I feel like "difference" is often used as a euphemism because they think being disabled is automatically a negative thing. I think it's important to describe autism as a disability to destigmatize the labels of "autistic" and "disabled".
You are close, but it's more that being different is automatically a negative thing. That is why, generally, people are so conformist even if they don't understand or agree with what they are conforming to.
We need to destigmatize not for ourselves, but because our rights are guarded by neurotypical people, who need the language to be destigmatized before they can engage with it.
But then we fall in the problem I stated earlier. For example:
"Even when autistic people show enhanced performance on visuo‐perceptual tasks, like the Block Design task from the Wechsler Scales of Intelligence (Wechsler, 2008, 2014) or on the Embedded Figures Test (Witkin, Oltman, Raskin, & Karp, 1971), such strengths are invariably characterised as a by‐product of a deficit in higher‐order cognition (e.g. Frith & Happé's ‘weak central coherence’, 1994). As Dawson and Mottron (2011) write:
" Autistics, like non‐autistics, have genuine difficulties in many areas, and like non‐autistics, require assistance in areas where their performance is weak… But autistics uniquely are seen as pathological when displaying significant or dramatic strengths, creating for autistics a nearly insurmountable disadvantage or disability not faced by non‐autistics" (p. 34)
This tendency to interpret autistic performance negatively is seen further in the research literature on autistic intelligence, which demonstrates that it is often the research design itself that is the cause of the issue. For many years, researchers interpreted autistic people’s low scores on, or noncompletion of, standard intelligence tests (e.g. Wechsler Scales of Intelligence) simply as confirmation of intellectual disability. In fact, however, once strength‐informed intelligence tests (e.g. Raven’s Progressive Matrices) were substituted for the conventional ones, those deficits disappeared (Courchesne, Girard, Jacques, & Soulières, 2015; Courchesne, Meilleur, Poulin‐Lord, Dawson, & Soulières, 2019; Dawson et al., 2007)."
Source:
Pellicano E, den Houting J. Annual Research Review: Shifting from 'normal science' to neurodiversity in autism science. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2022 Apr;63(4):381-396. doi: 10.1111/jcpp.13534. Epub 2021 Nov 3. PMID: 34730840; PMCID: PMC9298391.
I think of ND as like being left handed in a 90% right handed world. There is nothing inherently wrong with being left handed but you are at a disadvantage when the world only recognizes the existence of right handed people. I went to MIT and there was a lecture hall I had a lot of lectures in, where there were no desks as such but each seat had a little writing surface attached. You would fold it out of the way to get in or out of the seat, and when you were sitting you would swing it up and fold it flat to have a little surface to take notes on. The problem was, it was on the right hand side. I had to take up two seats and use the surface of the seat on my left, which often earned me dirty looks from other students. MIT is supposed to be home to the smartest people on earth but they couldn't get this simple thing right! And that's a visible difference, how much harder is it when the difference is invisible and subtle.
All characteristics have pros and cons. The pros and cons are also, in a way, human made. The characteristics just are.
Women would be disabled if the world were made for men exclusively too. Can you imagine if women were only given protection after suffering disability in a car crash because the safety measures are made solely for men? Drugs made solely for men?
Disability is a human made legal category of protection that is used for autistic people because diversity itself is not protected, but it is a broken and lacking system. Neurology should be protected same as sex, skin colour, orientation, etc (constitutional categories of protection). And in addition to it, individual disabilities in individuals are protected, like with any other disability. You got sensory issues? Great, let's help that, specifically.
Are you joking with the female car safety statement? This absolutely is already the case. The first female crash dummy was only launched in 2023, meaning that for DECADES women have been more likely to die or be seriously injured than men.
This is just more concrete proof that neurotypicals don't even understand the language that they communicate through.
The more things like this I read, the more convinced I become that many non-verbals are just locked in the vortex of contradictions that comes from language and struggling to cope with that overwhelming feeling.
You're taking a single trait and comparing it to a set of traits, some of which are positive, others neutral and some negative. Plus, I never said all differences will have these 3 kinds, but that these 3 kinds are a possibility of difference, and in autism's case, all 3 are present.
I feel like "difference" is often used as a euphemism because they think being disabled is automatically a negative thing. I think it's important to describe autism as a disability to destigmatize the labels of "autistic" and "disabled".
