Some people emphatically prefer to be called people with autism. Others get very offended. Some people emphatically prefer to be called autistic people. Others get very offended. There are reasons for all of that.
They have to do with the history of the intellectual and developmental disability community, the autism parent community, and the specific autistic self advocacy community.
For intellectual and developmental disability:
- Most self advocates have a very strong preference for person-first language
- Person-first language in this concept means “I am a PERSON, and I am not going to allow you to treat me as a disability case study, nor am I going to tolerate your diagnostic overshadowing.”
Autism is a developmental disability. There is a highly visible and destructive community of parents who consider themselves to be afflicted with their child’s autism. There is an autistic self advocacy community that developed in part specifically due to the need to counteract the harm being done by autism parents. The language someone prefers will often depend on which of these facts seems most important at a given time.
Regarding developmental disability.
- Folks who are primarily involved in the IDD self advocacy community usually prefer to be called people with autism
- This is for the same reasons people with any sort of developmental disability usually prefer person first language
- In that context, “person with autism” means “I am a PERSON, and you are not going to treat me like an autistic specimen.”
Regarding the destructive autism parent community:
- This parent community pushes the agenda of parents who believe that their child’s autism is a horrible tragedy that befell their parents and family
- They call themselves the autism community, but they consistently refuse to include or listen to autistic self advocates (especially adult self advocates). They only care about neurotypical parent perspectives (and only from parents who think autism is horrifying)
- They promote things like intense behavioral therapy for young children, institutionalization, group homes, sheltered workshops and genetic research aimed at developing prenatal testing. They do not listen to autistic self advocates who object to these things.
- They don’t care about the priorities of autistic self advocates. They do not do any work on issues such as self-directed adult services, enforcing the Olmstead mandate to provide services in the community rather than institutions, or research into skills for listening to people whose communication is atypical
- These parents have an emphatic preference for person first language. They say “people with autism.”
- What they mean by this is “Autism is NOT a part of who my child is, it’s an evil brain slug attached to their head, and I want to remove it at all costs.”
There is also an autistic self advocacy community. It developed in significant part to counteract the harm done by the autism parent community:
- A lot of the agenda of the autistic self advocacy community is the same as the IDD community and pursued in cooperation with the IDD community
- But there is also a lot of work that’s specifically about countering the harm that has been done by the autism parent community
- Much of the worst harm done by the parent community comes from the cultural consensus that autism is like an evil brain slug, and that any amount of brutality is a good thing if it might mean that the slug shrinks or dies
- For this reason, participants in the autistic self advocacy community generally have a very strong objection to person first language
- They call themselves autistic or Autistic.
- In this context, “autistic person” means “Autism is part of who I am. I’m ok. Stop trying to get me to hate myself. You do not need to remove autism to make me into a full person. We are already people. Stop physically and emotionally mutilating people in the name of treatment.”
Neither set of self advocates are wrong. Both positions are legitimate and important to be aware of. In order to know what someone means by their language choices, you have to consider the context.
Are you fucking kidding me? Like, no, Shakespeare wouldn’t tweet a sonnet cause 140 characters is a bit short for that. Wrong medium. But you know what he would have? A very active twitter FULL OF DICK PUNS AND YOUR MOM JOKES okay. (And probably also a blog for the sonnets and longer works, that cross-posts links to twitter anyway.)
Get out of here with that pretentious anti-technology bullshit.
lmao what is it even trying to get at like of course he never tweeted a sonnet, computers didn’t exist?? This is so weird
the Roe G Panty complex.
The Void between Singularities gave way, Nothingness filling up with Something as the barrier between universes was breached. The creature that entered flowed along the currents of reality, shadows and dust that drifted toward an Island.
Beings and Realities began to take shape, those Things native to this place Outside and those who, like her, were not. Goods were exchanged around her. A book for the payment of three chicken bones and a copper coin. A seven-legged creature for the cost of one year of life. Advice for a bucket of Shoggoth.
Charlie was not here to buy or sell. She rarely was for she rarely had need. They provided for most of what she used; like a captive she limited herself to what could easily be found. She had no spotted hounds yet to sell, no nightmare fuel or thulecite. No need for orichalcum or abyssal gems. She was merely here for relief, for a chance to avoid responsibility. After all, the nights were short and the islands sweltering. Surely there was no harm in taking a few nights off…
Go to YouTube.
