What's up with all the hate on" neurotypicals"

Post Reply New Topic

Like you with your group, I am a Special Olympics Athlete so I have a lot of friends there. Every single athlete in Special Olympics is challenged with something that affects his or her neurology or their intellectual capacity, but not every one of them is Autistic. So I understand what you mean.

I am someone who wants to avoid conflict and I prefer to agree to disagree. I have met aspies who are the same way too. Not wanting to keep on arguing with you about something or discussing something with you. I get some people just like to debate and argue and not everyone is that way. I would prefer to talk about something without it getting ugly and no strong emotion involved. I never saw this as a NT thing, more of a human thing. And people need to let others have their own opinions and you can't force them to change it. Actually trying to be argumentative and aggressive about it what actually alienates you from people. Then the person wonders why they can't get along with anyone and why so many people are stupid. I don't see how avoiding these heated topics is a impairment. It doesn't hold them back, the other way around does. But there are NTs out there who like to debate and argue but they know when to stop and when to do it. Like they might go online and do it instead because it's a safe place to do it and they might be better at it online. I think knowing when to stop is a social skill. Also if you look in the PPR section, people get pretty emotional there and things get ugly there and they are autistic people, not NT.


And you are right about people pathologizing. When you want to see a disorder, you will start seeing it. In 6th grade it was schizophrenia they were seeing in me because they were watching for signs. My tangential thinking for one I had so the speech therapist was convinced it was a sign of a mental illness. I was just visual so I would get distracted by pictures because my school counselor would say things and it wouldn't make sense and I wouldn't move on until the images in my head matches what the school counselor had said. He just kept speaking non literal terms. In my son's preschool, they were looking for autism so they saw autism in my son. I am sure people online who read about Asperger's and always knew they were different, they might start seeing signs in themselves, not that they are trying to fake it, and think they have it because they pathologize themselves because they want something that fits to explain themselves better and understand. I remember my ex boyfriend read about it so he was convinced he did stimming even though I saw none of it so he pointed some out to me. He showed me he was fiddling with his phone in his hand while driving. It looked normal to me, not weird. He said of course because it's normal to me. I am sure he was pathologizing himself. Plus he liked things organized like things together and keeping his place clean, still normal. The fact he only liked to eat organic to be healthy, still normal. My mom said he didn't even know what Asperger's is. I told her he had read about it and she said "you can read about it and still not know what it is." To me it didn't make sense but I think it does now. Asperger's is like learning a second language as nurseangela wrote.

What is your Evidence for this belief ?
For it is almost basically the same thing as saying that Chaos results from Anarchy...
This Mark Passio guy is someone I find to be full of awesome.
Some of the most kick-ass speeches I've heard from him really logically destroy the New Age cult-beliefs.

Neurotipical was originally come up with by the autistic community to describe those without autism, but it was later adopted by other communities and evolved to describe anyone without any neurological conditions or disabilities. Both definitions are still floating around though, so they have become interchangeable. It's kind of like that whole "I could care less" meaning that you don't care thing, it's annoying but that's just how it is.

I agree that people should say "allistic" instead, it's just that I see where people are coming from.

Sorry, I know I did overreact about a word. I suppose I can't keep on correcting members here every time somebody says ''NTs are 99% of the population''. But it just feels wrong to read that sentence. I mean, 99% of a huge population of humans on a planet is a vast figure to call ''typical'', when there are other existing neurological disabilities, diseases and conditions and differences that can present atypical behaviour and learning and social abilities in a person, other than Autism.

It's ok Joe. And mathematically you are correct. The latest statistic I heard, and I could be wrong, is that Autistics now comprise 1% of the world's population. So mathematically, NT's can't make up the entire left over 99%. That would leave no room for non NT Allistic people.

Even sociopaths will use that word to refer to people who aren't sociopaths. So in in that context, we're all NT.

Last edited by League_Girl on 05 Jun 2016, 1:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I don't exactly hate them,I don't get along with them and their way of thinking leading to disagreement.

