Most autistic people, despite everything, actually like being autistic.

Not all, of course. But most of us.
And I don’t just mean ‘making peace with it’.

I mean: it's bound up with who we are.

A thread 🧵

1/11

(refs at the end)
#Autism #ActuallyAutistic #Neurodivergent

For us, autism doesn't feel like some detachable defect.

Take it away – and you don’t leave me, just improved. You change who I am.

This feeling isn’t limited to one ‘type’ of autistic person. Across support needs, most autistic people say the same (refs at the end).

2/11

That idea – that there’s a separable ‘pure self’ – is basically not one that's shared by us.

But it's very popular elsewhere!

Many millions are poured into #autism research every year, in the areas of treatment, intervention, prevention, and the hunt for biomarkers.

💰💰💰

3/11

The implication here – sometimes unspoken, & sometimes not so unspoken – is that autism is something to be reduced, corrected, or even eventually eradicated.

So my questions are:

1/ Whose problem is autism being treated as?
2/ And whose interests are served by that?

4/11

Because a ‘world without autism’ isn't abstract.
It's a world without autistic people. 🙎🏽‍♀️🙎🏾🙎🏻‍♀️

There’s also a deeper issue here.

Autistic people aren't believed about our own experiences. Or we don't get asked at all.

#UtaFrith said it would be unscientific to do so. More on her views here: https://mas.to/@KatyElphinstone/116206483353899881

5/11

K.J. Elphinstone (@[email protected])

Content warning: Uta Frith's views on autism 😱

mas.to

Then, as we’re not listened to, society's understanding of autism develops without us.🤷🏽‍♀️

That flawed understanding is then used to overrule us, again.

Strange little loop. ➰

6/11

#EpistemicInjustice #Autism #AutismResearch

So what could ethical research look like, instead?

Here's the proposed researchers’ code of ethics:

1. Co-participation,
2. Respectful language,
3. Autistic differences not always as deficits,
4. No alignment with those promoting ABA, eugenics, and similar harms.

Far from today's reality.

7/11

Thanks @panda for this! And your work is in the references.

@KatyElphinstone I'm reminded of this *intensely* unethical science paper I read some twenty years or so where scientists electrocuted fish.

Why? To find out whether fish felt pain.

Their conclusion? They exhibit some behaviour patterns that suggest they could, but more research (i.e. electrocution) is required. You can't be sure, after all.

If this seems particularly disturbing, as if it's just some psychopaths using science as an excuse to live out their sicko fantasies ...

@KatyElphinstone ...in public, well no, apparently.

Apparently I'm anthropomorphizing animals, which is a science no-no. I am assigning human-like qualities to them, based on the undeniable observation that they act similar to humans when placed into similar situations.

That's not how it's done! *tuts in science*

Clearly it is significantly more ethical to discard the evidence in front of us, so we can continue to abuse other creatures at will.

This is done ...

@KatyElphinstone ... to women in medicine. This is done to people of colour. This is done to autistics.This is a pattern of systemic abuse.

And there is *always* someone who profits from this.

I'm pretty fed up with that kind of attitude as you might imagine.

@jens

It certainly is! Anthropomorphism my ... (ahem)...

I mentioned it too, in my article here: https://www.neurofabulous.org.uk/furries-and-therians.html

(and apologies for the images: I genuinely didn't know they were AI generated, at the time, and I plan to change them - they were just stock photos)

Furries and therians

Furries

@jens

My words were:

"And anybody who indulges in anthropomorphism, e.g. "Oh look, I stepped on my dog's paw and he yelped... do you think he might feel pain?" (okay, I'm exaggerating a little) is frowned upon.

It's traditionally considered silly and 'womanish' to attribute feelings and thoughts to anyone who doesn't look like us or speak like us."

@KatyElphinstone @jens Fish can't yelp, so QED 🙄

/s

@gunchleoc

Nope. So clearly they're fine.

@jens

@jens @KatyElphinstone What if humans behave like animals as they are, indeed, part of the animal kingdom?

It's a weird exceptionalism that's backed by essentially no credible research.

Animal - Wikipedia

@lispi314

Indeed it is! My daughter's geography teacher told her yesterday that humans aren't animals. Er... 🤷‍♀️

@jens

@KatyElphinstone @lispi314 It's weird, yes, but also easily explained. At least in the West, people have believed for two thousand years that they were meant to rule over the animal kingdom, not be part of it. Says so in the bible!
@lispi314 of course humans are animals.