autistic person

anonymous asked:

ADHD Lance? Autistic Keith? Thoughts?

YES YES AND UH YEAH

I 100% approve. I could see so many people being happy about this. Voltron does a pretty good job at pushing boundaries (but they can always keep pushing you know?)

(I would write you some Headcanons love, but since I don’t have either of these and don’t know anyone personally enough (that I know of) to talk extensively to make some it might be best for me to leave it be.I think it might be best to just write about the ones I know aka what I have, just to keep accurate and clean :))

But I highly recommend nosing around the tags, there is some great content out there by other writers <3

anonymous asked:

I've been told it's offensive to call someone "autistic", and that we should phrase it as "someone with autism", kinda like how we've changed from "schizophrenic" to "someone with schizophrenia". Thoughts?

My thought is someone doesn’t know what they are talking about. I don’t know about schizophrenic v. schizophrenia because I’m not, so I’m not in those communities, but autistics prefer identity first language in general, with those who prefer person first language in the overwhelming minority. So anyone who tells you that IFL is incorrect is probably not autistic.

That said, the right to personal autonomy trumps. If an individual informs you they personally prefer PFL language, that is not only acceptable, but completely valid. I don’t like it for myself, and I’m critical of the potential harm, but that in no way invalidates autonomy.

As a general rule I default to IFL until I learn otherwise, and then follow the lead of the community affected from that point forward. I typically ignore anyone outside those communities, especially if they tell me they learned it in school, that’s how they were taught, or they have a child/sibling/friend that wants to use PFL. Like, that’s nice. I don’t care if you’re brother’s friend’s child is married to a psychologist that wants you to use PFL. Unless you are that disability the opinion doesn’t matter. What matters is how the community identifies to set the default, and how an individual identifies themselves. 

anonymous asked:

Having a neurotype or disorder with an existing name or names that make it possible to choose between Person first language and identity first language is a weak relative privilege.

When the choice is available, the way someone’s condition is referred to can make a difference. I thought my response to the person first vs identity first language post made that clear.

If a disability community prefers identity first and non-disabled people consistently use person-first, it’s pretty clear the people pushing person-first don’t respect disabled people enough to address them the way they want to be addressed. It smacks of “I know better than you” superiority.

I am are two of the most powerful words we have because what comes after tells the world who we are. Those words are the core of every person. If it’s God, I AM is a complete sentence!

So what does that say about people? What comes after “I am” in reference to yourself?

I AM…

alive.

a woman.

a brunette.

petite.

skinny.

white.

Catholic.

asexual.

autistic.

a bullying survivor.

Groot.

I only chose one of those, one is a silly joke– the rest were already there when my genes built me into me or they were something that happened to me and changed me irreversibly.

So anyone who tells me those parts of my identity don’t matter by ignoring how I refer to myself is telling me that I don’t matter.

And that’s bullshit, because I matter and so does everyone else.

Respect disabled peoples’ identities.

y'all know that post that an autistic person made about the babadook being ableist? well there’s a lot of comments on that post saying that their interpretation is wrong and that the babadook it’s about depression and grief and nothing more and can i just ask all of y'all to stop? especially if you’re allistic?

like… just because you interpreted it differently doesn’t mean the op of that post is wrong? and have you allistics thought that maybe the reason why y'all didn’t see it being ableist against autistic people is because… you’re allistic? can allistics please just listen to autistic people for once without getting all defensive?

most of the comments I’ve seen are people going “it’s about depression and grief omg what a reach” and stuff around those lines and are comments basically made to make the op’s interpretation sound absurd which is just… really shitty. people have different ways of interpreting stuff and the op’s interpretation should be treated as valid. telling an autistic person that they’re reaching when they point out that something might be ableist is just a really shitty thing to do.

it doesn’t matter if you agree with the op or not, but don’t dismiss their interpretation of the babadook just because you don’t agree with it.

You are not “unnatural” or “bad” if you 

  • Have low to no empathy
  • Have hyper-empathy 
  • Have a personality disorder
  • Have more than one person in your mind
  • Have scary/violent thoughts
  • Don’t have the energy for interaction every day
  • Can’t take a shower/brush your teeth very often
  • Don’t like certain noises/textures
  • Don’t want to forgive them
  • Know you did nothing wrong
  • Love yourself 

Thankyou for everyone who participated in the Smashing Stigma Autism Survey 2017! These are our results, really interesting to see and we couldn’t do it without any of you :)

What the picture says:
Smashing Stigma - Autism Acceptance, Autism Survey 2017.
Autistic people: 94% prefer autistic person, 4% prefer person with autism and 2% prefer the option other.

We asked the same question to parents and supporters: 57% preferred autistic Person, 28% preferred person with autism and 15% preferred the option other.

Everyone together now: “No you think autism speaks is a good organisation for autism?” 95% responded No, 2% responded yes and 3% responded not sure.