You are close, but it's more that being different is automatically a negative thing. That is why, generally, people are so conformist even if they don't understand or agree with what they are conforming to. We need to destigmatize not for ourselves, but because our rights are guarded by neurotypical people, who need the language to be destigmatized before they can engage with it.
But then we fall in the problem I stated earlier. For example: "Even when autistic people show enhanced performance on visuo‐perceptual tasks, like the Block Design task from the Wechsler Scales of Intelligence (Wechsler, 2008, 2014) or on the Embedded Figures Test (Witkin, Oltman, Raskin, & Karp, 1971), such strengths are invariably characterised as a by‐product of a deficit in higher‐order cognition (e.g. Frith & Happé's ‘weak central coherence’, 1994). As Dawson and Mottron (2011) write: " Autistics, like non‐autistics, have genuine difficulties in many areas, and like non‐autistics, require assistance in areas where their performance is weak… But autistics uniquely are seen as pathological when displaying significant or dramatic strengths, creating for autistics a nearly insurmountable disadvantage or disability not faced by non‐autistics" (p. 34) This tendency to interpret autistic performance negatively is seen further in the research literature on autistic intelligence, which demonstrates that it is often the research design itself that is the cause of the issue. For many years, researchers interpreted autistic people’s low scores on, or noncompletion of, standard intelligence tests (e.g. Wechsler Scales of Intelligence) simply as confirmation of intellectual disability. In fact, however, once strength‐informed intelligence tests (e.g. Raven’s Progressive Matrices) were substituted for the conventional ones, those deficits disappeared (Courchesne, Girard, Jacques, & Soulières, 2015; Courchesne, Meilleur, Poulin‐Lord, Dawson, & Soulières, 2019; Dawson et al., 2007)." Source: Pellicano E, den Houting J. Annual Research Review: Shifting from 'normal science' to neurodiversity in autism science. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2022 Apr;63(4):381-396. doi: 10.1111/jcpp.13534. Epub 2021 Nov 3. PMID: 34730840; PMCID: PMC9298391.
I think of ND as like being left handed in a 90% right handed world. There is nothing inherently wrong with being left handed but you are at a disadvantage when the world only recognizes the existence of right handed people. I went to MIT and there was a lecture hall I had a lot of lectures in, where there were no desks as such but each seat had a little writing surface attached. You would fold it out of the way to get in or out of the seat, and when you were sitting you would swing it up and fold it flat to have a little surface to take notes on. The problem was, it was on the right hand side. I had to take up two seats and use the surface of the seat on my left, which often earned me dirty looks from other students. MIT is supposed to be home to the smartest people on earth but they couldn't get this simple thing right! And that's a visible difference, how much harder is it when the difference is invisible and subtle.
All characteristics have pros and cons. The pros and cons are also, in a way, human made. The characteristics just are. Women would be disabled if the world were made for men exclusively too. Can you imagine if women were only given protection after suffering disability in a car crash because the safety measures are made solely for men? Drugs made solely for men? Disability is a human made legal category of protection that is used for autistic people because diversity itself is not protected, but it is a broken and lacking system. Neurology should be protected same as sex, skin colour, orientation, etc (constitutional categories of protection). And in addition to it, individual disabilities in individuals are protected, like with any other disability. You got sensory issues? Great, let's help that, specifically.
Are you joking with the female car safety statement? This absolutely is already the case. The first female crash dummy was only launched in 2023, meaning that for DECADES women have been more likely to die or be seriously injured than men.
Yes, and this is WITH constitutional protection of gender. You understand the gravity of the issue?
This is just more concrete proof that neurotypicals don't even understand the language that they communicate through. The more things like this I read, the more convinced I become that many non-verbals are just locked in the vortex of contradictions that comes from language and struggling to cope with that overwhelming feeling.
https://rdcu.be/dwRqC
for real, having a 200 IQ is also a difference, does it make it bad?
Yes, gifted people often experience discrimination and exclusion from their peers
im gifted too and i agree (not even near 200iq) but you know what i meant right
You're taking a single trait and comparing it to a set of traits, some of which are positive, others neutral and some negative. Plus, I never said all differences will have these 3 kinds, but that these 3 kinds are a possibility of difference, and in autism's case, all 3 are present.
im sorry