Watch Bob Ross.
Listen to him talk about painting.
Seriously, this guy… this guy is full of advice for a writer who’s having trouble getting started.
He’s not writing, he’s painting, but… okay, like, he can sit there and talk about geology and the diffusion of light and make it clear that he knows what a mountain is and he knows what goes into the interplay of light and perspective, and then you’ll watch him smear some black paint on top of a still wet canvas with a thin metal wedge, and then take a brush and push it downwards so that it mixes with the base in such a way that it ends up lighter at the bottom and eventually just fades into the background.
And then he’ll take some titanium white paint and do the same thing to add snow and light, and you’re thinking… “But… interplay. Geology. Perspective.” and he’s just pushing paint around, talking about figuring out where the north slope lives and how there are no mistakes, just happy little accidents and then he steps back at the end and holy moly, it looks like he painted a mountain.
It doesn’t look like he pushed paint around for ten minutes, it looks like he looked at a real mountain somewhere and copied it.
Is there a real mountain that matches the painting? No. Could he use this method to exactly replicate an actual mountain? No. But he made a mountain that looks real enough, and even if he didn’t have 100% control over the final look of it, he conjured it out of his imagination.
This is the trick that more writers need to learn. It’s possible to create a story or even a whole book through meticulous planning and careful construction, but… most people can’t do that. It’s not that we’re not willing to put in the work, it’s just too easy to get stuck. Too easy to never leave the “Well, I’m still worldbuilding/researching” stage. Too easy to write oneself into a corner or get bogged down in the details.
So this is my advice today for fiction writers:
Learn how to speed paint.
Learn how to work wet on wet.
Learn how to push paint around on the edge of a knife.
Learn how to figure out where things want to live by feel and how to allow for happy little accidents.
There will be places for fine details and intricate sketches. But when you’re staring at a blank canvas and you have no idea where to start… paint the whole thing blue and start scraping up some mountains.
Quick, broad strokes. That’s all it takes to get you started. Quick, broad strokes and a few happy accidents.
Reblogging for myself.
There is NOTHING that pisses me off more than all the DOG BREEDERS ARE EVIL posts Tumblr seems to love. Excuse you if you can’t fucking tell the difference between a good dog breeder and a terrible one. Why not generalize them all?
What does a good, responsible, dog breeder do? Well, I’ll tell you what my mom did when she bred poodles:
- Made sure the puppies were all properly handled and cared for
- Gave them their shots and took care of any health issues they might have before they go to their new home
- Made sure their paperwork was in order (Our dogs were purebreds)
- Talk with each potential buyer so she could match the right puppy with the right owner.
- Also to make sure that the owners could actually look after the puppy. If not, she’d refuse to sell to them.
-Inbreeding is a no. Just no. Responsible breeders don’t do it.
So what reasons are there to buy a pup from a breeder? I can think of a few.
- Knowing how your puppy was raised. Best part of having puppies is playing with them and getting them used to people. Healthy, well-handled dogs will probably cause a lot less trouble later in their adult life. Though poodles are dramatic little shits in general and may set the house on fire because it amuses them.
- Breeders will often keep track of health problems their dogs may or may not have and will make sure the buyer is totally aware of it. For example: The puppies of one of our standard poodles would sometimes have watery eyes that need to be cleaned every couple of days or else gross gunk will pile up. My mom wouldn’t breed any dog with any health problem more severe than that. So in general, knowing a dog’s linage pays off.
-If, for any reason, you can’t take care of the dog anymore, breeders will sometimes take them back and find them a new home. My mom’s done this a couple of times. Better to do that then send them to a shelter.
-Finding a dog that suits you. Maybe you’re looking for a puppy that has the right temperament and energy level that goes with your lifestyle. An athletic person may want an energetic dog, or a quieter person may want a calmer dog that’s fine with sitting with them for hours at a time. Maybe someone wants a dog that’s a total smartass. Poodles are certainly good at doing this. (Btw if you want a total smartass dog, I’d suggest black miniature poodles. They’re born oddballs.)
Obviously it’s a good thing to adopt at shelters. Those poor dogs need a home and you can be the one to give it to them. But demonizing dog breeders and condemning everyone who buys from them will never not rub me the wrong way. Remember folks: There’s a huge difference between a responsible dog breeder and your average backyard breeder. And don’t confuse breeders with puppy mills, that’s wrong in every way.