this must be the best thing I've read in ages.
this must be the best thing I've read in ages.
Terra Vance posits that Autistic people experience empathy and emotions differently because the way autistic identity is structured differs from non-autistic people’s identity constructs.
I‘ve not related to something this much in a long time. I‘ve been treated as a traitor for this so often all over my life. I can’t believe that someone actually has a theory about this that is not esoteric in some way.
You're viewing a single thread.
This is a really really interesting article, I do have one thought though.
I'm not autistic, but my partner is, hence the fact I frequent autistic spaces to help myself understand her better. If someone asked me Who are you? I'd want to answer I am kind, social and insecure, but I wouldn't because I'd presume whoever was asking implicitly asking about my social intersectionality, because from there, they can map where we fall on wider topics, so I'd answer "I'm a D&D player and general RPG designer, I'm bisexual and living in (trendy UK city).
From this, I'd assume that they would think, well he's bisexual, so probably progressive and supportive of the LGBTQ+ community, into D&D so probably nerdy and social, and lives in a city which is welcoming and like-minded, so probably supported in his beliefs.
I'd hope they'd unpack my values from my social intersections, but they'd also make assumptions based on if they wanted to like me or not. Someone who would answer "football fan, rocket league player and car enthusiast" may map their network from rocket league, to gaming to D&D and find that we both loved Skyrim a decade ago, leading to a good conversation about that, where we'd then try to imply our values though our conversation. They may hear bisexual and have issues with the LGBTQ+ community and try to seperate their social map from mine, and avoid making links to me, and we wouldn't have any conversation because it's already clear that we could argue over something like pronouns easily by them knowing themselves and my sexuality meaning I'm likely to champion other parts of my community.
However if I'd answered kind, social and insecure, you can't unpack that the other way. You'd never know where to take that conversation to a point that resonated with both of us.
I know this isn't a perfect take, as to my understanding, if I told autistic people my social intersections, they'd be less likely to start to automatically make assumptions to unpack my identity from it, but in a neurotypical dominated world, I'd just default to assuming whoever I'm talking to will.
I know the article ends with Non-autistic people are likely to reject this theory as it disempowers their privilege as the superior “default” neurotype and I guess I'm doing exactly that, but I really don't believe that my neurotype is superior, but by being more prevalent, I will with strangers in a way that's most accomodating for people without autism.
by being more prevalent, I will with strangers in a way that's most accomodating for people without autism.
That’s exactly what privilege is, if you boil it down.
Oh yeah I know I'm in the privileged position, and that's exactly why it's important to me to read articles like this and communicate with autistic people. But I also feel like it's the wrong decision to approach strangers in a way that's harder for them if they're neurotypical but easier if they're autistic.
As soon as I know somebody is not in their comfort zone while communicating with me, either from a neurodivergency or anxiety or anything really, I'm happy to change my communication style to be better, but I can't make presumptions about people before I've learnt that, so I need to talk to them like they're neurotypical.
To be clear, I don’t think you did anything wrong. I was just remarking on the mechanics of privilege.
I didn’t get the sense the author was advocating that you present yourself differently to cater to autistic people, although I read it kinda fast so maybe I glossed over that. Just an observation of the different patterns.
I am self-suspected (and others-suspected) autistic and I would respond “I am an independent and curious person and I love animals and nature”.
The reason you would change your answer to include social intersections was only really clear to me once you explained what others would be expected to infer from your revised answer. But it does make logical sense to interact in a way that provides the most information to the people you want to impart this information to. In answering in the ‘autistic’ way, one could also be broadcasting themselves in such a way that appeals to or resonates with other autistics and neurodivergents, which isn’t necessarily a con for us either, as I find NDs to be ‘safe/comfort/good vibe’ people to me at a much higher rate than neurotypicals. But that is not the conscious goal in my answer, my goal is to just answer the question accurately to how I see myself. Hope that all makes sense!
