In which Anonymus Maximus talks about Identity and Words

Three things:

First: Autistic v. person with autism. Seems somewhat petty an issue to take a stand on, no?
Person first versus identity first language when talking about autistic people is really not important. It seems rather inconsequential, even. Except in all the ways it is important.

Part of the thing is that Autistic people are routinely denied self-determination. And like the Deaf and Blind communities, Autistics went with the idea that you cannot disentangle the person from the autism. See, everything I do is coloured by autism, because autism is pervasive, but not everything (nothing, really) I do is only autism.
And most of us don't care about how others identify. What does raise our hackles is when we get told by others how we are supposed to talk about ourselves. What others telling us to call ourselves mean is This person denies me my right to identify myself. It means This person denies my self-determination.
And this is why we tend to take a stand on it.
Not because it matters, but because it matters.

Secondly: A while back [Anonymus exchanged the awareness of time and scales and movement for the constant awareness of all textures.] there was a short, light hearted discussion among some autistics on tumblr - centering around "I wish more disability communities would do identity first language."  and I have things to say. Not very nice things.
I know that we have good reasons for identity first language. We have arguments, and essays and well thought out responses as to why identity first. We had a discussion and as a community came to the consensus of identity first.
Thing is, so do the communities who prefer person first. They have arguments and essays and well thought out responses. They had a discussion. And their consensus was person first.
And we want our choice of identity first to be respected. We want our self-determination to be respected. We want our self-identification to be upheld.
So do they.
So lets not talk about hypothetical ways in which it would be better for other communities to change how they identify. Instead, lets respect their choice, and keep telling others to respect ours.

Lastly: A lot of "correct" ways to talk about disability is using a language that minimizes non-disabled peoples discomfort. And then I spend a lot of time laughing so that I won't cry.
Who on god's green earth thought it was a good idea to name the self-advocacy curriculum in the special ed. programme:

Difability and Life

?

Difability.
Difability.

I challenge you to attempt to say this out loud and NOT sound as if you are mocking someone with a lisp.

Difability.

In which Anonymus Maximus talks some more about what Autistic People Are...

Autistic people are speaking - and it is indeed time to listen.

Autistic people, by defintition, utilises language in a non-standard way, ranging from non-verbal to hyperverbal. Hyperlexia is a symptom of autism, as is echolalia, palalia and extensive scripting.

But autistic people are communicating.
My personal language is highly scripted, and very echolalic. It is also, contrary to popular assumptions about autistic language usage, heavily reliant on extended metaphors. My language is a meta-language, if you will.
Earlier today I wrote a piece about the younger me, and the current me, being a dancer. Autistic people, being dancers. This is of course true in the literal sense. I am a dancer. I dance. And I would say that there are other autistics out there who dance.
But this is also one of my extended metaphors. It concerns movement and knowledge and bodies and thought and interpretation and being in tune with the rythm of your life. About the music of emotion. About communication.
Autistic people are dancers, because autistic people communicate.

Autistic people are dancers, because we move with the rythm of our lives. We might not move like you do. But we are dancers.

Last week we were writing-talking-speaking-communicating about the hatespeech generated by the google search auto-complete algorithm by flashblogging. The community moving as one to make things better. Talking about positive things. How Autistic people should be loved, and should be heard.

Well. We were heard. Google has said they shall fix this.
But we were then erased from the effort by the largest USian charity claiming to be on our side, whilst they tried to take credit. Erased from our own advocacy by people claiming to advocate for us. Autism Speaks tips their hat to Google, and doesn't at all mention the effort of the autistics out there who did the work to make it happen. No mention of Alyssa of YesThatToo, no mention of the flashblog. No mention of the dance of words, the music of emotions, the coordinated movement of people routinely assumed to be silent. We are dancers. We are speaking.

Autistic people are speaking and it is time to listen.
This does not mean allistic family members are speaking about and above their autistic family members and you should listen to them. It means autistic people are speaking and you should listen to them.
Autism Speaks does not speak for me.
I am speaking all on my own.

In which Anonymus Maximus flashblogs about what Autistic People Are...

This is Anonymus Minimus, and she is a dancer.

She will never become a world champion, but that is okay, because she doesn't dance for the competitions and the trophies. She dances because she loves the movement and the rythm and the music and the overall elation of the dance.

When she is dancing her arms are at her sides and her back is straight, she is high on her toes and she crosses her feet. She will never be a world champion, but that is okay.

Because this is Anonymus Minimus and she is a dancer.

 

This is Anonymus Minimus, and she is a dancer.

