What is an aspie?

Post Reply New Topic

This post was inspired by a passage in my abnormal psychology textbook about the removal of aspergers from the DSM and the controversy it causes, especially in the autistic community. Of course the controversy is much more complicated than they explained (in addition to the loss of services thing they mentioned aspie be used as a badge of pride), but I appreciate they bring some representation of that perspective into the book.

An aspie is someone with aspergers. Since aspergers is no longer in the DSM, aspies no longer exist...well, not really, because the term aspie never actually referred to someone with aspergers. In some circles, the term aspie has come to use to be used an insult against socially awkward people, but it's still popular in the autistic community, and it originated from the neurodiversity movement, which defines autism in a fundamentally different way the the psychiatric community does. It's not even just that it's not viewed as a disorder, the entire paradigm is different. See, despite what you may have heard, autism is NOT a neurological disorder. It's a neurodevelopemental disorder, which is really just a developmental disorder, which is really just a mental disorder that is present in childhood rather that developing as an adolescent or adult. The reason the neuro- prefix was added is because of the earlier onset neurology is viewed as being a more important contributor in developmental disorders than other mental disorders, but it really works on the same dynamic system paradigm as all mental disorders: a psychological disorder is a pattern of abnormal behavior that results from the complex and evolving interplay of biological and psychosocial factors (the nature versus nurture argument is a myth, it's pretty obviously both in almost every circumstance). Part of the reason the biological factors are especially stressed in autism is political, not medical, because parents didn't want to be blamed for the disorder, but that doesn't change the reality. Psychosocial factors are important to development of autism, and it's not a neurology, it's a pattern of behavior. From the psychiatric standpoint, it doesn't MATTER that autism is disabling as a result of society rather than being inherent to the neurology, all that matters is that it's disabling. This reflects the purpose of the psychiatry, to assist mentally disabled people.

The neurodiversity model meanwhile views autism as a neurology, as the name of the movement implies. Really I think the neurodiversity movement should be renamed the psychodiversity movement as it's the psych, not neurology, which really matters, but for many that's just a matter of semantics. It needs to be remembered that the neurodiversity movement is largely shaped by the interactions of autistic people with the psychiatric community and popular perceptions of the psychiatric community, and despite being an abuse of the meteorological fallacy, equating the brain with the individual is very common in popular psychology. The other key thing that needs to be realized about the neurodiversity movement is that aspies are fundamentally social creatures, and it's the social nature of aspies which shaped the community and it's terminology. If aspies weren't social, the neurodiversity movement simply wouldn't exist, or in the very least it wouldn't have emerged from the autistic community as there wouldn't be an autistic community. The atypical way in which autistic people socialize is probably why it emerged from the autistic community, as while it divided aspies from mainstream society, it sustained the autistic community as it's own entity. As such, autistic ideas of society shaped the paradigm of the neurodiversity movement, which in turns shaped the way then neurodiversity views and even defines autism. It's still ultimately determined the medical definition of autism though because of it's history, and I think that is where the neurodiversity needs to break free in order to reach it's full potential. As the term aspie originated from the community, they should take control of it.

So, what is an aspie? I think it's someone is neurologically (and by that I really mean psychologically, as that's where it actually manifests in practice) predisposed to autism. They may or may not actually be diagnosable with autism, but the thing that the neurodiversity movement cares about which forms a part of someone's identity is there. Frankly, defining one's identity by the impairment would be kinda stupid and self-limiting, but that's not how the neurodiversity community defines it at all. Here I'm not redefining aspie, I'm just clarifying how the community actually uses it in practice. For example, with the acceptance of self-diagnosis. In psychiatry, a self-diagnosis has absolutely no value because one is not capable of diagnosing oneself with a mental disorder as it violates the diagnostic procedure, but it's valuable in the autistic community because autistic people ARE capable of introspection, and we are social, and we can relate with each other. For the ability to relate, the capacity for introspection is infinitely more important than some external analysis of behavior. It should be noted though that due to the dependence on the medical definition of autism, there is no one type of aspies; there are as many different types of aspies as there are ways for people to predisposed to autism, and there is a LOT. When someone is talking about finding a cause for autism, it's clear they have not only no understanding of autism, but no understanding of psychiatry in general, because etiology simply doesn't work like that. What we are left with is an extremely inclusive definition of aspie, but it may be inclusive to the point it lacks any value as aspies are so diverse. At that point, the definition of aspie becomes somewhat existential: as an aspie, what is the important aspect of it to YOU?