But not every NT thinks the same way. That is like saying, "I don't exactly hate black people, I just don't get along with them and their way of thinking..."

I like to see people as individuals. I will say things like I don't like when an NT says this or does that but that does not mean that I believe all NTs say or do those things. It just means that I don't like it specifically when the person doing or saying it happens to be an NT. And it does not mean that I hate the person. It could be someone I love dearly. I just don't like that specific thing at that specific time coming from that specific person if he is saying or doing something that is hurtful to someone with a different neurology, and showing that he has no understanding or concern for the differences in neurology. And if many NTs happen to do the thing, I can hate it collectively but it does not mean I hate them. So it's not a us vs them thing. That would be like being racist.

Last edited by skibum on 05 Jun 2016, 1:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Yep, that's one of the reasons why I dislike that term. It is very ambiguous with it's many definitions and it implies that there is a such thing as a typical neurology. That's why I have decided to stop using that term and instead say "allistic".

I believe there is such a thing as a typical neurology.

None whatsoever. Aside from logical reasoning.

I'm forming a logical conclusion based on the fact that many autistics can't effectively communicate.

If you ask some autistics their opinion on some of the issues on this site, they won't be able to answer you, as many can't effectively communicate. Hence potential chaos.



So - to answer your question - it is logical to assume not all autistics can express their opinions on matters regarding autism because, simply put, not all autistics can express themselves in a manner others understand.

Therefore, by definition, many autistics will never be able to effectively communicate their opinions to others.



And let me be blunt - if I had a child, there are certain autistics I wouldn't want my child exposed to.

I wouldn't want my hypothetical 9-year old daughter seeing a teenage boy masturbate in public, nor would I want her seeing someone playing with their own fecal matter.

But that's not the autism discussed on this site.

My point is: I think in some instances 'NT's' are perfectly justified in their feelings/attitudes towards autism.



Autism is no more a rights movement than incontinence is a rights movement.

People don't have to be Autistic to masturbate in in public or play with their own fecal matter. I have seen people do that who are not Autistic. I personally know a couple of NTs who masturbate in public.

And just because every single Autistic is not able to communicate effectively in a manner that everyone can understand, it does not mean that Autistic people are not capable of having a say in matters that concern them. Not every NT is capable of communicating effectively either. So by your logic, if every single NT had a say in what concerns them, the world would be chaos as well.

Every single person is entitled to have a say in matters that concern him or her whether you understand him or not. Now as far as creating programs and legislation, and stuff like that, yes, we need an organized way to do that and to provide the best programs we can to benefit the most people we can and to provide proper protection, so we can't use the ideas of every single person. But everyone is entitled to have an opinion and to express it in a civil and respectful manner.

And there are enough Autistic people who are perfectly capable of communicating well enough that if it decisions had to be made about Autistics strictly by Autistics, I believe we could do it quite well. I do not believe for one second that that would lead to chaos. It sounds like you don't give us much credit at all.

I don't believe I said only autistics do this.




Again, you're misquoting me.


And it would.

My opinion on engineering is meaningless/irrelevant, as I know nothing about it.

If people such as myself had the 'right' to express an opinion on every bridge built, I would intentionally avoid driving over all bridges.


Again, you're misquoting me.


But you're likely not speaking on behalf of 'autistics'. You're likely speaking on behalf of your 'kind' of autism.

The opinions of parents/carers/doctors etc is just as valid as that of autistics.

My point is: why should decisions about autistics only involve autistics given autism is also an issue for parents/carers/doctors etc, never mind the general public?

Personally, I think your view that decisions on autism made strictly by autistics would work 'quite well' is nothing other than dangerous, narrow-minded (as you aren't considering carers etc), and verging on activist lunacy.

Autistic people should have more of a say in decisions affecting them. As part of a team consisting of autistic and nonautistic people.

Assuming they can effectively communicate.

Could you name me certain decisions you feel autistics don't have enough of a say in at present?



This is too broad (for me). Could you be more specific, and give a real-world example, rather than an ideal that is difficult to relate to a real-world situation?