When she isn't dancing she stays high on her toes and her hands and arms are always moving, flapping, touching her hair, covering her ears. When she isn't dancing she is rocking, reading, signing, humming strange songs to herself.

She doesn't speak much, but her life is filled with music and rythm.

This is Anonymus Minimus, and she is a dancer.

She is also the clumsiest person she knows. She drools and spills and falls and tumbles and can't guage the force she should use when picking things up. She has very little awareness of her own body, her own limbs. But this is okay, because the secret to knowing that you have a body is to forget that it limits you.

This is Anonymus Minimus, and she is autistic.

Somewhere along the line, Anonymus Minimus grows up.

She becomes an adult, a scientist, an activist, an advocate, an educator.

She grows up and becomes an author, an engineer, a mathematician, a physicist.

She grows up and becomes an artist, a musician, a baker and a cook.

She grows up and becomes Anonymus Maximus.

And above it all, she is a dancer.

This is Anonymus Maximus, and she is a dancer.

This is Anonymus Maximus, and she is Autistic.

Autistic people are dancers.

We move to the music and rythm of our lives.

Autistic people are dancers.

 We may not move like you do.

But we are dancers.

In which Anonymus Maximus flashblogs about what Autistic People Should... (part 2)

Autistic people should be heard.
Our voices should be listened to. The things we have to say about our own lives respected.
 Popular discourse around autism is focused on the parent, the sibling, the caretaker, the teacher, the therapist, the doctor, and the actually autistic people are left out.
And when we try to make our voices heard, we are silenced with "you are not like my child" [Obviously not. Your child is a child. I am not.], implying that because we can advocate for ourselves and other autistics we are not autistic enough to know anything about the difficulties of our disability.
You can say that I am wrong, thusly I am not autistic enough, low-functioning enough, to have anything of value to say.

Autistic people should be heard.
The actually autistic people are left out of the conversation about our disability.
It is focused on mice "developing autistic behaviours" as if mice could be autistic. (I'm not actually sure, maybe they can be, but I fail to recognise how behaviours that are considered autistic in humans would be the same behaviours a potentially autistic mouse exhibited.) It is focused on pre-natal testing, to make sure autistic children won't be born. It is focused on the great burden it is for a family to have an autistic family member. It is focused on how eye-contact is so very important and absolutely devastating if it isn't done. It is focused on everything but the actually autistic people, and what we have to say.

Autistic people should be heard.
And not just when we say things you agree with. We should be listened to when we say that you are being ableist, we should be listened to when we say that you are wrong, we should be listened to when we say that you are perpetuating stereotypes, we should be listened to when we say that there is hope, we should be listened to when we say that we don't want cures, we should be listened to when we say that we don't want to be Not Autistic, we should be listened to when we say that passing for allistic isn't a good thing. We should be listened to when we are challenging your beliefs, because we speak from a lived experience.

Autistic people should be heard.
I don't care if your brother is autistic, you are not the authority on the autistic experience.
I don't care if you work with autistic children (sorry, children with autism. Nevermind that the autistic community prefer identity first.), you are not the authority on the autistic experience.
I don't care if you have an autistic classmate, you are not the authority on the autistic experience.
I don't care if you have studied autism in school, you are not the authority on the autistic experience.
I don't care if you used to date an autistic person, you are not the authority on the autistic experience.
I don't care if you are the parent of an autistic child, you are not the authority on the autistic experience.
I don't care if you are studying neuroscience, you are not the authority on the autistic experience.
I don't care if you are otherwise neurodivergent, you are not the authority on the autistic experience, just as I'm not the authority on your divergence.
It turns out that the reliable authorities on the autistic experience are the autistic people themselves.

Autistic people should be heard.

In which Anonymus Maximus flashblogs about what Autistic people should...

Autistic people should get to live.

Autistic people should get to lead their lives without fear of violence.

Google search has really rather unfortunate auto-complete for the partial sentence "Autistic people should", and this is text is a part of a larger organized attempt at not getting told that we should be killed.

Autistic people should get to live.

Autistic people should get to lead their lives without fear of violence.

Here and now, today, if a parent murder their child, it is considered a heinous crime.
Here and now, today, if a parent murder their autistic child, it is considered a tragedy. The poor parent. Of course killing is wrong, but it is such a hardship to have an autistic child. It is understandable that they commited a cold blooded murder. Somehow. And people forget that a person lost their life. A person is dead now. And this is not noteworthy, because the person had a different brain.

Autistic people should get to live.

Autistic people shoud get to lead their lives without fear of violence.