I‘m absolutely clueless what it is you‘re trying to say but I‘ll try harder to understand:
„Harder for them if they’re neurotypical“
Example: So are you saying a person is to assume someones gender because that is what cis people usually do? Instead of being assertive and listening/asking for clarification.
Because thats how it reads to me.
Being in a privileged position means you have to cater to the minorities since they are the ones nobody caters to. At least if it is fairness you‘re after.
So yes, catering to autistic identity is something that can be asked of you if you‘re in a privileged position.
I'm sorry if I'm not being very clear, I'm never the best at presenting my points clearly.
I do try to cater do all neurodivergent people, using your example of assuming gender, it's a very small fix in language to get that right, and day by day, I'd say I do unfortunately assume the gender of strangers more than I wish I did, and it's only when someone presents themselves in a way that gives the slightest inkling that they may be transgender or genderqueer that I actually catch myself and ask them their preferred pronouns. If someone ever corrects me when I've got it wrong based on assumption, I'm going to try to hard to get it right from then on of course. I sort of approach neurodiversity similarly, and I'm trying to change that mindset but it does come slowly.
I don't want autistic people to mask and act neurotypical infront of me or anyone else, but unless they let me know how they need to be communicated with, I can't implicitly get it right, and plenty of neurodiverse people either don't know how they need to be communicated with, don't want to be treated differently or would rather not let strangers know they're neurodiverse.
If someone needs to be communicated with in a different way, they need to let me know, because any other approach may do more harm than good. Of course I'm always trying to communicate in a way that allows people to communicate back to me, but for anything specific, you need to let me know.
I'm not sure if this analogy will land but in a restaurant, it's great for the restaurant to cater to many dietary requirements but if you have allergies, you really should let them know.
Apologies if anything I've said here is unclear (it probably is), I'm not great at expressing complicated thoughts.
No, not unclear. At least not anymore. I think your elaboration helped a lot. Thank you very much.
I agree. This opens up another question though: how do we make it so NDs (and especially autistic people) learn to communicate their needs and dont get retraumatized all the time into communicating nothing at all? More a general question, you don’t need to answer if that is not something you have an idea for.
I think the issue here is that autistic people are on the way of lgbtq people some 50 yrs back. Nobody knows a lot, some are nice and try to help, others are denying, even some autistics.
Our much bigger knowledge should help but I‘m afraid it does not, at least not enough.
I'm unpacking a lot of stuff in the past 3 years, and this article struck me hard.
I remember thinking of myself as having to wear masks, without knowing what masking is, and only recently I started to see when that is automatic.
I like to think 'weird' and when people accept it I would also say stuff like I'm "infinitely curious, detail oriented, living in a vast network of interconnected concepts" or "I work in IT, am dad" if not.
And this article has examples of Me. Crying when watching a documentary about the infinity of space, learning of world-changing discoveries. Also being deadpan serious when answering an aghast, rethorical "How could someone do this?" with "Just like that."
Thanks for trying to understand diversity. Not a lot of people do.
If someone asked me Who are you? I'd want to answer [...] but I wouldn't because I'd presume whoever was asking implicitly asking about my social intersectionality, because from there, they can map [...], so I'd answer "[...]". From this, [...] I'd hope they'd unpack my values from my social intersections
O. M. G.
I am blown away by this. In the way that the first moments of a good film says so much more than what's on screen, this "intro of a person" is such a beautifully crafted, rich description that I'm left thinking you've spent a long time polishing that to such perfection.
Me? I'm likely to simply give my name and profession, or possibly my reason for being at whatever gathering we meet at.
This is to say: is it "normal" for ("normal") people to be able to give such eloquent descriptions? Because I feel like a right dunce in comparison.
For reference, I am not diagnosed with autism, but am certainly struggling with something in this crazy world (and can relate to what I've read about alexithymia ).
Oh, yes. I have such chains of thought sometimes.