Other Neurodiverse-- an untapped resource

Post Reply New Topic

So I'm just a n00b, but I've been thinking. (I'm also tl;dr leik woah, so please bear with me.) Divide and conquer, right? The spectrum's pretty united with itself, which is quite a feat for people like us. However, let's go back to basics for a second.

What is the goal of the Neurodiversity movement? Is it just to get autistics in positions of power? It shouldn't be; we should be trying to make a society in which everyone can be honest about their neurological wiring without fear. A society where you have value as a human even if you're not NT. From that point of view, having a Neurodiversity movement consisting entirely of autistics is like having a civil rights movement consisting entirely of black people.

We're important. We're also not the end-all be-all of alternative brains.

And further, having all of us on the spectrum means sacrificing a lot of the diversity that might help us make progress. Sure, I'm not exactly like you and you're not exactly like anyone else on the spectrum. But I think I can relatively safely bet that you have poorer social skills than average, have issues with sensory integration and have at least one "special interest."

I shouldn't be able to describe you that way. Face it; we need people with social skills on our side. We need all sorts of thinkers. We need people who can stop stimming, we need generalists, we can use all the help we can get.

Dyslexics, with their poor reading and writing but exceptional visual-spatial thinking, are a totally different group, which means they could give us fresh blood and a fresh spin. They're also far more numerous, which means they could swell our numbers and give us more voting power.

Schizophrenics have some shared challenges. I have yet to hear of something useful that they could do, but why not include them? It'd give us more people. Strength in numbers.

Downies (people with Down's Syndrome) have serious issues, but for some reason people tend to like them. They're easy sympathy-getters. And there are enough of them to, again, swell our numbers. Every little bit counts.

People with ADHD-- there's overlap already, but why not pull in the rest of them, too? More numbers, after all.

So the question isn't whether or when, because the answers are "yes" and "as soon as possible." The question is how. How do we extend the hand of friendship? How do we perform the first diplomacy? How do we organize previously loose groups, not just into more organized small groups but into one really big one? How do we convince them to agree?

Hmmm. Something to think about.

I agree with you. It really annoys me how some people will seem to think that being on the autistic spectrum makes someone "better." I think that everyone is different, and that everyone should be respected.

Great idea. Do you think there's room for people with Williams Syndrome, people with dyscalculia, people with bipolar disorder and severe personality disorders, and gifted people? And can NTs be "allies?"

Also, from the ADHD-but-not-ASD corner, hi, no convincing needed here. ::stands up and is counted::

"we should be trying to make a society in which everyone can be honest about their neurological wiring without fear. A society where you have value as a human even if you're not NT."
Well put. This is pretty much my goal.

Mosaic, YES. Of course there's room. The only group I can think of that's even debatable is sociopaths-- we might be able to gain a lot, but they'd probably scam us and anyway they'd never want to stand and say "Hi there, I'm evil!" Even NTs-- they have a particular style of neurological wiring, no better and no worse than mine or yours. If we want acceptance, we have to give it, even to the people we're "fighting."

But how can we spark this? I'm sure others could handle it better, but the idea is originating in the autistic community, so we'll have to be the ones to build the first bridge. Or two, or three.

So an open request to anyone reading this who is or knows anyone who is another type of Neurodiverse, please. Help mobilize your community. If you have an internet forum, post this. If you have a support group, mention it at your next meeting. If you just happen to know some people, tell them.

I want to watch this idea twist away from me and take on a life of its own, ushering in a new utopian age.

I'd also like to have my cake and eat it too... But this seems possible.

I will commence ASPIE RESEARCH MODE on successful social change. *proceeds to do nothing else for 48 hours straight and then find some way to relate it back to everything anyone tries to talk to me about* Because I am SERIOUS! (And no, this is not SPARTA!, I just like capslock.)

Get out there and do your part. I'll do mine.

