I’ve discovered my Autism at last, and I’m learning all the terminology, and sad contrarian that I am, I’m already arguing and rewriting the new language my way. It is what it is, I guess.
I’ve written three blogs and several Twitter rants complaining that the “neurotypical,” are a type, with plusses and minuses about them, that “neurotype,” has what is called a totality of the concept missing, they way it has been presented to me, it seems everyone has a type, except the “typical,” who apparently are somehow beyond neurotype, and they are the model and we all diverge from them. It’s part of what we call “the medical model,” of pathologizing of the neurodivergent, but it’s insidious.
A personal aside:
By accident of my life, I have long held an idea of what a “normal person’s” neurotype is. I didn’t know that’s what they were and I didn’t know what I was, but I knew they didn’t think like I did, and I wasn’t indoctrinated in the idea that they were right and I was wrong – if you saw the uh, feces folly that I grew up in, you’d understand, perhaps you would think those people had nothing to teach you either. In the end, my family doesn’t look particularly neurotypical, and it was a lot of other people that sold me on their type, their different way of thinking, like, pretty much everyone else I ever met.
So for reasons of arrogance and independence, the idea that anyone was “non-divergent,” didn’t satisfy me, if anyone is “non-divergent,” that by definition, would have to be me because – my initial reason as a young Autistic child – they are beating the crap out of little children. What I think when I hear it is, “That is your perfect form from which we all diverge?”
Back to technical matters:
It doesn’t satisfy me many ways, but the totality of the concept is that all are some type, and all types are evolved and not created, and all will have good and bad traits, depending on context, and that to speak to anyone, you have to have some idea of their type and what it means – and this is not less true if there are more of them. All are some type, and self knowledge regarding this is good for everyone – but due to the incomplete nature of this word today, all the typical type of person has for self-knowledge is that they are numerous, and perhaps if they hear of it, that they are not Autistic or another type.
The other option, stated in the previous entry, is the myth of Human Nature in which all things are possible, any good or any evil – this is my point, neurotypes have Big Data, statistical traits. Yes, “anything is possible,” for anyone, but it’s like the American dream: it’s possible, anyone can, but how many do?
This is what I mean by a partially developed concept, the statistical thing where more of one neurotype think and do more of one sort of thing that the other neurotypes, that’s what neurotype means. This Human Nature business stretches to anything, a person would have to be all neurotypes at once to be this myth. The Robustic (someone likes it!), formerly the Neurotypical, is not all of that, not the universal type with all options included. If they were, they could talk to the rest of us, couldn’t they? No, they are another evolved type like the rest, ostensibly purpose-built by evolution for whatever pressures it faces.
Different types suggest different niches to fill, different evolutionary processes involved in their creation, and different environments they are best adapted to – this is another proof, if there was one neurotype that does it all, why did the rest evolve?
It leads to stereotyping, where individuals are wrongly forced into general perceptions, but always there is more – is it every neurotype that would force every person into their stereotype? Or perhaps, ought there to be one about a certain sort that turns everything natural into a law and calls the cops?
If many Autists that work are in science and medicine, perhaps this can be a stereotype for good reasons, something about the Autistic type is good for that – but my Autistic self wouldn’t be forcing Autists into it! I think that is a Robustic trait, the conformism, I’m sorry. But it’s not me that said it first, it’s easy to see that when they describe Autistic social traits, that this is only the mirror image, that we do not pick up on (and so conform to), social cues. Note the parenthesized bit, the unspoken social cue, the non verbalization of “and conform to,” – of course this is Robustic framing, where conformity is understood, it’s sort of in the air.
Much Autistic confusion may have been avoided if they could only say that out loud, but I guess it’s not really conformity if you have to be reminded of it. Gilbert Gottfried smile.
Autists talk about it, we complain about the toll on ourselves of a conformism we cannot succeed at, and the concept is not full, perhaps we see it as a “trait,” but maybe we think it’s everyone but ourselves, part of the Human Nature deal, maybe we don’t think of it as a type specific trait, meaning both a superpower and a disability, depending on circumstance, of a specific neurotype?
There would seem to be a simple arithmetic to be discovered, we have neurotypes and environments (human made environments, to be sure, some meta stuff), so that if we see the environment, it should be clear what sort of mind has adapted for it/created it, or if we knew our minds, we could guess what sort of a world they are made for/are making, sort of thing. I wish it went without saying – knowing neither you can’t really do anything. Worse still, seeing either of these things clearly is extremely difficult on its own. Those that achieve one tend to specialize in it, and I’m not sure who knows both.
Again, though, if you have one, you can guess the other. Neurotypes, this concept, makes this far more possible. I had intuited my answer here long ago and said many times, with an apology that this was all I had, intuition, that what I was up against in opposing spanking seemed to be a warrior mindset, but it was the Matrix, I was the anomaly in the equation, because I didn’t share this mentality that I was ascribing to all of humanity – learning about Autism, and the bigger idea, neurotypes, solved this. (I mean, thank goodness. I never wanted to be The One, eish. LOL. ) Solved both sides of it, my mind, and “most peoples’” minds. Now it’s pretty much a tautology.
The environment is conflict, if it’s not war, “peacetime,” is competition in our war against the common enemy, Earth and all of its inhabitants – so the dominant neurotype is “warrior.” I’m sorry I have to say this, but that is the job of writing, I am starting to grasp, saying it: that is not the model of neuro-health, I mean it is, but it can’t be. Nothing would be justified in forcing a mindset of conflict on people and the goal of any “cures,” for neurotypes other than the Robustic one, is a bad goal, a goal that maintains a world of war.
Again, I didn’t say it first, it’s their reason for all of it, to be strong, to make the nation strong, so we can fight off “the enemy,” note the forever, content free phrasing. It’s all good in their framing, strength trumps all. We fight off the enemy in this, the best of all possible worlds. This is some of the reverse engineering mentioned in the previous post.
Nothing at all would be justified by this, much less ABA torture.
In fact, we really need to go the other direction entirely and start pacifying our species, and from Autism to Robustism, I say, stop already, you can’t get tough enough for the world you are creating.
That you think you can, this . . . this is not a superpower.
We need to cut down on your red meat. You need help. None of your own people will help you, I’m sorry to say, they all have the same problem. They are much too busy pissing you off to make us all strong to help you solve any aggression or anger problems you may be experiencing. If you wish to ever find peace, you must listen to someone else, another sort of mind.
Have you seen the news?
May 23rd., 2023