do your opinions count less if people knew you're autistic?

Yeah, I agree that a lot of the issues stem from us being a minority. If more people thought autistic way, certain things like communication might be a bit easier.

Yes, the dissonance between "I don't want to be labelled" and "I want you to recognise that I'm different"

I guess the issue is that we're a minority and it comes back to the fact that usually people think 'popular = right' which is clearly wrong.

This quote about the 'double empathy problem' made a lot of sense to me:

The sociologist Damian Milton at the University of Kent argues that mind-blindness goes both ways. If we see social situations as dynamically constructed between the participants, rather than defined by static, universal rules, it is impossible for one person to have a social ‘deficit’; the failure lies in the mutual creation of a social reality.

Therefore, when communication fails between autistic and non-autistic people, we must surely consider whether the mind-blindness is mutual. Milton calls this the ‘double empathy problem’: neither party is able to interpret the gestures, tone or pace of the other’s conversation, and so both participants leave with a sense of ‘otherness’.

However, because autistic people are in a minority, in mainstream discourse – including the language of respected tomes such as the DSM – neurotypical mind-blindness is invisible.

This was from this blog post: https://aeon.co/essays/the-autistic-view-of-the-world-is-not-the-neurotypical-cliche

Basically, we need to take time to establish the 'rules' for each social interaction... sure, start with some 'default settings' as these will be 'close enough' in most cases, but be prepared to change to make the interaction as mutually beneficial as possible.

Well, I said I don't like their categorisation, and it's a "very long stretch to put it there". But I don't think it necessary implies that "an impairment in one area means a whole suite of functioning is impaired" either. It only said "cognitive impairment", but didn't specify whether it's a "specific learning impairment" or "general learning impairment" like they do for dyslexia vs. Down's syndrome. Anyway, the categorisation is from a few disability surveys I filled out for job applications, either to monitor post hoc that they are not discriminating based on diagnoses, or to provide adjustments for those that need it. I'm not the one who made it up. But I guess since it's suppose to be a "disability" survey, their main point is to focus on the impaired parts. There will be no need to provide adjustments for above-average functioning areas. 

This is a bit off-topic, but I sometimes feel that there's a lot of contradiction between these two phenomena: (1) people are complaining that they have a lot of trouble getting help, adjustments, funding, support, etc. for their autism, and (2) people do not think autism is a disability but a difference, where some cognitive functions may be impaired and some enhanced. If one doesn't think their cognitive or social functioning (including if you use the social model of disability), why is there so much complaint of not getting enough support? If it's just a difference, where you can average out the impaired and enhanced functions, then shouldn't Neurotypicals also get support for their impairments relative to autism? E.g., like job interviews should have adjustments like giving Neurotypicals extra time to look for details, etc?

That is typical flawed logic i.e. that an impairment in one area means a whole suite of functioning is impaired... If I have a bit of rust on one panel of my car does that mean the bodywork as a whole is rusty? Nope.

I like the idea of 'Cognitive difference' then with sub-areas maybe listed as being impaired or enhanced.

There's never enough about the 'Cognitive enhancements' such as pattern recognition.

Take this example:

During WWII, the US Navy tried to determine where they needed to armour their aircraft to ensure they came back home. They ran an analysis of where planes had been shot up, and came up with this.

Obviously the places that needed to be up-armoured are the wingtips, the central body, and the elevators. That’s where the planes were all getting shot up.

Abraham Wald, a statistician, disagreed. He thought they should better armour the nose area, engines, and mid-body. Which was crazy, of course. That’s not where the planes were getting shot.

Except Mr. Wald realised what the others didn’t. The planes were getting shot there too, but they weren’t making it home.

What the Navy thought it had done was analyse where aircraft were suffering the most damage. What they had actually done was analyse where aircraft could suffer the most damage without catastrophic failure.

All of the places that weren’t hit? Those planes had been shot there and crashed.

They weren’t looking at the whole sample set, only the survivors.

I feel like ASD Cognitive Difference gets treated the same way - the focus is on the 'wrong' areas. Imagine the DSM diagnostic criteria being updated so that what clinicians were looking for were the POSITIVE aspects of autism...

I don't 100% disagree with the categorisation, but I think it's a very long stretch to put it there, and other terms for the category names would be much more suitable. 

