Autism-Shaming: Is camouflaging an obligation or a choice?

For me it definitely depends on a variety of factors. Who I'm with, how big a group it is, did I sleep well the night before, am I more stressed than normal, etc. 

All being well, I sometimes even enjoy presenting a different version of myself, the social, engaging, funny version that comes out when I'm out anywhere that isn't a space where I feel comfortable. I enjoy when something I've planned to say makes someone laugh or makes them happy, or they react in the way I hoped. It's like a game where I get points the more I interact.

But it is exhausting for me. If I have time to recover, then the masking/code switching is something that I will sometimes choose because I like the feeling of being accepted and thought of as a sociable, engaging person. If I don't have recovery time, then it's a survival first necessity to cut it back as much as I can or I become a zombie. 

People will actually ask me if I'm feeling ok, because they notice the shut down, and it makes me feel bad because it feels like I'm letting them down by them noticing that something is making me 'not my usual self'. 

If it's people I know well or have known a long time then they generally know and accept that sometimes I will be bright and funny and happy and other times I can't hold a conversation and need to sit quietly and not make eye contact.

I went in for a lot of mimicking behaviour as a kid. It turned out not to be a great idea as the masking didn’t integrate well enough to completely disguise my atypicality, and I’d be seen as a slightly eccentric nerd who perhaps was trying too hard rather than instinctively, easily, comfortably fitting in. And it would still result in social exclusion.

Now, decades later, I don’t try or care, and certainly don’t feel obligated to hide the diversity. 

Perhaps we too should have a Pride-type annual march. That would be good.

As I understand it, if I don't talk or make any eye contact, and I sit in a corner alone and by myself, and I don't make the effort to interact and engage with NT, then NT will perceive this to be "rude" behavior, since it comes across like I'm ignoring them, like I don't like them. Then they start giving me cut eyes, and they start bullying me, because they assume that I'm ignoring them, that I don't like them, and that being rude to them, so in their mind they're being rude to me back, because it's retaliation for a perceived offense. 

But from my perspective, I've just simply walked in and sat down. But then randomly, they're giving me cut eyes, and then out of nowhere they suddenly start bullying me. I just think they don't like me, but I won't understand why they are being so mean to me. I didn't even do anything or talk to them at all. It's just confusing. 

I'd be talking, someone says something funny in a group, I'd feel happiness, but I didn't show it on my face or change my neutral facial expression, so that person got mad at me, but I didn't mean to upset them. 

After instances of basically being socially tormented like this, I learned to camouflage, because others treat me better (they'd smile and wave at me, rather than look at me with cut eyes and get angry with me). It's a huge difference, but of course my natural tendencies to "invert" and wish that I was in a corner not talking or looking at anyone, is always there in the background. But I make the effort to interact with other people, because as tiring as it is, the day goes by easier. A pack of friendly folk is a lot nicer to be around than a pack of angry wolves.

Thanks Daniel for your insight. I've read a similar comment by yourself previously in which you linked different sexualities with different neurotypes, which is a highly accurate comparison to make in my opinion.

My only concern with this comparison is that, while it is true that the acceptance of different sexualities as increased in some parts of the world, low levels of acceptance (especially in less secular societies) mean that bullying and violence, physical and mental health problems, discrimination in employment, and underrepresentation in positions of civic leadership are still the norm for sexual minorities. I'm hoping for something better for autism!

I've thought about this for years. It's OK to use ethics to afford kindness or politeness to others. It's OK to be a mild version of myself in company I don't know and I don't really care to get to know. There are 2 sides to this. 

One is creating a fluid way of moving - mobility. I don't mind personally being covert, a wall flower if it lessens interaction, which is overwhelming and if it allows an affording kindness by playing along. Everyone wins. Humans use a bit of grown up reason and rules to navigate society and without that, people can get very selfish and cruel and demanding. So I'd rather be part of something where we all 'do our part'. 

The other issues is that a facade can be a strict boundary. I don't need your approval, I don't need to allow myself to be vulnerable around you, it does take time to learn who one can trust and that's a very demanding position for an exhcange without proper investment of friendship. 

Others have attempted to shame me many times throughout my life, but it didn't feel like shame. It felt like rejection and unkind. I felt unknown and belittled. That says more about the other than it does me. In retrospect, they were the wrong humans to be open and authentic with. 

