30
I would appreciate a diagnosis or classification of autism that isn't described as a disorder (lemmy.world)
submitted 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) by to c/autism@lemmy.world
64 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Using a social perspective to autism, I would appreciate if there were a way to classify someone as autistic without calling it a disorder. Yes, we have difficulties, but from a social perspective, a lot of them come from society being structured to meet the needs of allistics. They get guidance, acceptance, and ultimately privilege of a world that is designed for them, while we have to try to meet their expectations. From this perspective, we're not disordered, but oppressed/marginalized. How does that make us disordered?

I agree that there are different levels of functioning, and that some individuals might meet criteria for a disorder due to autism spectrum characteristics, so that would be valid. However, many individuals would function quite well in a setting that was designed to raise, educate, and accommodate autistic brains.

Anyone have any insight or ideas on this?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 3 years ago*

Some people (read those who take "go forth and multiply" literally and as an imperative) absolutely could. However, there is a basis in multiple older cultures in which gay/childless people helped support the society by taking care of the other members' children and the elderly. Not everything was focused on the individual need to have more kids, but to help those who others had. It is more of a group idea. There's more than enough children to sustain/grow the population, so it's more important to have extra hands to care for those who are here.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent