I had a Public Speaking 101 professor who was a Bavarian. He said the most unhinged statements like:
“Nonverbal communication is important, because being an aerospace engineer does not mean you get to think about planes and rockets all day, you need to know the whole thermal modality of thermodynamics and the theorem in which that is entailed by. Being an electrical engineer does not mean you are an electrician, it means you need to know who Carl Friedrich Gauss is. And political scientists are not politicians either. That is why nonverbal communication is so important “ (What part of that was nonverbal? It all seemed very verbal to me)
“[calling on a different student for each question] Who here knows who J.K. Rowling is? Who here knows what she did for a living? What books did she write? How many books? Who is the main character in those books?”and on and on like that (he was attempting to get to a specific scene that was different in book vs movie version, but it took a whole hour of yapping to get there)
“People say you have two ears and one mouth so you listen twice as much as you talk. But what I think is more important is that you have 2 nostrils but you only have 1 nose, and 2 plus 1 makes 3. And class, is the nose verbal or nonverbal? That’s right, nonverbal. And since we said yesterday that nonverbal communication is really important, thats why the number 3 is the most important number in this class. So usually when I ask a question with a numerical answer, you should say three. Example: How many minutes does your speech have to be? Three!”
“In the syllabus, I am following the academic policies stated by the university chancellor. Personally, I am indifferent about this chancellor, much as I am indifferent about another famous chancellor, if you know what I mean”
“The difference between Aristotle, Claude Shannon, and Steve Jobs is that they all knew it’s not about what you say, but how you say it, except only two of them knowing how to become the inventor of the computer, while the other didn’t even use computers.”
“Your assignments will be numbered as speeches 1, 2, 4, and 5. I will ignore Speech 3 from the curriculum which makes me sad because 3 is the most important number in this class”
“Why are you 5’7”? Why can’t you be 5’8”?”
“If you want to get a C in this class, you have aim for a B. If you want to get a B in this class, you have to aim for an A. If you want an A, good fucking luck and go fuck yourself! Do you think Jim Cook (sic) got to be CEO of Apple by just using an Apple device to upload a picture of himself eating an apple, and saying ‘well that was the bare minimum, so it’s good enough’ and expecting a reward?! Hell no! We give teachers to apples (sic) because it’s tradition, not because of the company. Thinking a fruit is a technology company is like thinking you can’t have confidence without having credentials, and that’s why this is supposed to be a challenging class, and I hate when people just expect it to be easy or unimportant just because it’s in the liberal arts department.”
“People usually assume homeless people are both old, male, and poor. But I‘m 51, and I’ve been a professor since I was 25. I have two young sons too who can explain AI in the digital learning revolution better than you can.”
“Everyone, regardless of major, needs to be an expert in communication STUDIES, and the reason subject is officially titled communication STUDIES in the catalog, not just communications is because I went to the bathroom more times in 1995 than in any other year.”
“The digital textbook is worth paying for because my best friend wrote it. I wanted to make it cost 50 dollars but the publishers wanted it to be 200, so we settled on 55.” (the textbook ended up actually costing 85 and not even being available on the first day of class and we had to wait until 3 days in)
“I am proud of my ancestors, but I want to be neither pro-Nazi nor anti-Nazi” (we were talking about Yosemite National Park before he said that)
The main problem was, if the Emperor was supposed to be above the other ruling aristocracy or beside. So German Emperor, could be read as "An emperor of german blood." Which would have meant that the old aristocracy had more power than under an Emperor of germany.so it was a matter of power distribution. Please take this explanation with a grain of salt, as I am not a historian. This is just a remembered tidbit from history class that i learned more than 15 years ago.
I'm not sure. Again, it has been a long time since I have learned about this part of german history. I'd maybe start with his Wikipedia article and begin working from there. You might also want to look into Otto von Bismarck while you're at it, as the history of both men is very intertwined and Von Bismarck was arguably the more interesting (and powerful) man.
Similar to how the rulers of Prussia for a while were called the "King in Prussia" and not the "King of Prussia." Although in that case it was because of Imperial politics, and since the title of "King" was seen as a royal title, only the Holy Roman Emperor could be called a king of HRE holdings (King of the Romans and King of Bohemia to be exact), and since Prussia wasn't considered to be apart of the HRE, Fredrick 3rd/1st was able to find a loophole to declare himself king without breaking the rules.