The logic is...

e.g., People with ASD often have difficulties with communication. Communication is a cognitive ability. Therefore people with ASD have an impairment in a cognitive ability. 

e.g., People with ASD often have difficulties with reading people's faces. Reading people's faces is a cognitive ability. Therefore people with ASD have an impairment in a cognitive ability. 

e.g., People with ASD often have difficulties with sensory integration. Sensory integration is a cognitive ability. Therefore people with ASD have an impairment in a cognitive ability. 

And since ASD has more than one impairment (e.g., triad of impairment theory https://www.autism.org.uk/about/what-is/asd.aspx), they just put everything under 'cognitive' impairment. 

But it's a long long stretch.... Most people with ASD who apply for the jobs I'm applying to are average or above average intelligence, so classifying someone with difficulties in communication as having a cognitive impairment overall is very degrading. 

My guess is that a lot of the forms are just very outdated, and they haven't changed it to a better format. Because according to the logic above, "every" neurological diagnosis would be classified under cognitive impairment, not just ASD, so it's a very bad categorisation. I would prefer it if the surveys just had the names of the diagnosis, and not categorising it (I guess it would make the forms longer). 

Tinyexplorer said:

Views like this are not widespread in UK, but they are creeping in, especially when people rely on certain US sources for information about autism.

qwerty said:

I've been applying to jobs recently, and in the diversity survey at the end, some place ASD under cognitive impairment

I mentioned ASD is categorised as "cognitive impairment" in the diversity surveys when I was applying for jobs. I should mention that I've applied for jobs both in the US and in the UK. And in the places I applied, ASD being categorised as cognitive impairment all happened to be in places in the UK. In the US, some of the forms are just yes/no whether you have a disability, while in other forms, you pick the specific name of your disability. In the UK, all disabilities are placed in categories, some places put ASD under social/communication disability, while others it under cognitive impairment. So it seemed likely that this view originated in the UK. One of the places I applied to in the UK that put ASD under cognitive impairment also took part in the Guaranteed Interview scheme (which means they are register Disability Confident employers. Maybe you should try applying for some jobs in the UK just to take a look at their diversity survey. 

A few years ago, some nasty, manipulative (and insanely jealous) members of my wife's family were suggesting that I should not be allowed to go to my father-in-laws funeral because I wouldn't understand what was going on.    The chief instigator was a teaching assistant....

What you say is very true and very sad and it sounds like a case of uneducated people talking about things that they actually know nothing about.

I don't class Autism as a Cognitive impairment but rather a Cognitive difference. Anyone is entitled to an opinion, Autistic or not. As long as someone has full mental capacity then they are as able as anyone else to participate in discussions and make decisions; sometimes more so. People who lack mental capacity either partly or entirely still have a right to participate in discussions and make decisions where they are able to. 

I'm going to stop now before I get on my high horse! 

There is an aspect to this question, that is really relevant. Someone mentioned that autism being classed with cognitive impairment... There are autism related organisations in US that actually openly argue that autism makes autistic people ineligible to participate in conversations and make decisions about themselves and others, that basically unless they behave in a NT way they don't have any value and positive contribution to society. There are also fora that explicitly ban autistic people from participating on the basis that are autistic, don't have empathy and don't understand, have nothing relevant to add to the discussion... Views like this are not widespread in UK, but they are creeping in, especially when people rely on certain US sources for information about autism. So we need to promote the correct information.

There were attacks on Greta Thunberg's credibility specifically about her autism, arguing that she does not understand what she is doing, that she is manipulated (a 'patsy'), has no mind of her own, that her views are not relevant because she does not have empathy, because of her eyes, because she is 'chilling', because she is 'dreaded', 'monotonous' etc etc.

Human rights watch rebuff [need google translate]: https://www.hrw.org/fr/news/2019/04/18/lettre-de-human-rights-watch-lexpress-en-reponse-la-tribune-de-laurent-alexandre-sur

'Like Greta Thunberg, I am on the autism spectrum. She gives me hope'. Charlie Hancock: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/25/greta-thunberg-autism-spectrum-critics

Greta of course is the lovely Swedish autistic teenager who is the face of the Climate protest, Extinction Rebellion and the the Nobel Prize nominee. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p07770t8

So Greta being the Nobel prize nominee is really helpful 

“It’s noteworthy that Thunberg has chosen to be open about being autistic, because by being openly autistic while serving in positions of leadership, autistic people can help transform how society views us, opening up opportunities for other autistic people around the world,” he says. “By being proudly autistic in our moments of excellence as well as our moments of struggle, we help to change the public image of autism and tell the world that we have much to offer.”' https://www.vox.com/first-person/2019/5/6/18531551/autism-greta-thunberg-speech?utm_campaign=vox&utm_content=entry&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

Trust me, they will realise eventually, it will take time but they will because others will just not come up with such unique ideas.