...So, what do you think an aspie is?

This is that "autism is an identity" thing and I really do not get it or any "identity" - what does it actually mean?

I guess I'm not autistic then, those silly doctors who said I was.

Identity is the concept of the key aspects of a specific person. Can't really define it beyond that.

Just from this comment you've proven that you're social and capable of introspection, though you might suck at it. Anyway, I meant autistic people in general, not necessarily every single specific autistic person.

What?


How?


So you meant to say "some autistic people ARE capable of introspection, and some are social"?

It's hard to define what makes someone autistic. I thought your piece was very well thought out.

What I find very defining is the style of communication. I'd say that although iliketrees and I are somewhat polar opposites, we share a common language.

That is very vague, but I think that if I were to try to be more specific, I'd probably get it wrong.

And, no, I'm not saying autism is a communication style. It comes with heavy baggage, but the baggage is different for every person. I'm trying to think of what is common.

Problem of today is that when others see you talk differently or behave differently, a lot of people jump to a conclusion that you have a serious and a big mental disorder. Sometimes its just a minor social or communicative issue and not a big deal at all

When I learned not to care about how others reacted to it when I talked differently, that's how they had learned to accept me as I am. Those who didn't, I just found 10 other friends instead. When you are younger you let it stop you more easily though

I'm confused. Aspergers is said to be a social disorder, yet with some if the symptoms some were telling me about in another thread - those were neurological disorders. A person with symptoms of anxiety, depression, problems with light and sound - that is all neurological. Something tells me it is both. It seems the neurological problems would have nothing to do with the social problems.

They really have nothing to do, but because of the similarities, a lot of people tend to get confused and make it appear as if it is the same thing

I can be depressed for example but, that doesnt mean I have a social problem. It's a matter of mood. Unfortunately, not all of society understands that

The concept of identity is hard to explain, I did what I could.

By commenting on this thread, you are being social. Being social doesn't mean that you are chatty in person, it means you interactive with other people in a communal way. You wouldn't have nearly 2,000 posts in an online forum if you weren't social. The definition of autism doesn't same autistic people aren't social, it's a cluster of different ways socialization is atypical, and while many of those abnormalities appear to be asocial, the idea that they are necessarily asocial has been proven to be a myth (the disorder that is actually defined by being asocial is schizoid personality disorder, and depending on how you define social behavior, anti-social personality disorder). By stating you don't understand the concept of identity, you are being introspective, because you are analyzing your own mental processes, in this case your schematic for identity. The idea that autistic people lack the ability for introspection goes back to an old theory of autism that has been demonstrated to be wrong for at least some people on the spectrum that assumed they acted atypically because they had no concept of self.

I've saying it's only some autistic people because I can't make the claim for all autistic people because there is no one autism, but it's clearly the case for many autistic people otherwise the community wouldn't exist. People who aren't social don't form communities. And while there is no requirement that autistic people have to be introspective for their to be an autistic community, the autistic community has been greatly shaped by introspection, often putting them in odds with the psychiatric community which as a whole has rejected the value of introspection as a lingering influence from behaviorism. Since in context I was referring to the autistic community when I was referring to autistic people, the ability could be more assumed.

Aspergers isn't a social disorder because there is more to it than just social problems. The rest of it is just a misunderstanding of what it means for something to be neurological disorders, on one hand ALL psychological disorders are on some level an expression of neurology, on the other to be be a precise neurological disorder it needs to be defined by a specific neurological abnormality, not the behavioral symptoms. There is no one autistic neurology. Anyway, typically there needs to be an interplay between neurological and social factors for a disorder to develop, it depends on how atypical the brain is, and if learned behaviors can effectively cure the disorder..

A label created by NT's, no less.

The irony is hilarious.

The social problems are the result of the neurological difference. An aspie is wired differently, and so doesnt act the same as NTs which creates difficulties in socializing. Kinda like two computers with different operating systems.

Except it's more complicated than that, because the various problems are created exclusvely by neurological influence, but by psychosocial ones as well.

Do I know you? I'm quite sure we've met.

It is difficult to tell exactly when a term was coined but "Aspie" is claimed to be coined by Dr. Liane Holiday Willey in her 1999 autobiography "Pretending to be Normal" with the intent of connotating "images of kind and caring individuals who live lives wrapped in different colors and fluffed with different stuffings."
Aspies and Auties - New York Times

If you have evidence of the term being used at that time or earlier by a neurotypical or otherwise I would like to know.

How much for such info?

I'll accept bids over $50