Requirements to put in a job description to discourage or filter out autistic people:

* Comfortable with ambiguity
* Strong people skills
* Good culture fit
* Multitasking
* A fast-paced dynamic environment
* Bachelor's degree or better

I see these things and think you don't want my >30 years of programming and machine learning experience, or my problem-solving skills and comprehensive knowledge that had people mistaking me for one of the team's PhDs, or my solutions that have proven patent-worthy. Your loss.

#ActuallyAutistic
@actuallyautistic
@neurodivergence

@actuallyautistic @neurodivergence The degree requirement, in particular, is one I want to highlight. I was a National Merit Scholar, with a free ride to a major, respected university. But I lost my scholarship and ended up homeless for a time because of my (as yet undiagnosed) disability. By the time I got back on my feet, college was no longer an option. But guess what? I kept actively learning on my own, and even pursued my own research agenda in machine learning and NLP. So I don't have the piece of paper you want to see, but I'm a stronger candidate than a lot of folks who *do* have that piece of paper. You'll never know that, because your job description is implicitly ableist in excluding neurodivergent folks who were not a good fit for university -- thanks to ableism there, as well.
@actuallyautistic @neurodivergence My fellow neurodivergent folks, tell me the ableist requirements you've seen in job descriptions. Let's give folks some insight into the stuff that contributes to systemic ableism in the workplace. I know there are way more examples than the few I've already listed.
@hosford42 @[email protected] @[email protected] not in job requirements specifically, but I've done interview training where they specifically told us to judge candidates based on their eye-contact
@PurpleStephyr @actuallyautistic This is one of the worst ones. It's hard to get more explicitly ableist against autistic people than judging folks based on eye contact. The worst thing is, police are taught to do this, too. And when they misread you, they have the legal license to use violence.

@hosford42 @PurpleStephyr @actuallyautistic This is also really stupid of the police too because there's tons of evidence showing that actual criminals know this & so deliberately make eye contact.

More enlightened law enforcement know this & so actually expect innocent people to avoid eye contact.

I've just started watching a french series called Astrid: Murder in Paris about an autistic woman who works in the police records unit. It's excellent ๐Ÿ‘Œ๐Ÿพ

Though it's an over used trope I can't help myself. Anyway back to it.

@sentient_water @hosford42 @PurpleStephyr @[email protected] Which of course is perverse, because then as an innocent autistic person who is broadly capable of eye contact (I doubt to a typical level) I'm likely to make an effort to do so . . .
@sentient_water @hosford42 @PurpleStephyr @[email protected] I'm also conscious that because I'm bright and articulate, it probably increases the chances that a lack of social understanding is misinterpreted as a wilful attempt to screw around or manipulate them.

@alastair which is why supposing intent is such a frustration interacting with allistics. Why do they expect they can mind read? Afaik itโ€™s well-known that thatโ€™s uh, not considered a good thing in psychology

@sentient_water @PurpleStephyr @actuallyautistic @hosford42

@loops @alastair @PurpleStephyr @actuallyautistic @hosford42 Exactly this ๐Ÿ’ฏ in the therapeutic setting we're constantly reminded how we can't read minds & that we don't know someone's true intentions. Yes I agree but we can know someone's consistent actions over an extended period & draw conclusions from them.

Though when it comes to autistics we are constantly punished & pathologized because we can't read minds.

Once again The Double Empathy problem & of course double standards.

@alastair @PurpleStephyr @actuallyautistic @hosford42 Absolutely this idea of "high functioning" is incredibly harmful.

You "seem" to have no problem understanding lots of things why can't you understand this hint, this ambiguous command. We're also predisposed to self incrimination too.

Some years ago I was stopped for speeding & when asked what the speed limit was. "30 mph" I said. "What speed were you doing?" "44 mph" The cop then said "You know you just admitted to a crime?" "Well that's what I did."

I always obey the speed limit though it was late at night & I was moving from a 50 to a 30 zone & there were no other vehicles on the road.

Thankfully due to my respectful tone, baffling honesty & the cop not being an ahole. I was let off but it could have gone much worse.

@sentient_water @PurpleStephyr @[email protected] @hosford42 I think the standard advice when being interviewed under caution/arrest is generally 'no comment' (I am not a lawyer). Of course that could be complicated by things like knowing information you want the police to have for their investigation. Or indeed taking such advice too literally.
@alastair @actuallyautistic @PurpleStephyr @hosford42 Yeah I know that should be the default answer but it can come across as obstructive or suspicious in itself. Besides my autism generally insists I answer any questions asked of me honestly & accurately.
@alastair @actuallyautistic @sentient_water @PurpleStephyr I'd be afraid to use that phrase with an officer. I'm sure they'd think I was "copping" an attitude. (Sorry, I literally can't help myself with the puns. I admit, I have a problem.) Even when I'm being completely genuine and up front, I get accused of having some sort of attitude.