I am a person. I am here, I think, I feel, I do, I dream, I love, I learn. And I want to live. I want to be the best me I can be. I want to be happy. I want to bring happiness to others. And I should get to do that, without having to know that most people want me dead.

Autistic people should get to live.
I should get to live. I, an Autistic person, should get to live.
We are here, and we can hear what you are saying about us. You want -people- to be exterminated. Why?
I should get to live.
Autistic people should get to live.


Autistic people should get to lead their lives without fear of violence.
I should get to lead my life withour fear of violence. I, an Autistic person, should get to lead my life without fear of violence.
I am here. And I am forced to lead my life knowing that people would rather I was dead. I am forced to lead my life knowing that parents would rather their child died than being like me. I am here, and I am forced to lead my life knowing that violence against me would be considered justified, and that the person getting the sympathy if I were to be murdered wouldn't be me. It would be my murderer.
Why?
I should get to lead my life without fear of violence.
Autistic people should get to lead their lives without fear of violence.

Autistic people should. Indeed.

In which Anonymus Maximus talks about the Social Model of Disability

Hello children! Today we're talking about two words, and their differing meanings, and how this intersects with ableism [and how the fact that 'ableism' still isn't considered a correct word works to continue said ableism] and a small discussion about how humans are social animals.

So. For context. I am quirky, clinically so. For a large chunk of my life I thought I was just quirky, and lazy, and since everyone else around me managed their lifes, I obviously could handle mine if I just tried harder. Then I became clinically quirky, and got a lable that says disabled, and get told repeatedly that I have no agency and because I am disabled I can't know what I think or lead a successful life.

This is bullshit.

So, lets talk about disabled.
Disability is not the same thing as impairedment. One thing doesn't actually mean the other.
And this is interesting.

You see, we have this tendancy to think that if you are disabled, you are impaired in some way. We also think that only disabled people are impaired. And we never think of the difference. [Word of warning, what follows is the idea of the social model of disability, and is somewhat Social Justice 101]
See, we are all impaired. Impairment means something we cannot do.
A rather common impairment nowadays is myopia. It is quite easily corrected with glasses. Glasses are assistive technology.
But, none of us are disabled because of it. And none of us thinks of glasses as assistive technology.
Disability would arise if there were no glasses.
Interestingly enough, this means that you wouldn't necessarily -feel- disabled or -suffer- from your impairment. Because you'd still see and do and feel and hear everything that you can see and do and feel and hear today, as you are, here and now and in real life [by which I mean, not some abstract you from a thought experiment], only, every other human being you ever encountered can see more than you do, and assume that you can too, and this would be where your suffering (from your disability caused by an entirely non-painful impairment) comes from. [Also, possibly, headaches, because yeah.]

So if you use a wheelchair for ambulatory purposes, you are impaired because you can't walk, but you are disabled because society insists on kerbs and staircases.

I think, maybe, one could be disabled without necessarily being impaired as well. Although I don't know how.

The main problem, I suppose, is that the social model talks about impairment and disability and ableism, and it synonymizes disability with ableism [kinda], but keeps using impairment and disability as interchangable words. Confusing? Yes. Yes it is.

Thusly we conclude the lecture about the Social Model of Disability, as a part of the series known as The Meanings of Words, and as a primer for Social Justice 101.

In conclusion: You can be impaired without being disabled. We all are.
You can be both impaired and disabled, and the disability comes from humans not making reasonable accomodations because we aren't used to needing to do so.
And you can be disabled without being impaired.
What does this tell us? [I say: "Kafka was right, Hell is indeed other people."] Other people is usually the problem. Aint that interesting, so say!

In which Anonymus Maximus talks about the Meaning of Words (part 2)

Dear Glee Fandom!
Usually I rant about your vaious -isms and how you all fail as allies and how you are a very toxic environment and how I don't understand why you all seem to hate the source material. Actually, no. I usually talk in too much detail about the show that I am seeing, and silently accepting of the idea that we all watch a different show, because we all filter what we see through our own life experiences. And then I tell my partner that I don't understand the fandom. I only rant when someone ends up being particulary offensive. Today, however, we're talking about a Pet Peeve of mine.
A misconception, a fault, something that is wrong and at times strikes me as willfully ignorant, something that is -really- common in the Glee Fandom.

So.

Dear Glee Fandom.
"Drabble" is a word with a specific meaning. Please stop using it as a synonyme to "ficlet" and "snippet".
A drabble is a story that is exactly 100 words long. Exactly!

I know this is rather inconsequential and really not a very big or important part of all the faults and wrongs with this fandom of ours.

But PLEASE!

Drabble means 'story of 100 words'.

Remember that!