The controller sensitivity is nice to have, but it does cause some delay problems here and thete iv noticed. Usually when entering doorways it happens, and you catch a door frame a lil bit.
agreed. i think i slightly prefer autistic person bc it seems to imply autism as a core characteristic of the person rather than just This Thing They Have, but until seeing this post i literally never thought about it
Just to provide another perspective, I am autistic, I prefer autistic person by a decent amount but I wouldn’t take offence from someone saying “person with autism”. The reasoning is partially because person with autism sounds like a disease, and it’s a disability. You don’t say “person with blindness”. The other reason is because person with autism makes it seem like I am seperate from the autism but I’m not, there is no “me” without the autism like there would be if I was someone with cancer.
i dont think the comparison is entirely apt; one is a race and the other is a medical condition. you wouldnt use "person with whiteness" to describe a white person, but you also wouldnt use "adhd person" to describe a person with adhd (however, you might use "narcissist" to describe someone with narcissistic personality disorder)
Well being white isn’t a neurological disorder , and no matter how you define it, autism is.
Edit: I don’t know why people are saying autism isn’t a mental illness and taking this personally. I don’t know what other thing to call it and I didn’t even mean to imply it’s something that needs to be cured. I am
I think technically it's a neurological development disorder rather than a mental illness. Mental illness is more psychiatric while neurological disorders affect the wiring of the brain/nerves directly.
They're referring to an interesting discovery called the Double Empathy Problem. In short, studies suggest that neurotypical people understand neurotypical people, and autistic people understand autistic people, but neurotypical people and autistic people don't understand each other very well. This challenges the idea that autistic people are inherently poor communicators, since they communicate well with each other. Which means that, in a society where autistic people were a majority, neurotypical people would probably be considered to have a neurological problem.
This suggests that autism might not (inherently) be a mental disability, but rather just a different way of thinking, and that the disablement comes from having to exist in a society which does nothing to accommodate those differences. Consider the classic story about the fish being tested for tree-climbing-aptitude and going it's whole life believing itself to be useless (:
If you're curious about this kind of stuff I heavily recommend reading some essays by Nick Walker, author of Neuroqueer Heresies. They should be available for free online :)
I've never got this complaint as an autistic person, like why are we being so pedantic about this, no one actually thinks when you say a person with autism they're just carrying the disability around 💀
Of course it is, but keep it quiet– RFK Jr. has been trying to track this sucker down for years.
Don't let Big-R. catch wind of it, I have a good thing going here as a 'tism dealer.
So... what'd'ya want today? Trains? Furries?.... I got some LEGO Autism in here too still, but as always, ya still gotta pay half up front for that one.
Woah there– you can't jump to that scale without being caught by the feds. A sudden spike like that and RFK himself will be knocking on the door in fifteen minutes.
It tends to be an individual thing , like each person identifies with one or the other. I refer to myself as an autistic person and never a person with autism, but some people will say the exact opposite.
I get that, I am the opposite because the autism has been a very recent thing, and the way I see it I am first myself and then I am autistic. Autism does not define me, so I am myself with autism
Yea but a lot of neurological people try to correct us when we say we're an autistic person, because we're "more than your disability! You're a person WITH autism!"
Several reasons, I myself dgaf about it either way. But some people (we all know which) tend to use autistic as an insult. So people started associating the word as such.
Yeah I never cared either, I get why some people would be offended but it’s not a huge deal to me. I have autism. I am autistic. No difference, plus it does sorta feel like I’m carrying it around sometimes.
Autism, depending on who you ask is either a disorder or a condition/neurotype; depending on the interpretation the way you refer to it it's different.
People can have a disorder (have autism, little colorful bag) or be of a different neurotype (be autistic).
It really depends on who you ask, profesional or not.
Since some autistic people will tell you that it's mainly an impairment that doesn't define them as a person, (then it's something they have, you can separate it from them as individuals).
While people like me will recognize that it is something that defines how I experience reality, shapes my personality and likes (it's something I am, you can't draw a line of where I start and the autism ends, it's one whole thing).
Then the original post shows this in a visual manner, either as an analogy to make it easy to understand or a jab against those who say "have", some people have really strong feelings about it
why do people separate between having autism and being autistic, those should mean the same thing
Depends on the context, but I don't agree those two should mean the same thing, I think it's somewhat useful distinction in many cases.
On neurology/mental health fields it's about making a distinction about dissorders and conditions/neurological types. These are described differently (you can't "be" a dissorder, but you can "be" a condition).
I personally find it's a useful way to describe the experience (since it's an spectrum different people naturally feel more identified with one over the other).
This is a stupid argument, IMO, you can’t physically take a walk either, I can kind of see how it can separate the Autism and the person, but shouldn’t it be, like, “Autist,” though you should call people what they want to be called by, granted.
Some of us use Autistic as a standalone noun as well as an adjective. It's still best to ask first, but the majority opinion seems to be that person-first language tries way too hard to emphasize personhood when it should really go without saying.
I guess, but it is standard to use person-first with disabilities (ie: person with Down syndrome, person with ADHD (neither of those have adjectives that I know of)), also with all conditions that don’t have an adjective (a person with a cold), so, Autism is just special because it has an adjective.