(The picture is a poster with the smashing stigma logo, a multi coloured neurodivergent sign, the writing is in amongst 3 pie charts of the results)

PSA to our followers this Autism Acceptance Month:
  • Use Autism **Acceptance** Month (as opposed to Autism Awareness Month).
  • NO “light it up blue” or puzzle pieces. Google “Autism Speaks hate group” to learn more.
  • Use red or gold instead, which are colors supported by the autistic community.
  • Use identity-first language (most autistic people prefer “autistic” instead of “person with autism”), but don’t police the language of someone who prefers to be called a person with autism.
  • NO scare terms like “suffering with autism” or “afflicted with autism.”
  • Avoid functioning labels like “high functioning” or “low functioning.”
  • If autistic voices are not at the center of your efforts, you’re doing it wrong.
  • When in doubt, ASK AN AUTISTIC PERSON. 
  • To learn more about autism, visit autistic-run organizations like the Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN) and Autism Women’s Network (AWN).

Autistic Person: “To decide who to hire, the applicants should try out for the job the same way a student in school would try out for a varsity sport. They should be given tests that directly measure their ability to perform the job. Whoever performs best on the tests will get the job.”

Allistic Person: “To decide who to hire, the applicants should be forced to have a conversation with me. The conversation will involve me asking vague questions like ‘tell me about yourself’. The questions I ask will be so hard to answer that people will literally pay someone to give them tips on how to answer them. I’ll also be testing things like body language and eye contact, which tell me jack shit about their ability to actually perform the job. But it’s okay, because I have psychic abilities that tell me who to hire within one minute of meeting them.”

Society: “I think we’ll go with the allistic person’s idea.”

Here’s the thing about being a professional who works with people in any kind of health or social care job:

We go through years and years of training. We are constantly urged to update our knowledge and skills. We amass knowledge in the hope it will service our clients well and ultimately we are driven by a strong desire to help people to improve their lives. We are often highly qualified, overworked and underpaid and I don’t believe I’ve ever met anyone who’s in it for the money.

But that does not make us unchallengeable “experts.” And it is dangerous for us to pretend that we have a more valid understanding of our client’s experiences than they have themselves.

If you look at the history of this sector, you can see that we’ve come a long way in a short time. It’s not that long ago that a lot more people were confined to asylums for no real reason. It’s not that long ago that people were put through countless painful operations in order to “improve” their physical disabilities, with no real consideration given to the person’s wishes. It’s still legal in most countries (everywhere except Malta) to operate on an intersex child without parental permission. Even in the early days of medicine, doctors set themselves up as “experts” and a lot of unsafe practice went unchallenged for decades as a result.

This sector has a dark history of abuse and the best professionals work with an awareness of this and a desire to avoid repeating those mistakes. Which means putting the clients’s experiences at the heart of everything, because when things are forced on people without their wishes being considered, that’s when it becomes abusive. You cannot work effectively with a person if you let your view of their situation override their own. My qualifications do not take precedence over first-hand experience.

Like a lot of allistic professionals, I was taught that “person with autism” is a preferable label to “autistic person.” To some extent, I can see there was good intent behind this. However, out of the classroom, most autistic people I’ve encountered disagree. So I have to defer to them, and if it’s uncomfortable to apply the same rule to everyone on the spectrum, I can simply ask people what they prefer. For me to presume that my classroom learning has more validity than the experiences of autistic people would be dangerously arrogant.

I’m not claiming to be the perfect professional or anything, but I am highly shocked when I see professionals on tumblr claiming that their professional knowledge is more legit than knowledge than comes from first-hand experiences. First of all, it’s highly unprofessional for you to be arguing about this in ALL CAPS WRITING on a social network. Secondly, all professionals have to be open to challenge. If an autistic person challenges you on your person-first language, hostility is a completely inappropriate reaction. As a professional, you have obligations that continue after you finish work for the evening. Respecting other people is the most basic one.

Diagnostic criteria for autism are always so badly written.

Like, the trains thing.

I’m going to keep coming back to the trains thing because it baffles me.

So, the example used for special interests in a lot of diagnostic criteria is trains.

“Has an unusually strong interest in something - for example, trains”

And, like, sure. Okay. Special interests can be anything. Trains are a possibility.

But, like, special interests don’t appear out of nowhere. You generally have to be exposed to something first to get a special interest in it.

So, like, I know a lot of autistic people, and I know no one with a special interest in trains.

You know what the most common special interest is, in my experience?

Star Wars.

Yeah, go fucking figure, the ubiquitous movie franchise that almost everyone has seen at least one movie of is the most common special interest, in my experience.

Now, I do kind of understand the trains thing. The line between special interest and regular interest isn’t always super obvious.

Like, collecting Star Wars toys, or writing Star Wars fanfic, or marathoning the movies a bunch of times doesn’t necessarily make it a special interest.

