Let's create another term to describe us.

The difficulties inherent in this are unintentionally illustrated by your introduction, which contains assumptions which don't apply to me:

I'm diagnosed as 'mild to moderate, not affecting cognition or language' ... but I don't 'copy' at all. Not only is copying not part of my profile, I'd actively avoid it. I mask, of course, but not by copying - my 'masked' profile is apparently assertively individual.

Unlike a physical condition with strong visual indicators autism can appear to be much more nebulous and hard to pin down.  We're all very different.

I understand your reasoning but getting the public to use different terminology, when most people who aren't directly connected to autism in some way would be uncertain about the existing terminology, is a major challenge. 

Changes in the language over issues like race, and LGBTQi, took years, involved a bigger segment of the population, and had a higher profile.

I'm with you in spirit but the important thing for me is to encourage a more informed public understanding of autism using the existing linguistic framework, with all its flaws. 

Knocking the wall down and starting from scratch would be a distraction; attempts to change the language on topics like this can be emotive, contentious, and involve endless wrangling (illustrated by the other comments here). 

An example of this is the term "Aspergers", which has had no traction in a clinical setting since 2013. 

It's a 'lay' term used by people who are embarrassed at being autistic, or badly informed (in some cases, in the defence of people who use the word, it may be because they're self-diagnosed & have no Psychiatrist's report  with the correct terms; being self-diagnosed is fine, in my view, btw).  

It was officially abandoned by clinicians 8+ years ago but that merely formalised a global consensus that had existed for some time. 

Yet it's still widely used, even amongst charities. I find that mildly irritating (very mildly - I'm not that agitated by it).

My diagnosis would once have been 'Aspergers' but nothing on earth would persuade me to use a term primarily designed to 'separate' me from fellow autistic people.  I'm autistic, & I'm fine with that.

PersonAnon said:

An example of this is the term "Aspergers", which has had no traction in a clinical setting since 2013. 

It's a 'lay' term used by people who are embarrassed at being autistic, or badly informed (in some cases, in the defence of people who use the word, it may be because they're self-diagnosed & have no Psychiatrist's report  with the correct terms; being self-diagnosed is fine, in my view, btw).  

It was officially abandoned by clinicians 8+ years ago but that merely formalised a global consensus that had existed for some time. 

Yet it's still widely used, even amongst charities. I find that mildly irritating (very mildly - I'm not that agitated by it).

My diagnosis would once have been 'Aspergers' but nothing on earth would persuade me to use a term primarily designed to 'separate' me from fellow autistic people.  I'm autistic, & I'm fine with that.

Asperger’s Syndrome (AS) was never a ‘lay’ term, only a diagnostic one which is currently being replaced as the International Classification of Diseases version 11 (ICD 11) comes into affect universally as of this year (2022), as began in America with the Diagnostic Statistical Manual version 5 in 2013, as still mentions Asperger’s Syndrome as follows from page 51 (in the Neurodevelopmental Disorders chapter starting on page 31):

Note: Individuals with a well-established DSM-IV diagnosis of autistic disorder, Asperger’s disorder, or pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified should be given the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. Individuals who have marked deficits in social communication, but whose symptoms do not otherwise meet criteria for autism spectrum disorder, should be evaluated for social (pragmatic) communication disorder.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10r_oUv_fZXQ4jUVXQC-4UnMdaneR3TD5/view

PersonAnon said:

An example of this is the term "Aspergers", which has had no traction in a clinical setting since 2013. 

It's a 'lay' term used by people who are embarrassed at being autistic, or badly informed (in some cases, in the defence of people who use the word, it may be because they're self-diagnosed & have no Psychiatrist's report  with the correct terms; being self-diagnosed is fine, in my view, btw).  

It was officially abandoned by clinicians 8+ years ago but that merely formalised a global consensus that had existed for some time. 

Yet it's still widely used, even amongst charities. I find that mildly irritating (very mildly - I'm not that agitated by it).

My diagnosis would once have been 'Aspergers' but nothing on earth would persuade me to use a term primarily designed to 'separate' me from fellow autistic people.  I'm autistic, & I'm fine with that.

Asperger’s Syndrome (AS) was never a ‘lay’ term, only a diagnostic one which is currently being replaced as the International Classification of Diseases version 11 (ICD 11) comes into affect universally as of this year (2022), as began in America with the Diagnostic Statistical Manual version 5 in 2013, as still mentions Asperger’s Syndrome as follows from page 51 (in the Neurodevelopmental Disorders chapter starting on page 31):

Note: Individuals with a well-established DSM-IV diagnosis of autistic disorder, Asperger’s disorder, or pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified should be given the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. Individuals who have marked deficits in social communication, but whose symptoms do not otherwise meet criteria for autism spectrum disorder, should be evaluated for social (pragmatic) communication disorder.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10r_oUv_fZXQ4jUVXQC-4UnMdaneR3TD5/view