The term "Aspie" is a deragatory slur in my book.

Post Reply New Topic

It was my mother that told me not to call my self Aspie actually because not many people would understand if you called your self and Aspie is public. My mum also told me that Aspie seems too much like you are lableing your self and that incoraged me not to use it that offen and try not to use it.

this is kind off how the conversation went (on the subject of sex so yeah..)
me: I am a 13 year old aspie and you ask me have i had sex
mum: well you never know in this stain age, and don't call your self aspie
me: why?
mum: because it seems too much like a lable to your behavour
me ok, but i don't hink of my self as a lable it is just shorter for me to say.
mum: i just don't like you thinking about your self in that way
(i thought about it a bit and it made sence and it feels a bit srange calling my self an Aspie)

Whoever said about it all depending on who says it, I agree.

ya they tend to do this they think their "brothas" or something cause of the color of their skin so they call each other "niggas".

Anyways I can't stand labels why can't just shed them?

Aspie. Well it is only a 'word' after all. And if you put an 'R" in it, it becomes aspire. I think some people can 'aspire' to be more 'aspie' sometimes, don't you?

Aspire is just 'r' added to aspie.

((Mick-take of poster))

The only reason that I never use the word "Aspie" is that I've hardly met anyone who even knows what AS is, much less knows the slang term for someone who has it. Whenever I've had to explain it to anyone I just sit back, roll my eyes and wait for the "Assburger" jokes even though we say "arse" not "ass" here.

As much as "aspie" isn't my favourite word, I can't really think of anything better. I used to like "aspergian" until it dawned on me that that was something you cast upon someone. Anyway...since when do we "aspies" always say the right thing?

the problem with it, as i understand it is this; autism is increasingly seen not as a disease or disorder, but simply a neurological difference. true, some of us might consider ourselves victims of something, but it is not autism per se; rather, what we are victims of is a society that is totally geared towards "neuro-typicality". because we are by definition not neurologically typical, we have varying levels of difficulty functioning in such a society.
to take as an example the original poster's comparison with race, it would be similar to saying that a person of ethnic minority living in a racist society is a victim of their own ethnicity, rather than seeing the obvious, which is that they are a "victim" of the society in which they live.

in response to thepoint of the original poster, i personally don't really use the term "aspie", but i don't think it appropriate to compare to any derogatory racist terminology. as far as i am aware, the term was coined by elements of the aspergers community, and has never had any connotation of hatred or prejudice.

Ah yes, but wait until NT teens get ahold of the term.

hmm, you have a point there. perhaps i should have said "has not yet held any connotation of hatred or prejudice."

I think of labels in terms of whether they are general or specific, or whether they describe a cause or an effect.

For example, I don't tell people "I have homosexuality" because that's a general label. I *am* queer, and that means I *have* a desire for intimacy with other guys.

Likewise I don't say "I have maleness" - I *am* a male and therefore *have* certain physical characteristics typical of my gender.

When you think of it that way, I don't *have* AS. I *am* an aspie, and therefore *have* problems with eye contact, semantics, non-verbal communication, etc.

The other way to approach the issue of labels is to ask whether the description applies to something that is innate/congenital/permanent or if it's something that was imposed after a period of being "normal" and which may go away again.

Using that description, it makes sense to say someone *has* cancer, but not that they *are* a cancerous person.

Using the terms "person with autism" or "person who has autism" makes it sound like AIDS or cancer - as if we were indistinguishable from the crowd until one day we contracted some virus or disease. It plays into the curebie mentality that tells parents they have an NT child under that blanket of autism and that they should spend vast fortunes in pursuit of a cure to get their "real" child back. We who are affected by autism know that there is no 2nd self just waiting to emerge, and the curebie mentality is offensive because all it does is tell kids "we don't love you because you're just a zombie who stole our real child and we want him back".


I don't suffer from AS.

I suffer from contact with people who don't understand AS and don't respect me as a person and don't care. I used to suffer from bullies who thought I was an easy target. I suffer from not feeling free to be me because it's not socially acceptable.

Those are not symptoms of AS, but they are common experiences for aspies. Your AS may enable you to be a victim, but AS isn't what's throwing rocks or making fun of you.

I could have blamed AS for all of the bullying I endured as a kid, but that would just be taking blame away from those who were ultimately responsible for my misery.

I'm not suggesting that AS is a particularly beneficial or enjoyable condition. There are down-sides to being autistic just like there are down-sides of being old or overweight or ugly. It just doesn't help to blame AS for all of your problems.

Right. AS doesn't call you the 'r' word, ((hate using it))

It's people that don't understand that make us suffer.

