Using a social perspective to autism, I would appreciate if there were a way to classify someone as autistic without calling it a disorder. Yes, we have difficulties, but from a social perspective, a lot of them come from society being structured to meet the needs of allistics. They get guidance, acceptance, and ultimately privilege of a world that is designed for them, while we have to try to meet their expectations. From this perspective, we’re not disordered, but oppressed/marginalized. How does that make us disordered?
I agree that there are different levels of functioning, and that some individuals might meet criteria for a disorder due to autism spectrum characteristics, so that would be valid. However, many individuals would function quite well in a setting that was designed to raise, educate, and accommodate autistic brains.
Anyone have any insight or ideas on this?
Yes!! Thank you! If everyone were autistic, then our society would be structured around it. People would understand sensory overload, direct communication, dislike of hierarchies, lack of conformity, disappearing for days/weeks/months, need for order, etc. Society would be built considering all that into it, so it would just not even really be a thing.
Kind of like there could be an alien species that looks exactly like us and enjoys stimulation while sleeping, so they think that humans are disordered because we have difficulty sleeping on beds that shake like an earthquake all night. “Op, yep. Those humans and their sensory sensitivity while sleeping. They’re disordered and need accommodations.”
Since the majority of society doesn’t have autistic nervous systems, the assumption is that deviations are disordered and allistics are not. That’s what I’m getting at. Surely, there would be individuals that need more support than others, but support would probably be woven into the fabric of society, just like there are some individuals that suck at defending themselves from violence, so society created systems to protect those more vulnerable.
I prefer the term neurotype over disorder. It should be seen as a neurological difference not a medical condition.
Yes! Thank you! That’s the term I was looking for.
If Western society wasn’t structured in the way it is
And if humans never evolved to talk, or weren’t social animals… Those hypotheticals are totally useless and doesn’t change the fact that issues making it harder for affected people to interact with the fast majority of people are in fact disorders
Once again back to words… moron is a word, I know some people can’t handle certain words but that doesn’t make them not real and I have no problems calling someone that in the context I used, if someone judged you for being autistic then yes I believe them to be a moron as it is a stupid position to take
Yes certain neurotypes aren’t normal and let me make this clear that doesn’t reflect on the person as it has absolutely nothing to do with you it’s not a choice if you have 100 people and they are born without genetic abnormalities and you have 1 person who is born with an abnormality then yes they aren’t part of the norm that’s just how biology works the human race wouldn’t exist otherwise. I’m sorry if you don’t think that’s fair or like it, science doesn’t care about that, you think that including the difficulties is part of the disorder it’s not, that’s just you projecting that, the disorder is the genetic abnormality not the life you lead being autistic and having to deal with a normal world
Words matter, otherwise verbal assault wouldn’t constitute a hate crime (at least in the UK). You used an ableist word and that matters. The word has an interesting history, in case anyone is interested (see below) and using it is ableist given it used to be a psychiatric classification. I am assuming you wouldn’t use the ‘F’ word to describe gay people or the ‘N’ word to describe black people. Those are just words, too, what makes them different?
https://www.teenvogue.com/story/the-sinister-history-of-the-word-moron-explained
Also, taking the “science doesn’t care about your feelings” line of thinking is really lazy. We don’t have to keep the status quo. In fact, it’s generally good if we don’t. I can see from your responses that you aren’t interested in discussion, so I’m leaving it here. It’s OK to be wrong about things sometimes. Maybe you are wrong about this. Maybe not, but maybe you are.
