Autistic vs Has Autism

Post Reply New Topic

I prefer autistic. To me, "has autism" suggests disease. It's also a bit too close to this person-first thing, and I've never liked that. I accept that language is important, but I don't like to see it being policed too vigorously, which I think was being done by the lady in the story in the original post. I sometimes wonder how it is that some people think they get to decide what folks are allowed to say and what they're not.

One of the aspects of allism is that people think person first language makes a difference. For only dollars a day, won't you help end the cycle? Everyday more and more people grow up thinking that reversing the modifiers matter. Won't somebody please think of the children?

For myself, I have no preference either way; in general, I will use either depending on the environment I'm in.

i.e. I work in disability services, where "person first language" is very much the desired terminology, so I generally use "has autism / person with autism / on the spectrum."

When talking to fellow autistic people, especially in online spaces, I tend to use "autistic."

I prefer 'autistic' because saying that I 'have autism' makes it sound like you could separate me from my autism but you can't - autism is part of what makes me me, you take that away and I'll be a completely different person.

I prefer to say I'm autistic rather than I have autism, mainly because it's less clunky. I like to be economical in my communication. And it seems more appropriate, since autism is not a disease.

I'm studying for a grad certificate in autism studies, and the current preferred term seems to be "individual on the autism spectrum".

We're supposed to put a statement in our assignments saying what language we will be using, with a citation referencing a study to explain our choice, which bugs me as it really isn't something I care about and I don't get why it's such a big deal, honestly.

I've noticed quite a few webpages/leaflets doing this. Do they really not have anything better to do?

I have also noticed similar explainers on website where they have used acronyms like 'LGBTQ+', although I think that is probably a lot more necessary, as there is more room for confusion than with autism/autistic.

Great discussion and question! I initially picked the second option of "Has/Have Autism" but after thinking about it and seeing the great points that were mentioned "Autistic" is a good choice as well.

That's rather hypocritical seeing as the person first stuff seems to originate in academia. I'm nò really sure why a citation is really necessary. I suppose you could see what Autism Speaks is currently doing and do the opposite with citations to all the people that hate that organization.

I can say I really don't care that much, like I'd probably more likey say I am autistic but also I might say I have autism, so like i guess it doesn't matter to me what term is used more if I was the butt of a joke about it I might not like it very much especially if it seemed people were being meanspirited when discussing it. but that said herb roasted trout is delicious and if they gave me a fish to make up for it I would have accepted even if they had said something rather ignorant before. like a good trout haul should make up for rude people as they are tasty fish.

I guess over all saying I have autism makes the most sense to me, some autistic people might not like that, but idk autistic people are people, not a monolith. So many people have autism, but that does not mean all the autistic people agree on everything.