I have no specific answers. You could start by researching this:
The Neurodivergency Thread:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postx106553-0-0.html

Welcome to DANDA Developmental Adult Neuro-Diversity Association:
http://www.danda.org.uk/

I just joined WrongPlanet, and in the course of registering I had to declare if I was autistic, had Asperger's or was neurotypical. I don't have autism or Asperger's, but I'm not neurotypical either. I have mood and anxiety disorders. There wasn't a category for me. I ended up choosing the neurotypical category, but felt that I wasn't accounted for. Now, I realize that this is a website for Autism and Asperger's, but couldn't the options have included "other neurodiverse?" The importance of having a broad definition of neurodiversity is very important. I agree with DandelionFireworks that we need to make the definition broader to include a wide range of neurodiverse people. As it turns out, I've just written a book that attempts to broaden the definition. It's called Neurodiversity: Discovering the Extraordinary Gifts of Autism, ADHD, Dyslexia, and Other Brain Differences. I also include schizophrenia, Down's syndrome, William's syndrome, mood and anxiety disorders, and a few others as well. I think the neurodiversity movement is ripe to expand beyond autism and Asperger's to include these other diversities. I believe that this will help to dissolve some of the petty bickering that I've observed in the movement, by expanding beyond provincial issues, and taking on some substantial questions about who really is neurodiverse and who is neurotypical.

KenG, those are useful links. Although I normally like semantic quibbling, however, I don't think it's the best use of our energies. What we call it doesn't matter; "Neurodiversity" is a workable term, as is "Neurodivergence," and I happen to prefer "Neurodiversity" because the current political condition in the USA favors diversity, so I think it's better marketing. But what I would really like is for us to have a big umbrella term, so that we can sound unified and make big unified actions without confusion. Doesn't really matter what the term is, so long as the NTs don't laugh when they hear it and so long as it communicates and is pronounceable. I'm reading over DANDA now. Sounds useful.

Thomas, indeed I hope that we can win over the mood disorders. There should be a category for "other Neurodiverse," but as it stands I think that's what they mean by NT-- anyone not on the spectrum. I would very much like to read your book, by the way. Are you self-published? Such a book sounds like a useful PR tool.

(...Yeah, I know, sometimes the highest compliment I can give is that something is useful. I mean it as high praise, but I dunno if you guys will pick up on that.)

I want to overcome the inertia of "this is the way it is." I don't think anyone here disagrees with me, but how many would stand beside me?

I don't really want it to be my job to kick you all into gear. But we all want this. And if it takes a disillusioned teen acting very teenagerish to make anything work, then so be it.

I guess the big question would be "what do we want?" What, exactly? Concrete, tangible goals... I don't seem to have any. How many of us know what an inclusive society would look like? How many of us will wager a guess?

If we're going to make anything happen, the goal has to be concrete. A society where...

One of my weaknesses is I'm bad at the concrete, but here's a thought.

Some people here are afraid to disclose, and let's be honest, they have good reason. There might be job repercussions (not being hired, not being promoted, maybe even being fired). There might be friendship repercussions (being put into a weird "other" category can suddenly make interactions very awkward). There might be all sorts of well-meaning but unhelpful responses ("oh, but you function so well! You can't possibly have a disorder!"; "Oh, I know someone (or a celebrity) whose kid has autism and they do X. You should totally try that with your kid!" ). If we REALLY have a society where we can be honest about our wiring and we're seen as just as human, even if we're not NT, then we need to change the perceptions of us that make it hard to disclose. What information to put out there exactly, how to do it, and who we're targeting beyond "people in general" I'm not sure. Hopefully more concrete thinkers will have ideas.

I do think there has to be more to changing people's attitudes than changing the terms we use to describe autism, though. Once upon a time, "ret*d" was a polite euphemism, but because people's attitudes towards mental retardation never changed, it became a playground insult, just like whatever preceded it. There's an obvious manipulative aspect to changing terms that many people dislike. If I'm talking to someone who prefers a specific term, I'll obviously use it out of respect for the person, but personally I have no investment in any particular words. I think images and stories are a much more powerful way to change minds. Think about the effects of Rain Man, good and bad, on how autistic people are perceived. Think about Amanda Baggs's blog. Movies, books, blogs, youtube videos, conversation...how else can we tell new stories?

