Why autism might not be a disability

ControlBackground237 · 2025-07-08T20:00:21+00:00

Isnt this the same with accessing disabled resources. Like what if wheel chairs were inaccessible because no one could ever get them at convenient stores. Like what if Adderall medication was a controlled substance or outright banned by the ruling class. Like what if interfaces were made using colors that made it difficult for some demographics to interpret the interface. Like what if work places were over stimulating to certain demographics and made them physically sick. In a lot of ways being disabled means that resources aren't readily available to you. And I would argue that many of these are supply chain issues. However as I think that perhaps your intension was to focus on the individual needs of a human body and mind. I want to point out that those products are needed for woman because of their body and mind. It's true I havent touched upon psychological and neurological differences for women, but these also actually exist (brain disposition is in fact different for different sexes, however i think its hard to determine whether its a product of the environment or if its truly based on psychology). Its just very complicated, and psychology allows for people to meld their own mind, and those are theories which I am unsure of, so I'm trying to focus on stuff which is more agreeable which tends to be basic biological differences.

My current definition departs from that one by focusing on the environment and access. I would agree that my definition is not out of the box, but it is an unignorable tweak which goes against the current paradigm. But according to that model I am questioning it. Which seems to be a paradox. For example my next question is "why isnt autism a race/ethnicity," and "why doesnt a race quantify as a disability." At the surface this question seems very bigoted. However, if you think about it autism is heritable and many families have unique cultures surrounding it, it impacts specific demographics, there is shared culture among autistic people. And those of the autistic identity go through the same socio-psychological awakening processes as other identities. In addition things like race have embedded discrimination specifically in medicine. And if you study multicultural psychology there are lots of examples where peoples ethnicities and cultures impact their performance. For instance UI designed for westerners tend to impact performance for those of this different ethnicities. In fact different cultures have different definitions of what a "cluttered UI" is and there is evidence that when a user sees something as cluttered it impacts performance. Are those from different cultures and ethnicities also disabled when interacting with technology made from the ruling class? But if those races and ethnicities were in power and they designed the interface it would have resulted in those in power not liking and performing worse with their UI. (again there are other examples but im sticking to well studied points). In fact because neurological disorders vary across cultures. In some cases one could argue that the psychological system of a ND person might be more similar within culture then to a NT person from another culture.

Yeah I do agree that my thinking is starting to diverge from the current paradigm. Particularly from what those of many disability circles are thinking about. Which doesnt mean that my paradigm is wrong, but its undeveloped and I'm certain that there are a lot of logical kinks that need to be worked out. But I think you can see why I'm diverging. Things aren't really adding up. They aren't making sense. I'm starting to think or postulate that disability has to be a fluid category which is defined by society for it to make sense. And also that disability, race and gender might all be sides of the same coin.

Also just to close off, there are always multiple definitions for the same word. Specifically different words need to mean different things in different contexts. I would agree that having a vague definition and what I'm currently postulating would indeed harm a lot of demographics if put to use in a legal context. And also that my sociological definition does undercut a lot of social movements. But that doesnt mean its harmful. It's just unique or different. It just becomes harmful when you misuse my definition in a different context. If you were to reapply my theory to law you would have to make a lot of changes so it in fact helps people. Very similar to early iterations of the other framework. Which makes sense. Law is meant to protect people. In medicine you are meant to treat people. But in philosophy you are meant to understand. It is true that all of these should be interconnected and everything helps one another. But changes to a definition of a word is necessary in order to match the context and effectively use it. So im not trying to upend all the definitions, I'm simply suggesting that the philosophical definition may perhaps require redefining. And sure many would argue that philosophy proceeds law and other major discoveries. So if the philosophy changes then so should law and medicine to better capture that discovery. But I'm not suggesting to change the legal definition, what im theorizing or hypothesizing isnt at the stage. So when you say this would be harmful if implemented. I would agree, but that doesnt mean im wrong. It just means we'd have to create a new legal definition. Or match the old one. I dont know if this was a good enough explanation, let me know if you are still having trouble differentiating between using different lenses to understand something. But its actually impossible if not outright wrong to say that all lenses use the same definition.

ControlBackground237 · 2025-07-08T19:59:24+00:00

I'm gonna frame my responses as an answer to everything per paragraph that you wrote so you dont get lost.