ADHDer is an increasingly common term in neurodivergent spaces from what I can tell.
But back on the previous topic (autism), it's also central to our identity in a lot of cases and not just something tacked on (and in some cases, though certainly not all, arguably not even a disability\* outside of other people not understanding us/our needs, which has more to do with their inability/unwillingness than ours) in no small part because we're literally built different, as in our brains literally developed in a different way from the very beginning, meaning it's literally inseparable from who we are as individuals.
\Mini-rant: in my experience,) someautistics will vehemently disagree with the idea that it isn't absolutely 100% guaranteed to be a disability for literally every single one of us in every conceivable example, while others have the more nuanced view that even if it is a disability for the majority, that doesn't mean it is for every individual autistic. I'm harping on this because the idea that it is invalidates my own lived experiences and it frustrates me greatly every time it happens. Some subs are better about this than others.
I feel like this is a matter of individual preference. I'm autistic, but I certainly don't like being defined by it and don't mind being called a "person with autism". I can't conceive it as anything but a disability either, because even if society were built with autistic people in mind (which would be difficult considering the experience of each autistic person is different despite a few shared characteristics) I'd still struggle. You can't change society to not make me feel intensely uncomfortable when I'm sweaty or when drops of water or any liquid fall down my skin, or when I smell ketchup, or when I touch certain textures or see/hear other people touch them or rub their hands together. Or to make me able to intuitively understand what I'm feeling. Or to work around my executive dysfunction. There's nothing I can do that people not in the spectrum can't, but there's plenty they can do that I can't.
Autism has definitely had a huge impact on my personality and especially my interests, and I'm sure I'd be a very different person if I didn't have autism, but I still don't like thinking of it as my defining characteristic. My experiences and the context in which I grew up and live in have also impacted who I am to the point that I'd be a different person if they had been any different. I like to think of those, as well as autism, as all being parts of what makes me what I am and colours the lens I perceive the world with.
I don't think my perspective is objective, of course. But I do believe that it's just as valid as the neurodiversity paradigm. And because all this stuff varies from person to person I don't think infographics like the one in the OP picture are helpful as a general PSA kind of thing. Nor is it fair to get upset at people for not knowing which specific way you personally like to have your autism talked about if they're speaking generally. If they're talking about your own specific experience and you don't like the language they use, you can tell them that, and in that case I believe the infographic would be useful to explain the logic behind the language you prefer. But if language that isn't actively hostile but that doesn't fit your preference is used when speaking generally about autism, it's better to assume good intentions and remember that it reflects a valid view, even if you don't personally share it.
I don't have much to say about what you've written here other than that I can appreciate it and your recognition of nuance in particular. I did say "in a lot of cases" to account for it not being true for every one of us, as you've subsequently proven.
I'm not offended or insulted when someone uses "person-first" language for me or says I "have autism", unless I've already explained to them that this isn't my preference and why (or they're trying to "correct" me). At the same time, I don't really care what other autistics prefer so long as they make it clear what their preference is, since it's their identity and I'm not gonna police it.
I genuinely prefer "autist", solely because it's quick and slangy and fun to say. "autistic person" is fine. I intellectually understand that "person with autism" is supposed to be thoughtful language by invoking my personhood first, or whatever, but when I hear it, it's just an obviously constructed phrase, like they think I have to be treated carefully and delicately, like I need to be reminded (or given permission) I can be both a human person and an autist. I hate it, and ironically, find it really dehumanizing, because it's not a thing you do for "normal" people.
Like, if you were tired, you wouldn't say "whew, long day, I am a person with sleepiness.", you'd say "I'm sleepy". If you were a welder and someone asked what your job was, you wouldn't say "I am a person who welds", you'd say "I'm a welder". If you were talking about your friend who went through a bad breakup, you wouldn't say "She is a person of sadness", you'd say "she's sad". If your friend had cancer, you wouldn't say "He's a person who has cancer", you'd say "he has cancer". So do not call me a person with autism, call me autistic. Being treated as some weird exception is the thing I hate most.
For the last one, you would say “they have Autism” not they’re “they’re a person with Autism,” and you would say “I treat people with cancer,” not “cancerous people.” The rest I can see.
I remember one time I called myself autistic and someone corrected me and said the correct term was "person with autism." Like, thanks, good catch, didn't want to accidentally offend myself.
It is, the thing is many would tell you that autism isn't just an impairment, but an inherent part of them as individuals that you can't really separate.
Like with cancer there's a clear separation betwen the person and the tumor as different things, there's the person, their personality, thoughts likes and dreams and then there's the cancer, you can imagine the person without cancer even.
With autism that line is very subjective, and if you ask me for my case as I experience it, not-existent.