I personally have found that since I've started being open about my diagnosis, people have been a lot more accepting and understanding. I actually feel a lot more able to be myself now, I don't need to hide anymore!

So true for me too.  I'm the oxymoron as so many within the business recognise my knowledge, skills, experience and innovative thoughts but the Damagement political "greasy pole climbers" like to keep me down.  

I'm laughing at them because even last week one said about me being stuck dong a "nuts and bolts" task but I am being paid so well to do what a secretary could do at a quarter/half the price.

I like your observation about 'groupthink'. 'Groupthink' causes so many problems, it can slow things down as people need to spend so much time discussing, and often their conclusions from groupthinking are influenced by authority, and people lose the ability to think by themselves independently.

Tinyexplorer said:

But it is attached to me rather than the disclosure.

Good point. I think this applies to me too. People often ignore my opinions even though they do not know about my diagnosis.

Tinyexplorer said:

disclosure always triggered unhappy developments, people actively using it against me, and ignoring whatever I have to say

yeah, this is what I worry about...

Tinyexplorer said:

connect it to 'cognitive impairment'

I've been applying to jobs recently, and in the diversity survey at the end, some place ASD under cognitive impairment I guess that's what many people believe ASD to be...

To be honest, in personal relationships I'd say if a friend insists on thinking that way, you need to trash them as they are literally trashing you, and your opinion. People always just tell me they don't notice when I tell them I have autism, so I haven't experienced this issue much. (generally though I know them for a good while first, and then I mention it. I'd completely suggest to you to do the same, they'd be less likely to have the issue with you that way. Ex. No one is generally going to backtrack and start thinking your opinions don't matter or you're a dummy if they had no different opinion of you at first.)

Given some of the strengths of those with ASD e.g.

• adept at abstract thinking
• ability to simplify complex issues
• attention to detail
• multidimensional thinking

They should probably take you MORE seriously knowing your diagnosis if the area the difference of opinion occurs in requires any of the above.

's example sums this up perfectly... one glance at the design and they know it wouldn't work and what was needed to fix that. But nope, the NT's had to come to a consensus and fell into 'groupthink' (sheepthink) and went with the solution they all agreed on, not the one that would work.

When it failed they then couldn't just say "We should have done what NAS51133 said in the first place, they had to go through another round of design, including 'high ups' to show how seriously everyone was taking getting right this time...

The skill to learn is being able to explain using small easy to understand words WHY their way won't work and your way will - they won't be able to just 'see' it like someone with ASD can...

I find people are generally insecure so are always looking for an opportunity to feel superior when they compare themselves to the people around them.  In a work environment, this is even more prevalent because their pay rise or promotion could hinge on them being seen as 'better' than the others.

Every defect or disability is just ammunition for these people. 

I have a big personality and I'm hugely competent and that frightens people.

I have had every excuse under the sun used against me to hold me back - even the way I do too much????

It's made me rather cynical of the whole NT-incompetence and political methods they use to hide it.

I am familiar with this dynamic. For me it happens in unstructured groups, when there is no formal structure of who does what and people are sort of competing. It also depends on people. But it is attached to me rather than the disclosure. I am really curious what other experiences are specifically related to the disclosure.

I must admit for me disclosure always triggered unhappy developments, people actively using it against me, and ignoring whatever I have to say, but I didn't specifically connect it to 'cognitive impairment', maybe naively.

That's an interesting experience! I haven't disclosed my diagnosis, but I think a lot of people think I'm socially inept. And I've experienced a few times the first part of what you've described: that my opinions will be ignored initially but after a while someone else (who is more socially popular) suggests the same thing, they will gain credit of coming up with the brilliant idea, and no one will remember or care that I suggested it months ago.

I have found, at work anyway, my views or opinions will be ignored initially but then when people realise after some time when somebody else suggests the same thing, they then realise that it was me that initially suggested it, and sometimes, whilst they may think its a really 'off the wall' idea or opinion, they usually come to realise I may be right, I have found the more people have gotten to know me the more they listen.