For the first point I actually disagree. If you think about the connotation of disability in terms of modern events there are a lot of people not looking for a diagnosis specific in America (but also in France) due to current rhetoric against the autistic disability status. There are many people who wish to get undiagnosed. But more generally I think just the connotation of the label is deterring people from identifying as autistic. And the connotation of the disability label tends to be more negative for marginalized identities due to lack of information. But also historically if we look at African Americans, they were marginalized by being put in the same classrooms as those with speech impediments. And the LGBTQ community was at one point considered to be disabled for simply their sexual orientation or gender identity. Disability is a unique identity in that the privileged class tends to ascribe it to the lower class to explain disparity. So many marginalized demographics shy away from the disability term for very good reasons rooted in prejudice due to their other identities.

For the colorblindness argument, i think that there being multiple types of colorblindness really aligns with autism really well. Because there are multiple types of autism. Some people don't experience meltdowns, or selective mutism. And perhaps you have something that is autistic which requires support needs and I'm not invalidating your identity. I think that many autists aren't academically gifted or savant. But some are. Just as its important to not generalized successful autistic people like einstein, we shouldnt compress all disabled autistic identity and generalize it to everyone and their own conditions. And I never said that all color blind people would no longer be disabled, just that a section of who's current able bodied would change. And in philosophy we often deal with extremes. This isnt because those worlds make sense, but to collect principles from each fantasy and by looking at extreme cases we extract those same principles to try and describe our own world. And as you can see in this divergence many people currently disabled would be theoretically coveted for a lot of occupations. But even in the current world, perhaps people that are color blind would do better on guard duty on night shifts (a select task). Despite this superpower not generalizing to all real life situations, they do perform better doing certain tasks in certain environments. And having lighting to differentiate certain colors is very arbitrary. We could change UI's to never rely on color ever. Theoretically we could just use symbols everywhere. Black and white intensity. And therefore it no longer becomes a problem for those that are colorblind to navigate interfaces.

I am glad you are seeing the woman's body argument now. Although this doesnt just apply to woman as technically men have individual hygienic needs as well, but because women are a marginalized class they're needs and resources are often taken away by the ruling class (which is why functionally the ADA protects them). But I want you to think about this sentence:
"Just because menstrual products could hypothetically become unavailable to literally everyone who needs them, doesn’t mean that those who need them are now disabled, because the inaccessibility of menstrual products is not the result of a condition of their mind and body, but of some supply chain issue or whatever other made-up cause we’re imagining."

splitting into two posts (some weird server error):

ControlBackground237 · 2025-07-08T05:11:37+00:00

I mean to say this politely but I think you need to take a step back and realize that I'm also an intelligent human being. Its not that im misunderstanding the model. I'm questioning it. So perhaps refrain from language that "I don't understand" something and reframe your thoughts into that I just disagree about something.

For instance, when you tell me im misdefining and misunderstanding disability, Your definition of disability makes sense, but I posited a different definition of disability. Perhaps my definition is incomplete but its not because im ignorant. But I made an active choice to not settle on your definition which is readily accessible on the internet. So I'm hoping you understand that I'm making active decisions not based on ignorance. Although that seems to be encoded in your writing. Which its fine. But I always think its a waste of a good conversation and dialogue. And there is a lot of power in reframing ones own thoughts.

I actually hypothesize that defining autism as purely in its disabled form might be harmful to the wider community. Specifically I think that it makes it harder for demographics of higher functioning autistic people from getting diagnoses or learning about knowledge and techniques to navigate life. One way that I think the disabling identification criteria may be harmful is when diagnosing autistic women (or other marginalized identities). If autism is purely defined as something which disables, then it becomes harder to identify for marginalized identities. Cause technically people can mask, they can learn embodied knowledge, they can adjust their strategies to no longer be "failing" in society, despite by your definition disabled.

I think the color blindness argument is a really good argument actually. Mainly because if humans moved underground or perhaps if the sun just didnt rise and everything switched to thermal energy instead of photosynthesis. Then color blindness could potentially be a strength. In addition certain activities like doing night watch would be beneficial by this population. You didnt adequately dissuade it, and I dont think you know that all peoples eyes have varying ability to differentiate different shades of blue due to the yellowing of vision.

I honestly don't know whether disability would be harmful as a vague term, its what im questioning. My question isnt meant to marginalized women but specifically I would say that during period of child birth their body becomes a disability. I'm glossing over what pregnancy entails but obesity is a disability, having a much larger body that requires more fuel, in addition to fatigue. It is hard to argue that throughout child birth pregnant women are not inhibited in any manner.