For me as I experience it, there's no line betwen me and the autism, it's something that shapes how I experience reality, how my thoughts are formulated and my ideals and morals, it's not something I "have", it's an intrinsic part of who I am.
Other disorders or mental health affectations can be treated and or clearly separated from the individual as certain groups or patterna of thoughts, unlike autism.
But again, it's a heavily subjective matter, even among profesionals.
The most preferred description (identity first/person first) depends on the disability. For example, most autistic people prefer to use identity first langue, while most people with ADHD prefer person first language. Some reasons that it’s often the case that people prefer the latter are (1) because the former is a charged term that carries negative connotations, (2) the disability doesn’t shape someone’s identity, and (3), there is no medically accepted standard term, or the most common ones are used more broadly and negatively, like people with NPD, or ASPD, who are stigmatised, through the way ‘narcissist’, ‘sociopath,’ and ‘psychopath’ are used pejoratively. The reason that this isn’t the case with Autism is mainly because autistic people, more often than not, see it as something that shapes who they are as a person. There is no agreed upon correct and incorrect usage, but the way people speak about disabilities shapes how they are viewed by society.
At least for me the only reason I use person first language when referring to adhd is bcs adhd is so hard to turn into an adjective without it sounding weird grammatically, meanwhile autistic is already an adjective that exists
Yea but the suitcase is nailed to my hand so I cant put it down and can only use one hand and if the suitcase touches anything by accident people are like "ew get your autism juices off the thing" and also i really want to ask clarifying questions all the time
If one day i say that i have autism and someone corrects me saying I'm autistic, I'm gonna make sure that person leaves the conversation knowing every single detail of pokémon lore they didn't ask for
the original post reminds me of how the German Emperor was called the German Emperor instead of the Emperor of Germany to appeal with the bavarians.
Always the fuckin Bavarians
separtist mfs tbh.... (/jk)
Hitler, you here? (/jk)
Nah, I'm the german emperor and I DON'T LIKE THE ZE ANNOYING BAVARIANS WANTING THEIR OWN COUNTRY!!!!!!!!!!!! (/jk)
I had a Public Speaking 101 professor who was a Bavarian. He said the most unhinged statements like:
“Nonverbal communication is important, because being an aerospace engineer does not mean you get to think about planes and rockets all day, you need to know the whole thermal modality of thermodynamics and the theorem in which that is entailed by. Being an electrical engineer does not mean you are an electrician, it means you need to know who Carl Friedrich Gauss is. And political scientists are not politicians either. That is why nonverbal communication is so important “ (What part of that was nonverbal? It all seemed very verbal to me)
“[calling on a different student for each question] Who here knows who J.K. Rowling is? Who here knows what she did for a living? What books did she write? How many books? Who is the main character in those books?”and on and on like that (he was attempting to get to a specific scene that was different in book vs movie version, but it took a whole hour of yapping to get there)
“People say you have two ears and one mouth so you listen twice as much as you talk. But what I think is more important is that you have 2 nostrils but you only have 1 nose, and 2 plus 1 makes 3. And class, is the nose verbal or nonverbal? That’s right, nonverbal. And since we said yesterday that nonverbal communication is really important, thats why the number 3 is the most important number in this class. So usually when I ask a question with a numerical answer, you should say three. Example: How many minutes does your speech have to be? Three!”
“In the syllabus, I am following the academic policies stated by the university chancellor. Personally, I am indifferent about this chancellor, much as I am indifferent about another famous chancellor, if you know what I mean”
“The difference between Aristotle, Claude Shannon, and Steve Jobs is that they all knew it’s not about what you say, but how you say it, except only two of them knowing how to become the inventor of the computer, while the other didn’t even use computers.”
“Your assignments will be numbered as speeches 1, 2, 4, and 5. I will ignore Speech 3 from the curriculum which makes me sad because 3 is the most important number in this class”
“Why are you 5’7”? Why can’t you be 5’8”?”
“If you want to get a C in this class, you have aim for a B. If you want to get a B in this class, you have to aim for an A. If you want an A, good fucking luck and go fuck yourself! Do you think Jim Cook (sic) got to be CEO of Apple by just using an Apple device to upload a picture of himself eating an apple, and saying ‘well that was the bare minimum, so it’s good enough’ and expecting a reward?! Hell no! We give teachers to apples (sic) because it’s tradition, not because of the company. Thinking a fruit is a technology company is like thinking you can’t have confidence without having credentials, and that’s why this is supposed to be a challenging class, and I hate when people just expect it to be easy or unimportant just because it’s in the liberal arts department.”
“People usually assume homeless people are both old, male, and poor. But I‘m 51, and I’ve been a professor since I was 25. I have two young sons too who can explain AI in the digital learning revolution better than you can.”