AS isn't a disease. It's a different way of thinking. Therefore, being called "an Aspie" isn't any more offensive to me than being called "female" or "left-brained" or "a visual thinker", all of which I am, and all of which biologically and neurologically affect how I think. (This is rather odd, incidentally; being both left-brained *and* a visual thinker--which is a right-brain function--is a really strange combination. Maybe it has something to do with the "female" end of things.)

If someone decides to say "person with Asperger Syndrome" instead of "Aspie", I'm fine with that, too. It's when they say either one, and then assume things that aren't true--such as the ideas that I'm "ret*d" or "robotic" or "unsympathetic" or "don't have emotions"--that I get offended. And rightly so: Despite the NT brain's increased urge to categorize and label things to make them more manageable, that doesn't excuse anyone's willingness to allow themselves to use those categories to prejudge people. Taking those you meet at face value, and allowing yourself to form an opinion of people only after you meet them, is a skill that many people lack--even though most of our culture highly values a refusal to allow oneself to be prejudiced.

Words themselves are used differently by different people (this is one of the things that make being an Aspie so confusing). A term like "Aspie", which (unlike "n****r") still lacks a fixed connotation, can be positive or negative or neutral, depending on that person's opinion of what "Aspie" means.

I wish words had only one definition. Then we wouldn't have to worry about such things at all.

Are you thinking of 'aspersions?' While the thought of casting Aspergians on people brings up some interesting mental images, I've never heard that before; however, I have heard the term 'casting aspersions on him/her/it/me/you' quite frequently.

Jetson, you rule.



And I don't think "aspie" sounds condescending and childish, but rather more affectionate - there's a subtle difference.

Furthermore, it makes a lovely and elegant bit of short-hand in my messages, which already tend to be long and unnecessarily wordy without having to wrestle with something as ungainly and aesthetically repulsive as "Persons With Asperger's Syndrome".

More importantly, as a couple of people have already said (and, I might add, said much better than I ever could), there's an importantant semantic difference between saying "I am an Aspie", and "I am a person with Asperger's" - the former underlines the sense that Asperger's Syndrome is an inseperable and acceptable part of who we are, the latter reminds me of those T-shirts that say "I'm with Stupid ->", as if you're saying "yeah, well, sorry about this Asperger's guy who is chained to me like a nerdy little brother I don't want to be seen in public with. He's not the real me... I know he's an embarrassment, but just try to ignore him please. Bear with me, I'm going to try to lose him at the mall as soon as possible so we can have a good time without him."

"I'm with Asperger" - so, is there REALLY two of you locked in a single body, the REAL you actually a Neuro-Typical, hopelessly chained to Stupid until you get a chance to lock that hated little embarrassment of a crippled and ret*d twin brother in the attic somewhere so you can have a good time with your friends?

Screw that, I refuse to think that way any more. I'm not a nameless, faceless "normal person" except-for-one-tiny-little-problem. I am, among other things, an aspie, and that's perfectly OK: I refuse to be embarrassed about myself any longer, especially since I believe nothing is ever going to "cure" AS, since there's nothing diseased or crippled about aspies.






Now, I notice that the British National Autistic Society didn't give their opinion one way or the other on the acceptability of the following terms that have been used to refer to this aspie:

weird
weirdo
freak
creep
'tard
fag (regardless of my actual sexual orientation)
spaz
goon
masochistic little queer
pansy
nerd
four-eyed dork
troll
selfish little *sshole
zombie
sociopath
antisocial
difficult-to-control insubordinate
sexually dead
not a team-player
self-centered
sissy
emotionally distant
dweeb
p*ssy
loner
momma's boy
geek
jock-strap boy and watch-boy (long stories)
disciplinary problem
stuck-up prick
space-cadet
JD
crybaby
robot
self-centered attention-seeker
nancy-boy
feeb
unsympathetic
zoner
*sshole
loser
arrogant
wimp
strangely asexual
big gay-ass nerd
inhuman
jerk
perv


...and thousands more that I don't care to bother remembering.

Compared to any of those, I'd rather be called an "aspie" by "A Person of an Autistic Persuasion" (or whatever impenetrable wall of words makes you happier) any day. Surely "aspie" doesn't really sound THAT bad in the general scheme of things, does it? At least, in my book, it easily beats "creepy little stuck-up nerd" (and the rest).

In every situation I've ever seen it used, "aspie" is not even remotely in the same class of "derogatory slur" as any of the above descriptions of me in ANY situation I can imagine!

I hear that, i have been called ass burgers, but aspie could be taken as ass pee

come to think of it, n****r is most often more acceptable when used by blacks, if a black guy calls his buddy a n****r, its ok but if a whit e guy does the same, its wrong, so if we as "those of autistc mind" call each other aspies but exclude NT's from use of the word its all good