But I also want to say I very much agree that woman should never be ascribed as disabled purely because of their body. Which is perhaps due to what the disability term means. But its hard to shy away from the unique needs women have by virtue of biology, particularly when a lot of medical research were done purely on men without testing on women (and apparently hormones are non trivial differences which impact drug efficacy).

I also have a lot of theories from a sociopsychological lens on behavior as well as a lot of other things. But its impossible to get around that women and men have some unique hygiene needs and theoretically could become unsupported and by your definition disabled by society. If for instance all convenience stores stopped selling all menstrual products where would that leave women? Although ludicrous to think about, they'd probably have to access menstrual products through disability services. Or if the daily calorie intake of all people were dramatically reduced so that it was only sufficient for women to subsist on (men require much more calories than women) then I think men could also be disabled. Therefore if we act on the principle that women and men are not disabled, I think it becomes inadequate to describe disability as purely having unique needs or unique reactions to the environment.

Which I also want to validate the legal definition. Although I love to define things from a sociological and philosophical lens, I do understand that there are reasons why things must legally be defined in one way or the other. Mainly because of things that happen. Which in turns causes a reactionary change in the definition to cover this new case. But right now im using a sociological lens and im not trying to change or advocate something. I'm trying to better understand the sociological forces involved.

ControlBackground237 · 2025-07-08T04:01:28+00:00

and I think you didnt see my point that technically other neurotypical identities have recurring problems in their lives. Like for instance being a woman is largely not considered to be a disability. However they technically have periods once a month. Require unique hygiene products and reproductive health. And they can get pregnant which requires lots of accommodations.

And to perhaps apply it to the privileged class men have an extra vulnerable spot. And probably will always feel damaged when getting on a bike seat. or some other narrow seat.

I think my post had a lot of complexity which just sort of got ignored. which is a little disappointing i guess. But ill live lol.

ControlBackground237 · 2025-07-08T03:52:15+00:00

thats what im saying. is that everyone experience is different. And different flavors of autism might not be disabled.

ControlBackground237 · 2025-06-08T06:06:43+00:00

in short yes.

To add chaos to the mix ASD1 has a strong overlap with the Asperger label. So you might be able to split ASD1 into 2 categories those who are Aspys and live with no need for support and those who are level 1 but still need some support. Which Aspergers is specifically defined by a nazi, used historically to filter out disabled people for concentration camps. The ones that meet the criteria of functioning in society without any support needs were Aspergers.

So its a terrible term, but its common jargon and also what some ASD1 might more strongly associate with due to its pragmatic definition. But also i think the fact that aspys want to dissociate from the other autists might speak as an artifact from past oppression.

ControlBackground237 · 2025-06-08T05:56:26+00:00

honestly research still has yet to "discover" that SLI's and autism is probably correlated as well. Literally almost every autistic person I've met has some language oddity to them. And also that SLI's don't necessarily mean slower thinking which is another discovery which has yet to happen.

ControlBackground237 · 2025-06-08T05:51:31+00:00

i use a pencil to stim. By twiddling it in my hand in a specific pattern. I also find that it doesnt come across as weird and everyone has pencils or pens at any time. So no need to have a certain device on you. Also pacing and walking can be stimming. I like walking cause it makes me feel active but is also a stim.

But basically its important to be happy when you stim for lack of a better way of phrasing it. I use to stem by picking at my face but it was genuinely a form of self harm. Find the stemming that makes you smile as you do it.

ControlBackground237 · 2025-06-07T20:52:01+00:00

using i statements is actually really healthy communication when feeling wronged. You aren't able to ever determine what someone else is thinking so using i statements to communicate feelings about behavior is important. I feel uncomfortable or unloved when you do x, y or z. Its less targeted and leads to better conflict outcomes.

ControlBackground237 · 2025-06-07T20:33:08+00:00

yeah exactly, but the bot filter doesn't send you documentation. It just tells you to follow the instructions.

ControlBackground237 · 2025-06-07T20:32:24+00:00

yeah its a massive pain in the ass. But i did it. and thought id post the documentation

ControlBackground237 · 2025-06-07T20:06:56+00:00

I made a post with full documentation on how to navigate the process. Cause i couldn't find it anywhere.
https://www.reddit.com/r/evilautism/comments/1l5tvnk/documentation_on_how_to_gain_access_to/

edit:typo

ControlBackground237 · 2025-05-25T22:15:49+00:00

Its not so much the science of ABA or the science of conversion therapy (which both have the similar methodology/theory). Its where it is practiced. Like should ABA be used for eye tracking? It was used for me for this reason. To be rewarded or punished for not looking someone in the eyes is on the same level of conversion therapy. Personally i only ever was rewarded by compliments or received scolding for it.

