"autistic" as a pejorative term

Post Reply New Topic

Ok just recounting what the general NT view was growing up in Australia. Ironically my brother was never referred to as autistic at school, I think they called him a "slow learner". The autism tag never applied as from upper primary he suddenly became verbal and an academic nerd.

However I knew a little about autism because my mum worked with autistic kids. It was weird, her choice of vocation...and how we kids turned out?? Aspergers I picked up through human biology class.

I probably misunderstood you, then.



Indeed.

Hehe, my mum worked with autistic kids too, before AS/HFA existed (at least here, the diagnosis was unheard of before it was included in the diagnostic manuals, and underdiagnosed long after that). She was concerned something was wrong since she (at least subconsciously) recognized several traits from the severely autistic children she worked with, but the pediatrician dismissed my problems (she didn't even dare mention autism directly, for obvious reasons) as me just being intelligent/the "little professor" type. That was in 1990, I think.

Well said. I've gotten similar comments. Why is it that the only group of people that doesn't use these words in that context and actually researches their meanings is the same group that already knows what they mean? That seems a little backwards to me.

This is interesting. It says that girls are frequently more aware of relational aggression, but both genders perform it fairly equally. Girls are theoretically more aware of and more hurt by it because they are "not supposed to behave that way" as female children. Cool beans.
People that try to establish causality between technology and aspergers are idiots

Exactly why I don't like social networks.

Anyway, I've been interested in the original topic for a while now. I asked an American friend if the word autistic is used as an insult in English-speaking countries a while ago, and they replied that no, but 'ret*d' is. I do however see 'autistic' misused in how people speak, the OP is probably an example of misuse.

I could go into a big, long rant about this, but I'll put it simply because I am tired and cranky today.

Corner Kid is not amused.

Hmm, I should have used the word "analogy" in my response. That is what they were doing afterall. That we might care enough to take offense was not even considered. Anyway, it was not meant as a slur, but it is still going to be taken out of context..\
And actually, considering that young people cannot put their cell/smart phones down for a second does seem to encourage anti-social, as in "RUDE not SOCIOPATHIC" behavior I could see a mistaken conclusion being reached here..

Sincerely,
Matthew

I overstepped professionally by telling her to properly research something before putting it in her paper? Really?!

Like I said in the OP, I told her that she should BE CAREFUL about using someone else's idea as her own, should cite it if she does, and should be able to say it in her own words after citing it--that's EXACTLY what I am supposed to tell her to do. If you don't know what a word means, you should not be using it--so I told her to look it up and learn what it means!

I said that I felt bad about the usage, but I did not say that I told her not to cite it. I said that I told her she could cite it, but she needs to use her own words and know what the word means.

Oh, indeed. I want to be sarcastic:

The fact that one of your students borrowed a phrase from one of her sources without crediting the source or understanding what it meant was apparently a reasonable thing for her to do. For you to tell her to properly research such statements is apparently overstepping.

/end sarcastic comment

I think you did the correct thing with her. At least in the future said student will hopefully not use unsourced information without understanding what it's supposed to mean.

I think we can borrow a method from the 1950s, 60s, and 70s Civil Rights movement for black people in the United States. And that is to take a neutral, factual word or term and put a positive connotation on it. For example,

"Black is beautiful."

I've read that at the time some white people wondered, what does that mean? Well, what it means is that a person with black skin can be beautiful, too.

So, you see, this was a very confident and matter-of-fact way to dialogue and advance the idea that maybe beauty is broader than we previously considered. so, maybe we can advance the idea that normal is broader than previously considered. And that people on the Autism Spectrum can be accepted and appreciated, too.

I don't care really. I see it as a different use of the word - a different semantic meaning.

I was referring to the usage of the phrase "socially autistic" associated with technology that appears to have been used as analogy, by the young girl's resource, not the exact full wording of the statement reported used in the young girl's research paper.

I find it highly unlikely that the young girl remembered the wording exactly the way she read it in the source as (technology is "making youths socially autistic.")

Since it can't be found worded this way with a google search anywhere on the internet, except for here in this thread, per link below, the odds are pretty good that it was the young girl's unique wording of what she remembered reading that she put in her research paper, that was reported in the Op.

"making youths socially autistic"

Certain aspects of technology, like the internet, video games, and broadband access to pornography are factors that have been reported in research associated with social problems analagous to some of the symptoms associated with autism spectrum disorders, even some sources suggesting a contribution to diagnosis.

The phrase "Socially Autistic" can be found in a few other analagous contexts, though none described as used as a pejorative phrase that I have been able to find.

If it was worded exactly the way the young girl was reported to have written it, in the source that the young girl used, I would definitely agree that the source was sloppy and unprofessional, however there really is no evidence of how the phrase was actually worded, used in the young girl's source, without an actual reference provided for the source. At best it is how the young girl remembered it being used.

From my posts quoted below. I can see where my point might not have been clear, but the way I read the Op, the suggestion of pejorative use was against the source of the information, not the young girl.

It's highly unlikely an actual reputable source would use the phrase socially autistic in a pejorative manner in regard to social problems associated with technology, or wording that technology is "making" any youths have any social problems.

That would definitely be unusual use of the English language in an actual reputable source discussing the issue; likely part of why the phrase can't be found used that way anywhere in a Google search, except in this thread.

The girl is reported being tutored in remedial English, so that could be part of the issue in how she is remembering and wording the statement in her research paper.

The fact that the young girl did not have a reference for the source that she stated she used was definitely a problem as well as the fact that she didn't understand what the analogy socially autistic meant per the social problems that have been associated with some avenues of technology, but I would have to see the source to determine if there was any hint of pejorative use, per the topic of this discussion. If it was a reputable source, it's not likely.

It appeared from the original post that the girl was provided an understanding that the phrase was being used in a pejorative way. I don't think anyone is disagreeing with that the right thing was done by instructing the girl to properly research the topic by properly referencing the quote per the source, and gaining a proper understanding of it. Marcia's post is agreeing with that aspect of the Op, in her response to it.

Disgusted, but not surprised. Honey, "autistic" has always been a pejorative term. Shocking, shattering, "I'm-so-sorry," a fate worse than death. It just wasn't always applied so widely.

"Autistic," "disabled," "ret*d," "developmentally delayed." All pejorative. Hell, a lot of people use "different" as a pejorative term.

Makes you wonder just exactly who has the pathology, and if there isn't something pathological about the way we decide.