Autistic Representations as sources of harm

Post Reply New Topic

Very thoughtful piece:

http://disabilityinkidlit.com/2015/12/1 ... sequences/


"When autistic readers get upset about certain portrayals, it’s not because we’re trying to be difficult or demanding, or because we only want a very narrow portrayal of autism; it’s because there is a real-world context, and the situations portrayed often have negative consequences for us in very direct, immediate, ongoing ways. It’s particularly frustrating when those elements are considered helpful or neutral, or go unquestioned. When we read fictional portrayals that reinforce harmful real-life attitudes and stereotypes, it makes our own bad experiences very vivid for us, and also sends the message to non-autistic readers that those tropes are accurate. We don’t want that to happen because it already happens too much."

And another perceptive article on writing about autistic characters in fiction:

http://disabilityinkidlit.com/2015/04/1 ... pproaches/

That article is fantastic. Thank you for posting the link

Excellent articles, thanks B19. The contrast made between "behaviourizing vs. humanizing" strikes me as extendable well beyond the realm of literature, or even writing in general. The clarity of the explanation would make a good read for anyone needing to understand why the behaviourist approach to autism is so demeaning and harmful, including plenty of therapists, psychiatrists and psychologists.

I completely agree. I just sent it to my disability lawyer and to my brother because it's just as true about how people see us in real life as it is in how fictional characters are portrayed. I am going to share it with my psychologist and with other people as well.

Thanks for your feedback.

It really inspired me to start thinking about writing a kind of "second chapter" to that excellent piece, and it led me into several trains of thought that were not as obvious before I read that piece. It has implications for science and the way science conceptualises AS people - as non people compared to normative people. Science recognises that the thoughts and feelings of "normative" people matter in core, central ways which profoundly influence outwardly observed behaviour. They ignore that this is also factual for AS people. That's a stark example of dehumanisation. Scientists look at AS people as experimental subjects very much as they look at animals or plants.

I need to reflect for a while on what I would like to say in response to the article. I was very grateful to the writer and glad I found it.

I am very excited to read your thoughts on this. You have my support 100%