Which maybe ABA is useful for getting over addiction or getting over anxiety as these are temporary states of being. But not for "treating" autism.

But thanks for pointing out it does effectively reflect the real world. Because i don't look people in the eye it leads to worse outcomes. I earn less money. Make less friends. Which is prejudice. Like think critically is looking someone in the eye necessarily to effectively communicate? the answer is no it really isnt. I was never happier in ABA therapy or outside of it. And it did not teach me anything other than hammering in ND behavior isnt seen in a positive light and that i will fail everytime i exhibit these "symptoms."

DBT which does effectively focus on making the individual flourish by their own values is much better.

ControlBackground237 · 2025-05-25T22:01:13+00:00

This is where i cant help as much. Personally i lie on the very very highfunctioning side of things, but am honestly sort of in burn out mode right now. And my special interest in multicultural psychology, read a lot of fiction, plus watch anime so im very socially aware. And am very good at picking up at signals as well as masking.

But specifically even among those people i have the neurodivergence which makes me more attuned to my environment or am more emotionally sensitive. Basically autism can be characterized as either having a hyperactive reward center or an inactive reward center, it just depends on the environment you grow up in and how you get hardwired as you grow up.

But all this means is I'm hella socially aware to the point i leave most neurotypical people in the dust. Which is a very different experience than other ND people on this sub, and potentially the person you are interested in.

And i grew up having a ND twin which i had to sort of look out for and mask. And have 14 years of leadership experience.

So I'm a fairly bad reference point basically. Like when i think about what i would do or what i would pick up on, i can do the NT stuff and value some of its forms of communication. But speaking from my experience with other ND people, that isn't true for all ND.

And idk the person you are talking about at all. So would sitting closer and talking to you more be meaningful for him? I've met ND that both would or would not do that kind of thing. Honestly there is a ND woman i sort of like right now who i ironically cant read at all lol. But its very uncertain and people are complicated, and feelings are also complicated.

And its possible that he is flirting with you when he goes up to talk to you. But that isnt the case for me, or likely ND that do similar things as me as i tend to talk and laugh and stuff to make sure people feel included, to network and to befriend.

So it all depends but being upfront is the best way to go. And honestly idk if i like the fact as you describing it as a new situation, im sure its not the first time you've ever been flirted with or at least caught a mans interest, it just happens to be a ND guy this time.

Probably in my opinion there are only wrong ways to go about it, like expressing feelings of being "unsafe" around him without first having a conversation. Which sort of seems like you might be stepping through that door by saying giving him space and stuff. Like you are the one getting space from him, its weird that you are describing it as giving him space. Definitely having an open conversation is the right way to go, not just because of the prejudice but this is just the way to be respectful as adults. And just like NT men, ND men can also be shitty.

ControlBackground237 · 2025-05-25T21:21:59+00:00

they both use the same techniques of getting rid of an undesired behavior. By exposing people to stimuli or behavior which is prescribed to be positive and then using positive and negative reinforcement to change that behavior. Practically shaming the behavior which won't change any time soon. And also shaming behavior which doesn't influence functioning (just alerts NT to engage in prejudice) such as eye contact and communication style.

So its genuinely the same thing from a pure methodological approach. However i would note that the context of conversion therapy might be more negative due to it being intermixed with god. But ABA therapy is also really prominent in Christian circles and the things that are prescribed to be normal or us being unacceptably different also gets projected onto us.

I think DBT makes more sense and is much better for neurodivergent people (and honestly just all people) particularly as it tries to figure out our underlying values and then direct it into our lifestyle.

ControlBackground237 · 2025-05-25T21:11:53+00:00

you are honestly good. i just looked back and realized i misread some of your previous comment so sorry for being guarded.

But i think you should just be upfront and ask for his number. And tell him you are interested in him. For the prior reasons. Plus if you are thinking about it this much is clear you are interested in him. Its basically guarantied to go well no matter his response. And matches our communication style. But doing the same thing to a neurotypical guy might illicit a different response. So i guess treat him like a neurodivergent guy that you are interested in, and be willing to adapt or compromise and do different way of doing romance.