And since it’s socially acceptable (especially in modern day nerd culture) to do all of those things, it’s not a glaring indicator of autism to outsiders.

If someone’s really into something obscure - like trains - however, it can make the fact that it’s a special interest super obvious.

But it’s still bad to have it be the go-to special interest example because it’s just not that common.

Plenty of autistic people don’t have obscure special interests. Their SIs are in the Marvel movies or Star Wars or Star Trek or Five Nights at Freddy’s.

Hell, part of the problem with women and girls not getting diagnosed is because no one notices their special interests in, like, makeup or boy bands.

When you use “trains” as the example, you’re sending the implicit message that special interests have to be obscure and out of the social norm, and that’s just not the case for most people - especially now that a lot of geek culture has gone mainstream and there’s a huge nostalgia cash-in.

Having a special interest in Power Rangers was weird for me when I was 14. It’s not now that it’s a big blockbuster movie and most people exposed to the internet review-sphere are at least aware of Linkara’s History of Power Rangers.

Special interests don’t have to be outside the social norm to be special interests. It’s how the autistic person feels about them and engages with them that defines it.

This is kind of personal to me because i was made to feel ashamed for being autistic but there’s nothing to be ashamed of and people need to stop mocking those with autism when they have no clue what autism is. People with it have nothing to feel bad about x

listen as someone on the autistic spectrum, I can’t express how happy I am with Billy Cranston as a character.

A lot of the representation of autism/Aspergers I’ve seen in the media has been people who are typically cold/casually insult people/being pushed away or looked down on/overall just pretty negative.

But Billy Cranston..he is a beautiful soul. The biggest stereotype of people on the autistic spectrum is that we “don’t have feelings” or are “really apathetic”. Yeah a lot of us have difficulty understanding other people but that’s because our brains just function differently like a lot of us really do try to understand others because we want people to understand us! And when we see characters that have autistic traits (a lot of the time we don’t get characters that are canonically autistic so we have to look for our representation through characters with traits) being rude and deliberately dismissive of other people’s feelings (a certain detective and a scientist from two highly overrated shows come to mind😒) it’s really harmful to us and supports those stereotypes.

Billy Cranston is not dismissive and rude. He is full of love for his friends. He tries to understand the people around him, probably because a lot of people in a small town don’t try to understand him.

Yes his “quirks” are played for laughs a lot but it’s in no way offensive and is genuinely funny (I mean to me anyway, there were a lot of things he does in the film that I’m guilty of, like not understanding social queues and keep talking and not realising I’m repeating things).

And finally Power Rangers does something with Billy Cranston and his autism that a lot of movies/TV shows don’t do with their autistic characters (if there are any) and that is unapologetically celebrate him. To me, Billy was the heart and soul of the movie.

So can we please have more autistic characters that aren’t rude white man-children who’s disabilities are played for laughs, thanks.

there is a huge difference between normalising stimming and aestheticising stimming. I want stimming normalised. I want nts to stim. if neurotypicals stim, it doesn’t look weird when I do. that’s normalising stimming.

I DON’T want stimming aestheticised. if nts are only okay with stimming if it’s pretty? that does jack fuck shit for autistic people. it doesn’t matter if chewlery gets normalised if chewing it in public is still stigmatised! in fact, it could be looked at worse because it would be seen as destruction of something pretty.
stimboards are great, I love them! but they don’t normalise stimming when nts embrace them, because they aren’t considering it anything weird. Enjoying the look of calligraphy being written is not stigmatised. slime is a children’s toy, gifs of it aren’t stigmatised. stimboards, to nts, are going to look like a relaxing breed of aesthetics and moodboards. That’s fine. that’s basically what they are. but I don’t want that glorified as normalising of stimming when the nts embracing it don’t know or care about the origin.
Anyone can buy a stim toy if they want one, but if they still stigmatise nd people for using them? if they don’t actually stim with them? that’s not! normalising anything!

when neurotypical people take something autistic people do to survive, ostracise autistic people for it, and fashion it into something they think is pretty for themselves to consume, that’s not normalisation. And that is what they do every time! the “pretty” ways of stimming are normalised, and the “ugly” ways are stigmatised. autistic people are literally profiled as criminals on the streets for stimming publicly. it’s a problem.

so @neurotypicals: if you like stimboards, great! if you like the look of chewlery, cool! if you want stim toys but don’t need them, cool! all of these things are fine! but you need to make sure that when you see someone stimming publicly, that you don’t treat them differently. don’t call them slurs. don’t think that they should “know better” or that they’re “up to no good”. don’t infantilise them. don’t be a dick to neurodivergents. normalising stimming is a result of people not thinking stimming is abnormal. that’s all you’ve gotta do to make a difference: change your perspective, and change that of others if your friends think poorly of us. it helps.