass."
This is incredibly helpful and I will read and absorb everything. Thank you so much!
Also we are pulling all the ads and intros and all that... and renaming and rebranding the podcast. It's a lot of work, but we are on it. Had there been a response directly, of course, that all would have been negotiated, but by not responding I'm left to navigate on my own and I have laid out the time line for that. When we come back in October it will all be rebranded and the feed cleaned and everything edited etc. That said keep in mind I have other obligations that also need prioritizing so I will go as quickly as possible but this is what feels reasonable and do able with my budget and time.
I do see what you mean about asking him to do the remaining epsiodes, but again - any of that is negotiable. He could have just said what his counter terms were and we could have discussed it. I don't think it's wrong or not values-aligned to ask or to reply with what feels right to you.
I appreciate your disagreement and the discussion!
Beyond the blatant lack of care about consent, I also don't align with the way you have broadcasted Matt's personal health as if you have any ownership over him. *Even if* Matt has previously mentioned his health explicitly on previous episodes, that should always be his choice to share or not share.
I also have a hard time seeing the ways in which you put down "neurotypical" folks or Allistics. This is a gentle reminder that we are not better than others who you have individually described as "dumb, top down NT." Using ableist language to put down others whose brains work differently is not a culture I wish to celebrate.
Phew, this is messy. While I understand the sentiment, I don't think it's smart to air all your "dirty laundry" in public. As a fellow autistic, I understand the urge to be 100% transparent, but I think this should have been given some time and reflection first, before "the show must go on." This one-sided and hasty reaction now makes me seriously question my commitment as a listener to a podcast that has been so, so important to me in my journey as a late diagnosed autistic. Your earlier episodes still mean the world to me, but this isn’t it.
Robin,
I think transparency is important personally and as a podcast listener I’ve had 2 host breakups - Reply All and Sounds Like a Cult where I felt like I was in the dark and I needed to understand what happened to grieve and move on. This was something I really struggled with because the hosts were my special interest.
I understand you might not need this to grieve but it’s what I needed as a listener. I became consumed by searching Reddit to try to understand what happened or trying to parse statements. I felt like I deserved an answer and I feel like our listeners deserve that.
If someone wants to know what happened they can read every single word directly with no edits. Primary source info. The recording is one sided I agree. And I regret that Matt wouldn’t come on. But the document of correspondence is not one sided at all and it’s there for people who want to judge for themselves.
I don’t know if the don’t air your dirty laundry thing is an allistic communication value but it doesn’t align with my understanding of the direct nature of detailed bottom up autistic communication.
I appreciate your perspective and commenting. I’m not sure there is a right way to do a public break up but personally I hate antiseptic and cryptic statements. They send my data hunger into overload.
My goal is only to help our listeners make sense of the change for themselves whatever that looks like for them.
Hey Angela, thanks for replying to these comments.
I agree that the “dirty laundry” line sounds a bit allistic, language barriers may also play a role here.
My point is:
There is a BIG difference between direct communication and bluntly putting private coversations out there for thousands of people to see, without (I assume) the other person’s consent.
Trust me when I say that I have made similar mistakes. But never on a public platform, and never around a disagreement with a friend.
Ofcourse we want ALL the details, but that doesn’t mean it’s okay to just share them with us.
You could have told us your side of the story, without publishing your conversations with Matt.
But the best option, I think, would have been to take a breather and give yourself and Matt some time to reflect and respond by sorting this out between yourselves first.
Again, I have made similar mistakes on a smaller scale, and I get the sense of urgency to react and respond immediately. But I’ve also learned that this, for me, often comes from a place of fear and self defence, instead of a well-considered step ahead that takes into account the other people (like Matt) who are involved.
Thank you for saying this. I think it's really important that we as autistic people don't use our neurotype to justify harmful behavior.