I do agree with you words do matter that was my entire point, a disorder is not a bad word it’s a technical term, do we need to make up a new word because it has a stigma attached to it for some people? As far as moron goes what words that you don’t like are next is idiot gonna be on the chopping block? Dim witted? Should I spell it like this? m*ron does that make it so it’s not the same word and doesn’t hurt people? Sometimes policing what other people say can go too far you saying ableist could be bothersome to me but I’m not gonna tell you that you can’t say that
Comparing moron and the N word is a stretch but hey words are hurtful to you personally I can’t change that, good luck navigating life if that is going to set you off, not everyone is gonna be nice or agree with you that’s life though
Pretty sure scientifically proven facts are truths, unless they are disproven or the methodology is flawed if that’s lazy then I don’t know what to say lol
I do agree with you on my possibly being wrong, I don’t have a problem admitting when I’m wrong, on the flip side maybe, just maybe you too are wrong
A genetic abnormality doesn’t have to be a disorder. Someone could have a genetic abnormality that protects them from the bubonic plague and not be considered “disordered”.
Also, calling someone a moron for judging an autistic person is an oversimplification and generalization. That person could be quite intelligent, but not have the culture, compassion, or education to not judge others.
Science doesn’t care about anything. Science is a system we’ve created to help progress our awareness of the universe. However, all scientific theories are based off of assumptions, those assumptions come from society’s values, and those values come from the people with power. The point is that science still has aspects that are socially constructed, which means that it’s not entirely definite. A measurement can be definite. What that measurement means is subjective.
Yes, atypical Brian’s or neurodivergence does not necessarily equal disorder. I hated when my ex used to refer to my “disorder”. I found it not representative and even disrespectful to be honest.
Maybe it’s because we associate disorder with non functioning, when’s it more “life on hard mode in the current social/cultural context”. It also implies there’s something wrong with the individuals rather than recognizing that the environment could also be adjusted to help the individual thrive.
Exactly! And I’ve heard from several sources, including a therapist I was seeing, that having a few individuals with autistic traits in a pre-historical group was advantageous to the group as a whole. Two of the benefits I remember were that (1) they were great ambassadors/messengers because both parties trusted them more than NTs and (2) they were more aware of details in local environment to alert the group of important changes that affected everyone. Because of this, these individuals were highly regarded, cared for, and protected.
You do realize the word has a meaning?
“an illness or condition that disrupts normal physical or mental functions”
Generally people are born with 4 limbs because that is the normal, if you are born without them it’s abnormal you need to use words to classify things, the world operates on the norm… it wouldn’t make sense to make all cars be only able to operate for people who were born without limbs
Saying that, just because you have a disorder doesn’t make you any less of a person, anyone that thinks that is a moron… basically don’t get hung up on a word, you had no choice in your biology/birth you just got what you got
They way you describe it as being oppressed or marginalized you are gonna be well on your way to always being a victim if you want to frame your worldview that way
I could see this argument though. If society takes on the value that the main purpose of every single living organism is to reproduce, then homosexuality could be considered a disorder since “homosexuals” would have difficulties fulfilling life’s mandate (per society). I don’t agree with that, but I can see the argument.
Well I also don’ agree with that, but if we wouldn’t reproduce, we would go extinct.
It’s funny how you immediately brought that up when it has nothing to do with it and as Johnny said it doesn’t disrupt anything mentally or physically so no, but nice try to make it an issue that wasn’t even talked about
Does homosexuality disrupt normal physical or mental functions? No.
Does ADHD, Bipolar, Autism, Depression, and others disrupt normal physical or mental functions? Yes.
Couldn’t it be argued that homosexuality disrupted normal function in society due to societal expectations, which is also the primary way that ADHD produces functional disability? If society has different requirements would ADHD still be a disorder?
Just playing devil’s advocate.
I mostly agree, except for the last part about marginalization. The idea you can always overcome whatever disability/disorder/whatever with hard work and the right mindset is not accurate at all. And that’s not you wanting to be a victim, it’s you advocating for what you need. Accommodations exist for everyone, they just cater to abled/neurotypical people instead. Once I finally admitted to myself I was disabled and stopped trying to live my life like I am 100% able bodied improved my life A LOT.
And disabled/chronically ill/neurodivergent people DO face a lot of discrimination regardless of if you want to admit it or not. We should be fighting for improvement in treatment, acknowledging people treat you like less of a person doesn’t mean you actually are less of a person. ESPECIALLY in the current political climate… once LGBT+ people are dehumanized sufficiently disabled people are going to be next.
