Bring Back Aspie

I agree I don't like that we now have to use the same terminology for both types. Partly because I don't want anyone to think I am 'low functioning' and also because I don't want anyone to underestimate the difficulties of someone who is 'low functioning' by comparing that person to me (I have some difficulties, but I am independent and I have achieved a lot). 

However, on balance, I don't want to identify myself using a word derived from the name of that person so I'll continue to call myself 'autistic' for now.

I'm back!!!

Lol that was a terrible attempt at humour  I saw the title and thought well here goes an attempt at humour.

I'll show myself out......

Just because two separate terms exist, for example low functioning autism and Asperger’s, it doesn’t mean if a person is in need of services targeted to both that  they shouldn’t be allowed to access both. I’m not suggesting that medical diagnosis should adopt a different set of terms. Im saying that for informal and advertising purposes it’s helpful to use some of these old terms from time to time or possibly to develop new terms.

I would much rather be called autistic. I think that 'aspergers' causes people to underestimate my challenges. Also, I prefer not to be associated with a man who was involved with the ***. 

Peter said:

Low functioning needs / issues: Issues with mental capacity and issues with independent living, accessing healthcare and welfare services.

High functioning autism needs issues: Issues with social isolation, discrimination (especially in the workplace / education). exclusion from education / labour market unrelated to ability.

 But I have "HFA" but my needs are also "low funtioning" needs. Where do I turn if those support services get split in half and people doing triage only read "HFA" on a decades out of date document? That's a problem, because I'm not the only one in that boat either.
Because if my reality isn't that I'm always or mostly "High functioning" then having "HFA" is just a meaningless wild stab in the dark made by some shrink with a clipboard and outdated notions of what autism is back when it was thought that it was caused by vaccines.
What would you propose to remedy that issue for those who would fall through the gaps?

Low functioning needs / issues: Issues with mental capacity and issues with independent living, accessing healthcare and welfare services.

High functioning autism needs issues: Issues with social isolation, discrimination (especially in the workplace / education). exclusion from education / labour market unrelated to ability.

The issue to my mind is services for aspies / high functioning autistic people look quite different to services for low functioning autistic people. It is useful to have a separate term because the services for each needs to be set up and run differently with an emphasis on different needs.

As it is the one size fits all terminology hides the fact that people with 'Aspergers' type autism are not being well served and having their needs met. It also makes the services that are set up for them harder to find.

I don't want to add a side note to the word autistic that implies that "I'm one of those fortunate ones", "mine isn't so bad".

Actually this too. ^ It's a fair point.

I recal someone once asked me after I explained I may have some issues because I'm autistic "but you're high functioning right?" and I dunno what they expected me to say, did they expect me to say "oh no I'm not like those OTHER autistcs" because what the heck? So I also don't like the tone it sets with some people as if they think there are "better" and "worse" autists or something which I think is part of the ableism we encounter where supposedly our worth is tied to our productivity and how well we fit in with the NT world.

For anyone interested, here's a link to a thread I created on a similar theme:

https://community.autism.org.uk/f/adults-on-the-autistic-spectrum/31208/asd-asperger-s-syndrome-levels-1-2-and-3

I'm happy with the word autism as it is. Even tho no professional has given me the approval that I'm autistic, I still identity as one and I don't want to add a side note to the word autistic that implies that "I'm one of those fortunate ones", "mine isn't so bad".

I care about people's awareness of minorities and neurodiversity and about defying stereotypes as much as I care about my own benefit. 

it's time that people get used to differences, it's time that they get used to diversity and it's time to let go of stereotypes. It's time for everyone to feel included. It's time for autistic people and other minorities to stop going through painful experiences of exclusion. I don't want to exclude those who are less fortunate even more than they already are. I don't want to be part of what brings me the most pain.

I find the functioning label vs support needs issue is more easily solved by saying something like:
"Hi I'm Bees, and I'm Autistic with high sensory sensitivity, and if you're new to me I may not be able to look you in the eye just yet."
Then I just bring up other stuff literally as and when it come up as needing to be addressed. If this was some kind of health assessment form I'd be listing examples of literally everything I struggle with anyway, but that's not something a random person I'm meeting for the first time needs to know so like a full list the "short hand" for an assumed full list is not required either.

I used to feel like this until I really thought about it and tbh I don't think I need to be put into a "higher" category, as functionaing is situational, and the term "HFA/Aspergers" was really only used traditionally to differenticate those of us on the spectrum who did or didn't have an intellectual disability/low IQ.
But I don't need it to be differentiated I just say I am autistic, without the need to say I am autistic and have an intellectual/learning disability.  If people assume I have a low IQ because I'm autistic then that is them being silly not me, and they'd soon find out to their own shame because I find most NTs to be intellectually vapid. But I don't think  higher IQ makes me any less Autistic to require it's own label, because Autism is Autism as a spectrum not versions of it as "their own thing" based on what else you have going on with you as well.
Also I think it is better for all of us if we disrupt people's misconceptions about what autism is and what it "looks like" by using it as an umbrella term.

I understand where you are coming from, it can seem like saying 'autistic' without some form of qualifier as to how that affects an individual can seem a little vague. Someone with a physical disability is often just referred to as 'disabled' without a qualifier tho. I do however feel that functioning labels can be very harmful.

Interested to hear what others have to say on the subject.

I don't really find it limiting to be grouped in with people whose autism looks very different to mine- I feel that all of us being called autistic together helps to show just how varied it can look. I would also like to think that if we're all using the same label, people will think twice about underestimating people with high support needs and/or dismissing the difficulties those of us with low support needs can still have, though I'm not super optimistic about that happening!

I do get that it's harder to describe exactly what being autistic is like for you without having that familiar shorthand. 'Functioning' labels don't really seem to be as helpful for us as they are for allistic people who want to categorise us from the outside, and even talking about varying support needs is tough because it's so variable and difficult to define even on an individual level. I'm not keen to go back to 'aspie' or similar though because of the historical context. Maybe we need something else- but I don't know how to define this particular way of being autistic in a way that doesn't just push more stigma onto people who experience it differently to us.

Why do you find it limiting?