“Everyone, regardless of major, needs to be an expert in communication STUDIES, and the reason subject is officially titled communication STUDIES in the catalog, not just communications is because I went to the bathroom more times in 1995 than in any other year.”
“The digital textbook is worth paying for because my best friend wrote it. I wanted to make it cost 50 dollars but the publishers wanted it to be 200, so we settled on 55.” (the textbook ended up actually costing 85 and not even being available on the first day of class and we had to wait until 3 days in)
“I am proud of my ancestors, but I want to be neither pro-Nazi nor anti-Nazi” (we were talking about Yosemite National Park before he said that)
The best thing about this is that they weren't sure what title to use during the coronation, so he was crowned Emperor (pause) Wilhelm.
Jokes aside, that seems like a nice compromise but what about "Emperor of the German People"?
The main problem was, if the Emperor was supposed to be above the other ruling aristocracy or beside. So German Emperor, could be read as "An emperor of german blood." Which would have meant that the old aristocracy had more power than under an Emperor of germany.so it was a matter of power distribution. Please take this explanation with a grain of salt, as I am not a historian. This is just a remembered tidbit from history class that i learned more than 15 years ago.
that is an interesting perspective for his name though, any more facts that I could check tomorrow if I can?
I'm not sure. Again, it has been a long time since I have learned about this part of german history. I'd maybe start with his Wikipedia article and begin working from there. You might also want to look into Otto von Bismarck while you're at it, as the history of both men is very intertwined and Von Bismarck was arguably the more interesting (and powerful) man.
I see then, nice day to you
During the French revolution, Louis XVI was renamed from King of France to King of the French for this reason
also interesting as well
Found one
Similar to how the rulers of Prussia for a while were called the "King in Prussia" and not the "King of Prussia." Although in that case it was because of Imperial politics, and since the title of "King" was seen as a royal title, only the Holy Roman Emperor could be called a king of HRE holdings (King of the Romans and King of Bohemia to be exact), and since Prussia wasn't considered to be apart of the HRE, Fredrick 3rd/1st was able to find a loophole to declare himself king without breaking the rules.
King of Prussia vs King in Prussia
I read that as Batarians and was like, I didn't know they were in contact back then
TIL Autism gives you ≈10 seconds of invincibility and faster running speed
ADHD just gives a passive speed boost with +100% controller sensitivity and doubled motion blur 😔
The controller sensitivity is nice to have, but it does cause some delay problems here and thete iv noticed. Usually when entering doorways it happens, and you catch a door frame a lil bit.
You still can’t survive falls into bottomless pits tho so watch out
Nor lava for whatever reason
TIL Autism is a briefcase you can equip to your inventory
It also makes you gay.
Coincidentally there is a huge overlap between autistic and lgbt people.
Aw crap, I left my autism at home today. Guess I gotta take the train back home… oh.
Autism with a person
“A person on the autism spectrum”
… that’s just Mariokart on rainbow road level
Sometimes you have autism. Sometimes autism has you.
I get it, though.
Would you rather be called a white person or a person with whiteness?
I genuinely don't feel strongly one way or the other tbh
Autistic person here, I don't really care (concerning the original post's question)
we'll still be heavily misunderstood either way lmao. a rose by any other name.
agreed. i think i slightly prefer autistic person bc it seems to imply autism as a core characteristic of the person rather than just This Thing They Have, but until seeing this post i literally never thought about it
just dont call me an autist or the r-slur lmao
Which one? Ruler of the Worlds?
Regard but with one different letter
Don't worry haha, I fully know the word they were talking about, I simply wanted to have a bit of fun
Non-native here, what's bad about “autist”? I thought it was just the noun version of “autistic”
a: it just Sounds Bad to me, definitely a personal thing
b: because the internet is horrible it's also dated internet slang for "A person characterized by abnormal and unhealthy focus or persistence, low self-awareness and unhealthy hatred of opposition or criticism."
Yeah, “autist” sounds totally wrong in English. Feels like it has a rather negative connotation attached to it as well (seems like it to me at least).
But in my native language it’s far more neutral, so there I have no issues with it. Hell, I use it when talking about myself all the time.
Just to provide another perspective, I am autistic, I prefer autistic person by a decent amount but I wouldn’t take offence from someone saying “person with autism”. The reasoning is partially because person with autism sounds like a disease, and it’s a disability. You don’t say “person with blindness”. The other reason is because person with autism makes it seem like I am seperate from the autism but I’m not, there is no “me” without the autism like there would be if I was someone with cancer.
I'd rather be called slurs.
say no more
https://preview.redd.it/6iir3d1bnz6g1.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&s=d5c601f75f04eac48c9697b6659d1eae8ee09b6e
Yay!