Mosaic, that's good, I'm glad someone can direct their thoughts that well. I agree. We need to fix perceptions. What you mention is called the Euphemism Treadmill.

I wonder if media representation will actually work. I think the media is more likely to lag behind and show us in a better light after the rest of society does, rather than being leaders.

I think schools would be a good place to start. They can reach the minds of most of our children. We can't just show them videos, though. We need fully integrated classrooms, where everyone is taught together, but also everyone is given whatever accommodations they need. Suppose we had a school where everyone was given their optimal learning environment, regardless of diagnosis.

When I talk to the people who would have been my peers, I tell the truth about myself (if they'll listen, because it's not always appropriate to talk about yourself like that regardless). I know there are at least three teens who know more about Asperger's since talking to me, and one of them even became my friend (not a particularly close friend, though), so I would hope that if she ever learns about someone else on the spectrum, she'll remember me. (Of course, what she'll remember might not be flattering, but at least she'll never subscribe to the math-genius stereotype. She might even remember that I do things utterly unrelated to my Asperger's, and have opinions that I could have formed even as an NT.)

We have to be more visible and likable, but there are issues with that.
1. We run the risk of becoming tokens
2. We have poor social skills, so we run the risk of making them think even less of us
3. There just aren't that many of us.

That's why I think we need others. If we can hide under the umbrella term Neurodiversity, and if we can let others be our public face, will that make it easier?

What would be nice would be a few openly autistic celebrities.

I am in from both the AD/HD and the suspected(not certified) asperger angle. I am one of the mods on a big AD/HD and comorbidity(in the widest sense of the word) forum and we are making great progress there.

Lets make this world safe for everyone including the neurodiverse.

Hello, Sarek. What kind of progress are you making? What sorts of things are you doing?

Since Thomas didn't answer you, here is a link to his book:
http://www.amazon.com/Neurodiversity-Di ... 0738213543
(it is published by Da Capo Lifelong Books)
There are plenty of them.
To name just a few:
Rock singer Gary Numan:
http://drownedinsound.com/news/1277766- ... he-reckons
Rock singer Craig Nicholls:
http://www.watoday.com.au/entertainment ... -68vo.html
Pop singer Ladyhawke:
http://www.nme.com/news/ladyhawke/41253
Nobel prize laureate Vernon Smith:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7030731/

"f we can hide under the umbrella term Neurodiversity, and if we can let others be our public face, will that make it easier?"
If we hide behind others, that's like claiming we're not good enough to communicate for ourselves. Isn't that shooting ourselves in the foot?

I think we do need to speak for ourselves. And the more of us speak publicly, the harder it will be to turn us into tokens. But if we ALSO have more socially skilled neurodiverse people working towards the same ends, that should help us get more support.

What preceded it was the classifications of idiot, moron and imbecile. You can see how far these words have fallen from their original diagnostic usages.

On the main topic though, yes I totally agree that a broader definition of neurodiversity is needed. It seems that people often make this false dichotomy of either autistic or neurotypical, when there is an entire plethora of other brain and mind types out there. My younger brother, for instance, largely fits the profile of a sociopath (the manipulative and decietful [which can be extra frustrating for me, since I am terrible at recognizing when someone is lying] sort, rather than the violent, rageful sort). Though I can understand us not wanting to associate ourselves with such folk, even they have a right to march beneath the banner of neurodiversity, since it would clearly be inaccurate to label them neurotypical.
I think that it is a great idea to try and pool our skills. Being neurodiverse means that we are all bad at something, but we often have other skills to a higher degree. By collaborating with other people we can compensate for each other's weaknesses and make for a much more powerful force.

P.S. I feel like we are starting up a superhero team or something.

Well, we are, in a sense. We want to be a team. We want to be heroes. A lot of us have, er, "superpowers," in the sense that we have savant skills or similar. And we have our Kryptonite.

Don't you wish "savant" were a spectrum? Because there's not a real dichotomy between savants and NTs. I, for one, definitely fall somewhere in the middle of that spectrum. I'm clearly not a savant, and I just as clearly don't have a normal distribution of skills.