Now I am more strict about my time, my worth, my being. I am more protective and I do not share if you do not prove you are worth my sharing with. Everyone has a fair amount of complications and not everyone wants to be kind. We really have a limited capacity for other human interaction and investment. I cannot be everything to everyone nor can you. So I am very very particular about freindships. 

Work environments, the same. I am fortunate enough to work for myself (for now) but I do mind my intensities around others. Mostly because being so elevated, reason can easily escape ones thinking and I might say or do something I actually wouldn't thoughtfully do. If this means I slow down on purpose, then so be it. I want to be someone others trust and rely on.

After enough research, I've realised Successful NT's have a whole myriad of internal disciiplines they undergo daily, whether for Aesthetic or Ethics or to make more money. Does the motive really matter if we have a safe society with museums and libraries and wine bars... 

Hi JJ. Lovely to hear from you again. Interesting insight. I must confess I'm confused by the whole concept. My camouflage is so old and established that it has become a second skin. So much so that oftentimes I don't recognise my own autistic self! I'm slowly beginning to identify and accept certain traits and strip away the protective camouflage that's covered them for so long.

Thank you 21. I'll make a nice cup of tea and sit down and read the article.

I have only come to understand the terms autistic camouflaging or masking this year.
Before that, I would have said that it is my natural behavior to observe what would seem to be acceptable to who I am talking to and try to reflect that as much as possible- and I thought that was what everyone else did and called it 'fitting in'.

However this puts one in a position of needing to formulate an authentic response when there are no cues or examples to mimic - and this is where the strategy really falls down. There are, of course the two very British responses of 'sorry' and 'thank you' to fall back on and I guess the number of times I have used them completely inappropriately would be comedic were it not for the anxiety they represented and also the post-hoc loss of self worth when I had the mental space to deconstruct the encounter.

Unfortunately, the most compassionate response is sometimes hard to deal with. If someone comes back with "there's nothing to be sorry about" then I'm really lost for a reaction and the whole thing starts to become an emergency-exit-situation.

Maybe one day I will be able to discriminate between masking and a fully direct/authentic interaction but as it stands, I mostly can't tell which one is which.

I think masking is not a choice, it is a safety mechanism. This is partly due to the lack of autism acceptance and stigma in society/negative past experiences.Also another reason for masking is that autistic people are a minority in a majority world. Moreover, society generally does not accept anything that is different from the expected fake ‘norm’.

Personally, I classify certain people as ‘safe’ meaning that I feel comfortable around them and can be my autistic self. So I definitely believe that autistic masking is a safety response as when I have shown autistic traits around other people, I have received negative comments such as ‘look me in the eye’ or ‘everyone is on the spectrum’.

This is a link to an article on autistic masking and social threat by autistic academic Wenn Lawson:

https://www.lifescienceglobal.com/pms/index.php/jiddt/article/download/6802/3617

That’s a really good explanation of the reasons for masking and useful to inform neurotypical people about. 

Tassimo,

I don't camouflage or mask at all, instead I spell the truth out to people and scientifically prove to them that the problem is cultural prejudice, shun them for their participation in cultural prejudice and tell them I will always prefer to be autistic.

I remind them "normal" is a social construction meaning "abnormal" is a social construction, then point out it's their standard norms that marginalize people with perceived differences as well as autism out putting them at risk of discrimination and facing other bad attitudes from the society.

I then ask them; "Don't we hear some people say "I'm a bit autistic but not autistic enough."? Why do people say that, how is it decided whether they're autistic or not then point out to them it's decided by cultural prejudice, anyone who does not pass for their idea of "normal" is judged as there's something wrong with them."

I then back it up with other scientific evidence pointing out in the past the LGBTQ+ population were seen as people with psychiatric health disorders and ask them were they ever? They obviously respond with "no." I then ask them why were they labelled psychiatric health disorders and that proves it even further it's cultural prejudice, anyone who does not fit their standard norms.

I then use other conditions like Schizophrenia, I remind them all people experience Schizophrenic symptoms so how do we decide whether they have Schizophrenia or not, where is the line that it crosses from "normal" to "Schizophrenic"? Then again the answer is the line is determined by cultural prejudice, whether someone fits the standard norm or not.

I point out to them their hypocrisy, for example, if they claim we lack empathy for their side I remind them they lack empathy for our side. Spell out to them that all they have to say concerning communication and interaction works in both directions.