Okay, but you made it sound funny as fuck. It's like an alien trying to mimic English. "Yes, I am a male with whiteness!"
Muersault would say that tbh, but a bit more specific “That is correct, I am a male with a white skin complexion”
I think it would be person of whiteness
Person of autism
Creature of still
POW!
I think I’d be confused at either since I’m not white 🤔
But which one would you prefer??
Neither
Black people vs people of color
Call me Caucasian.
Person with Caucasianism
Person of Cauc
Did you know that ‘whiteness’ has a 100% mortality rate?
"I'm sorry, i can't go to work, I'm having a little whiteness today"
i dont think the comparison is entirely apt; one is a race and the other is a medical condition. you wouldnt use "person with whiteness" to describe a white person, but you also wouldnt use "adhd person" to describe a person with adhd (however, you might use "narcissist" to describe someone with narcissistic personality disorder)
I honestly would choose the second, because I am my own person and then I am white, with that being said I hate "a person with whiteness".
Well being white isn’t a neurological disorder , and no matter how you define it, autism is.
Edit: I don’t know why people are saying autism isn’t a mental illness and taking this personally. I don’t know what other thing to call it and I didn’t even mean to imply it’s something that needs to be cured. I am
Edit 2: changed it
I think technically it's a neurological development disorder rather than a mental illness. Mental illness is more psychiatric while neurological disorders affect the wiring of the brain/nerves directly.
Not being Autistic would be equally disabling in a society comprised mostly of Autistic people.
What does this have to do with anything though???0
They're referring to an interesting discovery called the Double Empathy Problem. In short, studies suggest that neurotypical people understand neurotypical people, and autistic people understand autistic people, but neurotypical people and autistic people don't understand each other very well. This challenges the idea that autistic people are inherently poor communicators, since they communicate well with each other. Which means that, in a society where autistic people were a majority, neurotypical people would probably be considered to have a neurological problem.
This suggests that autism might not (inherently) be a mental disability, but rather just a different way of thinking, and that the disablement comes from having to exist in a society which does nothing to accommodate those differences. Consider the classic story about the fish being tested for tree-climbing-aptitude and going it's whole life believing itself to be useless (:
If you're curious about this kind of stuff I heavily recommend reading some essays by Nick Walker, author of Neuroqueer Heresies. They should be available for free online :)
Why don’t people just give an explanation from the start instead of hurling insults though
That doesn’t have shit to do with fuck though?
I've never got this complaint as an autistic person, like why are we being so pedantic about this, no one actually thinks when you say a person with autism they're just carrying the disability around 💀
Autism, probably.
https://preview.redd.it/ns8nrqftsq6g1.png?width=1031&format=png&auto=webp&s=54ad46186bb73d4b76b3b4fd96cfa889267c350f
Damn autists, they ruined autism!
The disability briefcase isn’t real???! 🤯
Of course it is, but keep it quiet– RFK Jr. has been trying to track this sucker down for years.
Don't let Big-R. catch wind of it, I have a good thing going here as a 'tism dealer.
So... what'd'ya want today? Trains? Furries?.... I got some LEGO Autism in here too still, but as always, ya still gotta pay half up front for that one.
Do you have any Magic the Gathering autism left?
Just EDH, you good with that?
Yeah, that’ll work. Do you have enough for say, roughly a retirement home’s worth of people?
Woah there– you can't jump to that scale without being caught by the feds. A sudden spike like that and RFK himself will be knocking on the door in fifteen minutes.
Fine. How long should I space them out?
It tends to be an individual thing , like each person identifies with one or the other. I refer to myself as an autistic person and never a person with autism, but some people will say the exact opposite.
I get that, I am the opposite because the autism has been a very recent thing, and the way I see it I am first myself and then I am autistic. Autism does not define me, so I am myself with autism
Yea but a lot of neurological people try to correct us when we say we're an autistic person, because we're "more than your disability! You're a person WITH autism!"
Neurological
Only referring to people with neurons.
did you mean neurotypical 😭
Autocorrect did that I think?? Yeah I did mean that
Sounds like an autistic problem smh
It's just a way to bully other people while not actually doing anything to help autistic people who struggle already.
Several reasons, I myself dgaf about it either way. But some people (we all know which) tend to use autistic as an insult. So people started associating the word as such.
Because how things are framed matters, even if small things seem inconsequential. Language contextualizes how we see the world.
Yeah I never cared either, I get why some people would be offended but it’s not a huge deal to me. I have autism. I am autistic. No difference, plus it does sorta feel like I’m carrying it around sometimes.
i keep my autism in a bag
I'm useless but not for long
The future is coming on
It's coming on, it's coming on, it's coming on, it's coming on
W Clint Eastwood
First one personally. I am not autistic but i do own a box of autism i carry around for good luck
i dont even understand what the original post meant
Person with an autism bag here to explain.