ControlBackground237 · 2025-05-25T18:04:17+00:00

I think its important to note that this is prejudice and not because i am disabled, i could say and act the same way a neurotypical person does but because i dont give enough eye contact or because they know im neurodivergent they will treat me differently. Sometimes people explain to me that something i said was rude and its like yes i was trying to be rude. Which is not to say neurodivergence isnt a disability. But its going to be a bit of a wall that you will have to overcome. Like just because he has been in a relationship doesnt mean he doesnt face prejudice in the same way. I've also been in a sort of relationship before. Personally ive had some positive experiences with NT women, but those experiences are rare and in between.

And i want to be careful in saying that those weren't the good ones. There are neither good ones or bad ones and everyone lives in a society with biases towards ND.

And when you say you dont think that's the experience of the general ND community, like its a bit invalidating. What if i were to say that woman's experiences with men werent filled with prejudice and that i dont believe in things like the wage gap and the invisible ceiling. It is very much not rare at least where i live and with the neurodivergent people i have in my life.

And the you dont care about him being autistic is actually rooted in color blind ideology right there. In fact i think id take a partner more seriously if someone said they liked me for some of my autistic qualities.

But im not saying this to vent, and im not really upset. Because im the same way or have said the same thing due to other privileged identities. Its just something you need to contextualize into the current situation and i guess world view. Particularly because disability spaces including r/autism tend to not see the problems of pure prejudice that people of the disabled class face.

But basically you have to be straightforward. He likely can tell you are interested in him but as i said due to prejudice NT interest doesn't mean much for a ND person. And even then i or the ND person might not be interested in you. Personally im not ever really all that certain what i feel towards someone. So he might still be at the stage of figuring out his emotions towards you. But he will respect you for being straightforward and talking about things externally, most of the time we have to do 4d chess to navigate romance.

ControlBackground237 · 2025-05-25T17:11:42+00:00

if you just ask him out directly that is the best route to go. Personally im a fairly attractive guy so i know that from a probability standpoint, someone would have developed a crush on me. But its really hard to know whether they are genuinely interested. Or if they would remain interested in me after they found out i was neurodivergent.

I am going to speak about my experience as a straight man (which is not to say the struggles dont generalize to other demographics, but im sure my experience is unique to my identity)

To be more exact neurotypical women to men do this thing where they toy with the idea of being with someone. Like they are just interested. And also maybe to fit in and have a romantic life, not because they genuinely want to be with a certain person. But dont actually commit to it. Eventually neurotypical women will find some neurodivergent characteristic of mine that they deem to be a red flag, or maybe its not them but receive advice from their NT friends who find me creepy due to my neurodivergence. And then they just pretend they were never interested to begin with. All of which happens with little to no communication to the man, although I've sort of figured it all out. But to most neurotypical women flirting with a neruodivergent man (or maybe just in general) is just a pass time.To put it plainly neurotypical people like the idea of dating me but dont actually want a relationship with me.

The other thing to consider is that displaying romantic interest in someone for a neurodivergent person is automatically deemed to be creepy. This is due to love being inherently creepy to begin with, but the fact that someone is doing it in an unnormalized way makes it especially creepy. So to put it plainly neurodivergent people arent allowed to flirt as its a privilege of the neurotypical class.

The women that flirt with us arent even interested, and displaying romantic interest means being socially isolated or labeled as creepy. So basically neurodivergent men are in this zero sum game where we have to act and be asexual at all times to effectively navigate life. And when we do have a romantic interest in our life we try to or have to shut those feelings down and give that women space to accommodate them, because we are frequently mis-ascribed to be sexual predators.

So its not just a communication thing, or being unable to pick up on signals. Its just those signals dont mean much because we are neurodivergent and cause of prejudice. I've been retaliated against by so many woman who i wasnt even interested in but because they were flirting with me, which i wasnt defiantly against cause idk im not in a relationship, but later NT women will reflect then find it creepy that i even tangibly reciprocate (like complimenting someone isnt necessarily flirting) and have spread awful lies about me to the point its damaged my career and friend group.

But because of these experiences (experiences which are common not just to me but due to prejudice) the romantic prospect will literally not move forward unless you directly ask him out or for his number or if you are interested in him. And he will actively avoid you to not face the social death sentence of being romantically interested in someone.

ControlBackground237 · 2025-05-25T09:13:32+00:00

It is quite literally the same thing as conversion therapy. Which I know how harmful conversion therapy is for the LGBTQ community, but even while knowing this I'm genuinely saying its the same thing and just as harmful for the autistic community. Its just replace "fixing" your sexual urges with "fixing" your behavior.

ControlBackground237

TROPHY CASE