5 ms·

It's not used 'too broadly.' Autism is a disorder on a spectrum. Some people have mild autism, some people have moderate and some people have severe autism. The

It's not used 'too broadly.' Autism is a disorder on a spectrum. Some people have mild autism, some people have moderate and some people have severe autism. These are technical terms. Also calling people 'autistic' and later calling people with autism 'it' as in 'try to injure itself' is a really shitty way to talk about human beings. Check yourself.

sdrothrock 12y ago
> Also calling people 'autistic' and later calling people with autism 'it' as in 'try to injure itself' is a really shitty way to talk about human beings. Check yourself. mamcx is not a native English speaker and was perhaps trying to use "it" as a gender-inspecific pronoun rather than intentionally portraying people on the autistic spectrum as "objects" or "inhuman."
- mamcx 12y ago
  yep, sorry for the bad choice of words.
  - sdrothrock 12y ago
    No problem. I think most people will tend to use a plural (they, them) in this kind of situation. People who are pickier about grammar will probably say "he or she" or "him or her."
dubfan 12y ago
Did you read the article? The author uses "autistic" to refer to people with autism (and additionally rejects the term "people with autism")
- Liesmith 12y ago
  Yeah I read the article, and his rejection of 'people with autism' is akin to 'deaf culture' nonsense. Autism is a tragic, often crippling disorder and this guy wants it to be a culture. That's fine, he can feel however he wants and construct his identity however he feels best about himself. Calling a person 'it' is considerably worse, though, and that's what I was objecting to above.
- mamcx 12y ago
  That is a weird distinction, probably is a cultural thing? How can be better to say one of the other?. I have more than 30 years with my twin brother. My aunt is a professional trainer for people with disabilitues (a sport, gold-winner kind of trainer), I have learn a bit of sign language and so on. But I never heard that kind of argument (ie: here in colombia none of both will sound more or less respectfull, are equivalent)
  - RaptorJ 12y ago
    There is some contention [weasel words] about what is the better way to refer to people with disabilities/diabled persons. Here are two perspectives: People-first: http://www.asha.org/publications/journals/submissions/person_first.htm http://www.asha.org/publications/journals/submissions/person... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People-first_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People-first_language Identity-first: http://www.xojane.com/issues/i-am-not-a-person-with-a-disability-i-am-a-disabled-person http://www.xojane.com/issues/i-am-not-a-person-with-a-disabi... and http://cheshirekit.wordpress.com/2014/01/23/the-social-model-of-disability-and-person-first-vs-identity-first-language-2/ http://cheshirekit.wordpress.com/2014/01/23/the-social-model...

sdrothrock 12y ago

> Also calling people 'autistic' and later calling people with autism 'it' as in 'try to injure itself' is a really shitty way to talk about human beings. Check yourself. mamcx is not a native English speaker and was perhaps trying to use "it" as a gender-inspecific pronoun rather than intentionally portraying people on the autistic spectrum as "objects" or "inhuman."

mamcx 12y ago
yep, sorry for the bad choice of words.
- sdrothrock 12y ago
  No problem. I think most people will tend to use a plural (they, them) in this kind of situation. People who are pickier about grammar will probably say "he or she" or "him or her."

dubfan 12y ago

Did you read the article? The author uses "autistic" to refer to people with autism (and additionally rejects the term "people with autism")

Liesmith 12y ago
Yeah I read the article, and his rejection of 'people with autism' is akin to 'deaf culture' nonsense. Autism is a tragic, often crippling disorder and this guy wants it to be a culture. That's fine, he can feel however he wants and construct his identity however he feels best about himself. Calling a person 'it' is considerably worse, though, and that's what I was objecting to above.
mamcx 12y ago
That is a weird distinction, probably is a cultural thing? How can be better to say one of the other?. I have more than 30 years with my twin brother. My aunt is a professional trainer for people with disabilitues (a sport, gold-winner kind of trainer), I have learn a bit of sign language and so on. But I never heard that kind of argument (ie: here in colombia none of both will sound more or less respectfull, are equivalent)
- RaptorJ 12y ago
  There is some contention [weasel words] about what is the better way to refer to people with disabilities/diabled persons. Here are two perspectives: People-first: http://www.asha.org/publications/journals/submissions/person_first.htm http://www.asha.org/publications/journals/submissions/person... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People-first_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People-first_language Identity-first: http://www.xojane.com/issues/i-am-not-a-person-with-a-disability-i-am-a-disabled-person http://www.xojane.com/issues/i-am-not-a-person-with-a-disabi... and http://cheshirekit.wordpress.com/2014/01/23/the-social-model-of-disability-and-person-first-vs-identity-first-language-2/ http://cheshirekit.wordpress.com/2014/01/23/the-social-model...