I can see how you interpreted that last part that way I didn’t mean it like that, what I was trying to say is I’m arguing that the word disorder is strictly that it’s a genetic disorder and having it doesn’t make you any less of a person it’s a biological issue
I’m not advocating a positive mindset cures all (otherwise depression and anxiety wouldn’t exist) and people with disabilities don’t experience hardships, of course they do but at the same time you are a person that can try to not allow others to dictate your feelings, life is hard enough as it is don’t let someone who looks down upon you determine your worth as their opinion is just that… an opinion
Its a disorder, not calling it one is not making it any less of a disorder.
Asperger’s was a syndrome, and they stopped calling it that, so it’s no longer a syndrome. The DSM is highly culturally-based.
The official term in the UK is Asperger’s disorder, although I’ve never heard it actually called that.
No it’s not. From the National Autistic Society:
"Asperger’s syndrome’ (often shortened to Asperger’s) is no longer used as a diagnostic term for autism and is considered controversial due to the history of Hans Asperger, which is summarised below.
Historically, Asperger syndrome was used as a diagnostic term for some autistic people who did not also have a diagnosis of a learning disability. Broadly, it is now agreed that what was referred to as Asperger syndrome is part of the autism spectrum and there is no need for a separate term.
Some people who received a diagnosis of Asperger syndrome continue to use this terminology to refer to themselves. Others do not, usually for two reasons: because the term is no longer used officially; and because of revelations about the Austrian psychiatrist Hans Asperger, who Asperger syndrome was named after and who was complicit with the Nazis."
https://www.autism.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/what-is-autism/the-history-of-autism/asperger-syndrome
Asperger’s was a syndrome, and they stopped calling it that, so it’s no longer a syndrome.
Those words only have meaning to a US American. I am a Asperger. My diagnosis is Asperger and I do not want to be called ASD Level something.
But isn’t this the entire point? You like to call yourself that, and that is perfectly fine, but ultimately all of these words come from psychiatric diagnosis, from the DSM. That is where the labels were defined, that is where our cultural understanding of the neurotype comes from.
Our culture has defined that you are disordered because of your way of being, you’ve been diagnosed as such. Another culture, a former culture will not have defined it that way. So you calling it a disorder is not based on anything absolute, it is based in a cultural understanding.
I was diagnosed with autism level 1, not aspergers, because: 1 - We now understand that describing people based on ‘functioning’ is extremely damaging to the individual; and 2 - Asperger tested on children for the Nazis, and I think we can all agree that’s not cool.
All of this is cultural, we didn’t know about the damage of functioning labeling at the time that diagnosis was accepted (or the whole Nazi thing), and so our cultural understanding of the condition has changed.
Understandings of disorder are cultural, not absolute.
I would appreciate classification and diagnosis of more neurotypical quirks as disorders.
A flip in mentality, where common behaviors that are more or less detrimental are actually seen as disorders and not just the common baseline that you can either be worse than or better than.
Like you struggle to properly understand technical/nerdy things? That’s a disorder. Oh, you’re superstitious? That’s a disorder. Of course, we’d need to also frame the entire thing around a different word than disorder, as it just means different from normal and despite the actual colloquial understanding it’s technically not supposed to make a value judgement.
I’d be very interested to hear your suggestions on what could be seen as a neurotypical disorder/flaw.
That’s an interesting idea! Perhaps, the term would be “atypical” or something like that? Also, what do you think this approach would achieve? Perhaps more accommodations, understanding, or compassion for quirks?
My first reaction to the idea is that it would result in a lot of people getting diagnoses and may dilute the value/strength that the diagnosis carries, so maybe people would take it less seriously. But, if implemented in an effective manner, it may turn out to increase awareness and compassion. However, I’m interested in your thoughts to develop a more concrete personal stance on it.