Hate the saying"Were all a bit autistic"

Some people who arent austitic in work say "we're all a bit autistic arent we" and the only difference between you and me is you have a diagnosis. Really makes me angry as they think just because soSmirk things that annoy them makes them autistic. I asked them how they deal with these annoying things and the said they just forget about it. Things that might annoy them will create severe emotional sSmirkess and anxiety, effects me socially and in some cases cause me to self harm, I can't just forget about it. It's obvious that a lot people don't understand what its really like to be autistic or theSmirkjust don't care and try and fob it off as something silly to just get over it Smirk 

Parents
  • I agree with you   -

    For the time being science does not define as are not a seperate species.  However I am persuaded by experience and observations to consider that the analogy of chimps and bonobos may be pretty close to the mark as  suggests.

    Maybe intermingling of the 2 gene pools?  I am drawn by observation that autistic people get on better with other autistic people than with neurotypical and perhaps that has something to do with genetic selection along the way...

    Notwithstanding the genetics, phenotypically autistic people are not part of the continuum of the neurotypical population, they are a discrete part of it - albeit with overlaps.

    An individual is autistic based upon observable physical, biochemical and behavioural characteristics that are discrete albeit with overlaps to neurotupical.  Agreed the boundaries for this phenotype are set by clinicians - however these boundaries are very well informed.  So so   raising the BAP makes sense.

    The thing that kind of makes things messy (albeit functionally understandable) about the diagnosis and the condition is that the individual has to be disabled in some way by it to receive the nomenclature.  That's where the patronising part comes into it maybe as   picks up on and as others have said very well

    Here's to a day when society is so understanding of neurodiversity and mutually accommodating that autism doesn't need to be defined by the disability of any person.

Reply
  • I agree with you   -

    For the time being science does not define as are not a seperate species.  However I am persuaded by experience and observations to consider that the analogy of chimps and bonobos may be pretty close to the mark as  suggests.

    Maybe intermingling of the 2 gene pools?  I am drawn by observation that autistic people get on better with other autistic people than with neurotypical and perhaps that has something to do with genetic selection along the way...

    Notwithstanding the genetics, phenotypically autistic people are not part of the continuum of the neurotypical population, they are a discrete part of it - albeit with overlaps.

    An individual is autistic based upon observable physical, biochemical and behavioural characteristics that are discrete albeit with overlaps to neurotupical.  Agreed the boundaries for this phenotype are set by clinicians - however these boundaries are very well informed.  So so   raising the BAP makes sense.

    The thing that kind of makes things messy (albeit functionally understandable) about the diagnosis and the condition is that the individual has to be disabled in some way by it to receive the nomenclature.  That's where the patronising part comes into it maybe as   picks up on and as others have said very well

    Here's to a day when society is so understanding of neurodiversity and mutually accommodating that autism doesn't need to be defined by the disability of any person.

Children
  • It could be that autistic people get along better with each other, as once the 'I'm autistic' bit of the conversation is out of the way, we can drop a lot of the masks we use in social situations and maybe talk about shared experiences of trying to navigate an NT world. I've also got to say that once past that, I wonder how many people I would actually have anything much in common with?