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?

  • pogosort@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I believe that you have good intentions with your post but this line of thinking is alienating to the autistic people who have difficulties that cannot be merely attributed to societal discrimination, but require support for their disability to allow them to live and thrive at all. Using terminology that is only derived from the social model of disability removes the agency from autistic people, particularly people with moderate-to-severe presentations, to communicate their difficulties clearly.

    “However, many individuals would function quite well in a setting that was designed to raise, educate, and accommodate autistic brains.”

    Environmental accommodations do not eliminate the presence of autism as a disability. A disabled person is still disabled when they receive accommodations. The fact that we need accommodations distinct from allistic people is indicative of its status as a disability.

    As you are a leader of an autistic community, I suggest for you to consider the implications of these statements towards autistic people with moderate-to-severe presentations and to be inclusive of them when discussing the social model of disability.

    • BOMBS@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think you make some valid points, but I think that society shouldn’t depend on the term “disorder” to provide accommodations. If I have a friend that says he doesn’t like dogs, I don’t require that he have a dog phobia diagnosis to put my dog in another room when he comes over. Similarly, if someone were to be classified as Autistic Neurotype, that could be sufficient enough to provide accommodations to meet their needs. I’m also not advocating against the use of the term disorder. I think that should be a personal option that someone could choose.

      Additionally, while some may consider me a leader, my approach is to solely moderate this community by applying the rules and help foster engagement, discussions on difficult topics, and growth while maintaining the respectful culture we’ve developed. If we start limiting topics or judging users for their innocent messages, then we discourage sincerity and engagement. Some topics are going to be controversial, and this is a place for those discussions. Otherwise, users might go to less healthy settings to address them or not address them at all.

      I’m autistic just like everyone else, and will make my social mistakes. It’s happened before, and it’s going to happen again. I would appreciate some compassion and leniency with my engagement in the community if I make any mistakes or offensive remarks. I’m trying my best and only want good things for us.