NT socially constructed?

Post Reply New Topic

I directed a friend of mine (about whom I strongly suspect he's got AS) to an online quiz, and he scored negative. Well, I suppose the borders of the spectrum are blurry enough to account for that kind of results. But when I tried to describe to him what AS was, it was difficult for me to get him to actually understand what it was about. He could not see anything "disorderly" about the disorder.
What surprised me the most was his comment after he took the quiz I showed to him. He said, "judging from the questions in this quiz, what the authors take to be neurotypical (i.e., 'normal') is someone who is hypersociable, extremely skilled in all kinds of interactions, someone we don't really see in everyday life."
I wonder. And wonder, and wonder. Perhaps the criteria of social awkwardness that are used to define AS could be related somehow to the accepted standards of behavior unique to Western culture? My friend and I live in South America, and several of our social conventions differ from those applicable in the US. Some US customs look like "hypersociable" to us. This leads me to the question, maybe AS has more to do with cultural expectations than with an actual, objective failure to function in society? Can the case be made that the definition of NT is, so to speak, socially constructed?

NT & AS are purely physiological -
AS people have different sensory thresholds from NTs, different motor mechanisms from NTs, different language mechanisms from NTs, different processing mechanisms from NTs etc.
Occassionally, I can spot AS people in public places by merely looking at them - the way they walk, the way they move their heads, the look in their eyes, etc.
AS people's social difficulties are a direct outcome of their physiological minority status within society.
For example: Some AS people who experience problems interacting with NT society can be extremely sociable with one another.

Of course the concept of "neurotypicality" is socially constructed. Just look at the manner in which the DSM has been altered over the years. There is no such thing as a "standard-issue" brain; no individual has a neurological make-up which is exactly the same as another person's. What society determines to be "pathological" or "disordered" is a line in the sand which can shift over time. I don't know a lot about AS people in other cultures, but it's not hard to imagine that we'd do better in some cultures or sub-cultures than in others. This is the social model of disability--the idea that environment and society can play a huge role in how well a person "functions." As of yet, there are no 100% objective ways to determine whether someone is "AS" or "NT." (And what is NT, anyway? If someone has bipolar, are they NT?) Yes, there are significant differences between the two groups on average, but sometimes autistic traits can manifest themselves in ways which are the complete opposite to another autistic person. (Like hyposensitivity or hypersensitivity, or the fact that some autistics are amazingly gifted with numbers while others have dyscalculia.) I'd wager that there are no traits for which you could definitively say that ALL autistic people have them, while NO NT people do. Or the reverse.

That's right, but autism itself is still physiological.
(Claiming that autism is a pathology is a social construct).

The principal component of autism is physiological, but the ways in which we define it as a phenomenon are socially constructed. Note, for instance, the proliferation of autism-spectrum disorders. The diagnostic process is a labeling function that depends on an understanding of what kinds of functions fall within the realm of normal or disordered.

Perhaps more importantly, we know almost nothing about how social environment may function as a fundamental cause of autistic symptoms. It is possible, for instance, that the recent increase in diagnosis is due in part to increasing levels of exposure to some noxious element of the environment, which in turn places more people at 'risk' for developing autism-spectrum symptoms. It may also be due to increasing efforts to identify and diagnose autism where it had previously gone unrecognized. This is an empirical question for which we currently lack sufficient data to investigate.

It is not only NT & AS are purely physiological, but it is all the same multicultural.

Well thinking about it, it is all wrong, AS has its own culture, and you can find AS "cultured" ppl located in any place of the world. The world should be ULTRA-cultural (it goes farther than multicultural).

I tryed to explain... it is AS the same South America, Europe, Africa or USA. It could be long to explain all details about it.

What you mean, that in some cultural enviromentes, the results than a AS problem can be different, but only because the "traits" do not match it in this case with this particular culture.

By example, If you go to a country where all is permited, everybody is open and helpful, freedoom is basis, a high education country, AS could have NO real PROBLEMS and be accepted. But it is impossible now-adays, except in WP country
Saludos

In some cultures autistic traits would be mroe noticable than others and the concept of weather such is good or bad is socially constructed.

I believe it is both physiological and socially contructed in nature. The physiological differences in our brains' wiring are undeniable and scientifically proven. How social construct comes into play is it determines the standard that we grate against. If that standard were more forgiving, or if the "norm" shifted a bit in our direction, AS would lose the "Syndrome" part of its name.

Slowly but surely the world is getting to know us for what we are. One person at a time we need to show them our talents and reach for the stars.