Autism, depending on who you ask is either a disorder or a condition/neurotype; depending on the interpretation the way you refer to it it's different.
People can have a disorder (have autism, little colorful bag) or be of a different neurotype (be autistic).
It really depends on who you ask, profesional or not.
Since some autistic people will tell you that it's mainly an impairment that doesn't define them as a person, (then it's something they have, you can separate it from them as individuals).
While people like me will recognize that it is something that defines how I experience reality, shapes my personality and likes (it's something I am, you can't draw a line of where I start and the autism ends, it's one whole thing).
Then the original post shows this in a visual manner, either as an analogy to make it easy to understand or a jab against those who say "have", some people have really strong feelings about it
im autistic too and never heard of all that, why do people separate between having autism and being autistic, those should mean the same thing
Sonic related pfp, should have guessed.
Depends on the context, but I don't agree those two should mean the same thing, I think it's somewhat useful distinction in many cases.
On neurology/mental health fields it's about making a distinction about dissorders and conditions/neurological types. These are described differently (you can't "be" a dissorder, but you can "be" a condition).
I personally find it's a useful way to describe the experience (since it's an spectrum different people naturally feel more identified with one over the other).
i just hadnt thought of it that way i guess, just think that its a dintinction that doesnt feel that clear at first, to me at least
This is a stupid argument, IMO, you can’t physically take a walk either, I can kind of see how it can separate the Autism and the person, but shouldn’t it be, like, “Autist,” though you should call people what they want to be called by, granted.
Some of us use Autistic as a standalone noun as well as an adjective. It's still best to ask first, but the majority opinion seems to be that person-first language tries way too hard to emphasize personhood when it should really go without saying.
I guess, but it is standard to use person-first with disabilities (ie: person with Down syndrome, person with ADHD (neither of those have adjectives that I know of)), also with all conditions that don’t have an adjective (a person with a cold), so, Autism is just special because it has an adjective.
ADHDer is an increasingly common term in neurodivergent spaces from what I can tell.
But back on the previous topic (autism), it's also central to our identity in a lot of cases and not just something tacked on (and in some cases, though certainly not all, arguably not even a disability\* outside of other people not understanding us/our needs, which has more to do with their inability/unwillingness than ours) in no small part because we're literally built different, as in our brains literally developed in a different way from the very beginning, meaning it's literally inseparable from who we are as individuals.
\Mini-rant: in my experience,) some autistics will vehemently disagree with the idea that it isn't absolutely 100% guaranteed to be a disability for literally every single one of us in every conceivable example, while others have the more nuanced view that even if it is a disability for the majority, that doesn't mean it is for every individual autistic. I'm harping on this because the idea that it is invalidates my own lived experiences and it frustrates me greatly every time it happens. Some subs are better about this than others.
I feel like this is a matter of individual preference. I'm autistic, but I certainly don't like being defined by it and don't mind being called a "person with autism". I can't conceive it as anything but a disability either, because even if society were built with autistic people in mind (which would be difficult considering the experience of each autistic person is different despite a few shared characteristics) I'd still struggle. You can't change society to not make me feel intensely uncomfortable when I'm sweaty or when drops of water or any liquid fall down my skin, or when I smell ketchup, or when I touch certain textures or see/hear other people touch them or rub their hands together. Or to make me able to intuitively understand what I'm feeling. Or to work around my executive dysfunction. There's nothing I can do that people not in the spectrum can't, but there's plenty they can do that I can't.
Autism has definitely had a huge impact on my personality and especially my interests, and I'm sure I'd be a very different person if I didn't have autism, but I still don't like thinking of it as my defining characteristic. My experiences and the context in which I grew up and live in have also impacted who I am to the point that I'd be a different person if they had been any different. I like to think of those, as well as autism, as all being parts of what makes me what I am and colours the lens I perceive the world with.
I don't think my perspective is objective, of course. But I do believe that it's just as valid as the neurodiversity paradigm. And because all this stuff varies from person to person I don't think infographics like the one in the OP picture are helpful as a general PSA kind of thing. Nor is it fair to get upset at people for not knowing which specific way you personally like to have your autism talked about if they're speaking generally. If they're talking about your own specific experience and you don't like the language they use, you can tell them that, and in that case I believe the infographic would be useful to explain the logic behind the language you prefer. But if language that isn't actively hostile but that doesn't fit your preference is used when speaking generally about autism, it's better to assume good intentions and remember that it reflects a valid view, even if you don't personally share it.
I don't have much to say about what you've written here other than that I can appreciate it and your recognition of nuance in particular. I did say "in a lot of cases" to account for it not being true for every one of us, as you've subsequently proven.
I'm not offended or insulted when someone uses "person-first" language for me or says I "have autism", unless I've already explained to them that this isn't my preference and why (or they're trying to "correct" me). At the same time, I don't really care what other autistics prefer so long as they make it clear what their preference is, since it's their identity and I'm not gonna police it.
I prefer autist because it's funny and sounds like a British person saying "artist." Or would it be a "person with Britishism?"
I genuinely prefer "autist", solely because it's quick and slangy and fun to say. "autistic person" is fine. I intellectually understand that "person with autism" is supposed to be thoughtful language by invoking my personhood first, or whatever, but when I hear it, it's just an obviously constructed phrase, like they think I have to be treated carefully and delicately, like I need to be reminded (or given permission) I can be both a human person and an autist. I hate it, and ironically, find it really dehumanizing, because it's not a thing you do for "normal" people.
Like, if you were tired, you wouldn't say "whew, long day, I am a person with sleepiness.", you'd say "I'm sleepy". If you were a welder and someone asked what your job was, you wouldn't say "I am a person who welds", you'd say "I'm a welder". If you were talking about your friend who went through a bad breakup, you wouldn't say "She is a person of sadness", you'd say "she's sad". If your friend had cancer, you wouldn't say "He's a person who has cancer", you'd say "he has cancer". So do not call me a person with autism, call me autistic. Being treated as some weird exception is the thing I hate most.
For the last one, you would say “they have Autism” not they’re “they’re a person with Autism,” and you would say “I treat people with cancer,” not “cancerous people.” The rest I can see.
I remember one time I called myself autistic and someone corrected me and said the correct term was "person with autism." Like, thanks, good catch, didn't want to accidentally offend myself.
"King of Prussia and King in Prussia" ass
Autistic people, do you want to be called Super Star Marios?
I genuinely dont understand what the difference betwen a person with X and an X person
There is none, just another bullshit culture war psyop
Does that mean I kill Bowser if I touch him?
an autistic person with autism
A person with cancer. A cancerous person.
I feel like saying a person with [impairment] is completely normal.
It is, the thing is many would tell you that autism isn't just an impairment, but an inherent part of them as individuals that you can't really separate.
Like with cancer there's a clear separation betwen the person and the tumor as different things, there's the person, their personality, thoughts likes and dreams and then there's the cancer, you can imagine the person without cancer even.
With autism that line is very subjective, and if you ask me for my case as I experience it, not-existent.
For me as I experience it, there's no line betwen me and the autism, it's something that shapes how I experience reality, how my thoughts are formulated and my ideals and morals, it's not something I "have", it's an intrinsic part of who I am.
Other disorders or mental health affectations can be treated and or clearly separated from the individual as certain groups or patterna of thoughts, unlike autism.
But again, it's a heavily subjective matter, even among profesionals.
The most preferred description (identity first/person first) depends on the disability. For example, most autistic people prefer to use identity first langue, while most people with ADHD prefer person first language. Some reasons that it’s often the case that people prefer the latter are (1) because the former is a charged term that carries negative connotations, (2) the disability doesn’t shape someone’s identity, and (3), there is no medically accepted standard term, or the most common ones are used more broadly and negatively, like people with NPD, or ASPD, who are stigmatised, through the way ‘narcissist’, ‘sociopath,’ and ‘psychopath’ are used pejoratively. The reason that this isn’t the case with Autism is mainly because autistic people, more often than not, see it as something that shapes who they are as a person. There is no agreed upon correct and incorrect usage, but the way people speak about disabilities shapes how they are viewed by society.
At least for me the only reason I use person first language when referring to adhd is bcs adhd is so hard to turn into an adjective without it sounding weird grammatically, meanwhile autistic is already an adjective that exists
I can hear the music
Yea but the suitcase is nailed to my hand so I cant put it down and can only use one hand and if the suitcase touches anything by accident people are like "ew get your autism juices off the thing" and also i really want to ask clarifying questions all the time
Anyone who posts that image is automatically the guy on the left
If one day i say that i have autism and someone corrects me saying I'm autistic, I'm gonna make sure that person leaves the conversation knowing every single detail of pokémon lore they didn't ask for
I too like to carry my autism around in a little purse
As someone with Autisim, these are both correct.
man i love my autism toolkit
Case and point
What? Is this like Tony Stark suiting up with the briefcase suit? What does the suitcase mean in this context??
I am so confused
This is nice @Ritchie Bros
I like to be an autistic person
I love being an invincible mario
ah that explains the music that plays when you get one...
I am an autism with Person
i prefer mental retardation but at least its not neurospicy
No cuz actually. If i'm called acoustic, neurospicy whatever, I hate you, with a burning passion.
Neurospicy feels like an actual slur