What do you think about the term "aspie"?

Post Reply New Topic

It used to common on WP for folks to talk about "aspies, and auties". Which is fine by me.

I recall one post were someone even wrote "all of us aspies, auties, and willies". By"willies" he meant "folks with William's syndrome". William's Syndrome is a rare condition, even compared to ASDs. Though its comparable to ASDs. In fact it's often dubbed in the popular press as being "the opposite of autism". That because the distinctive trait of folks who have it is that they have a compulsion to socialize. They have to get in your face and interact with you (in marked contrast to extreme autistics who ignore you and just stay in their own world).

ADHD (formerly known as ADD) is a distinct, but comparable condition to aspergers, and to HFA, but folks who have it don't have their own moniker like "aspie". Not sure what you would call them. ADHDers ? Or maybe "ADDers"?

If you happened to African American, and had ADHD, would that mean that you were a "Black Adder"?

I adopted Aspie as my label once I was diagnosed, because it was better than waiting for others to label me - and I considered it a positive.

I'm a bit cynical about the mental health profession (I worked in an "allied" field, and that joke about sausage-making has a lot of truth in it). There are (at least in the US) therapists who invest a surprising amount of energy in exerting their power over clients - in subtle and not so subtle ways, such as moving appointment times unilaterally for the doc's convenience while being inflexible when clients are late or need to reschedule (when the client does it, it's resistance, but when the doc does it, it's necessity), and being dismissive of clients' complaints about drug side effects. There really is an element of keeping the peasant in his or her place, with some practitioners. Not all, not the majority, but as far as I'm concerned even one is too many (and more than one suggests a pattern).

I was not surprised to see the Asperger diagnosis diluted in DSM-5. A lot of Aspies were embracing their diagnosis and finding it empowering.

Again, I'm cynical, but I had a window into the field for some years. Your mileage may vary. There are good therapists, there are excellent ones. And I'm still an Aspie.

I like 'aspie' because I feel it is a bit fun an whimsical - and a lot of autistic people are a bit fun and whimsical. Certainly fits me.

Some people on WP with classic autism have mentioned that they feel a bit excluded by the term. I feel that we stand stronger toghether. Also, there is little scientific support for keeping Asperger's as a separate diagnosis. I've seen several people mention that they were resistant to it originally, but that it made too much sense.

Miss Weatherwax has a very good point, though. Something to keep in mind. In the future there will be a lot of fights for support, for a diagnostic process that is less random, for specific therapies tailored to autistics, supported by science....the list goes on. I'm very happy that we have professionals from the health and mental health field as members here on WP.

I don't like it.
Having Aspergers to me is an enigma, not only because all the people I deal with in my daily life are nd and uneducated about Aspergers, but also because I don't understand it well myself, and the risk of reducing Aspergers to a caricature is far too frequent.
Covering all these problems with a confidential and familiar name for a condition most people don't understand nor accept, and giving others yet another opportunity to simplify and misunderstand me, is the last thing I need.

It's a handy term should one not wish to be called autistic.

I don't think it's a bad term.

I don't really feel one way or the other about it. I tend to use it simply because it's less to write/say "I'm an Aspie" than "I've been diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome," although I prefer to say that I'm autistic (I also don't have a preference for "autistic" or "have autism" - they're both true, it is a part of who I am, but it isn't all of who I am) because people assume I'm higher functioning than I am when they hear "Asperger's," and I'm so gosh-dang sick of always being overestimated and then accused of being lazy or not caring when I don't live up to other people's expectations of me when in actuality I'm trying my hardest. But it's really the intent behind the words rather than the words themselves that matter to me.

I think it's a nice thing that people with Aspergers have an "in-group" term for themselves. I don't really have positive or negative associations with it (or with the terms neurodivergent and neurotypical). I'm autistic though rather than an Aspie, having had a significant speech delay, and I sometimes feel left out in discussions about "we Aspies" or feel the need to qualify that I'm just autistic. I don't think people are intentionally trying to exclude classic autistics, although I can sometimes take it that way. And judging from the large number of posts on WP by Aspies, I relate to almost every one, although I believe one difference may that being autistic I'm very non-verbal in my internal thinking. The one qualification I'd have is that it took a lot for me to accept and be able to say "I'm autistic", and sometimes the term "Aspie" sounds like it's minimizing that condition. Which drives me nuts because so many NTs already minimize the challenges we face. Both groups have considerable challenges as well as great strengths. I do greatly prefer to say "I'm autistic" rather than "I have autism" as it goes all the way to the core of who I am, but that's a different issue...

As has been mentioned above, I personally use "Aspie" as an abbreviation of "person/people with Asperger's".

Also, I don't see anything bad in it. But then, that may only be because "Aspie" doesn't get used in insulting and/or joking contexts in the same way "autistic" does. I just wish people would stop using it as such.

I hate the term for a couple reasons:

1. I have no idea what it means. Some people use it as a nickname for HFA/Asperger's, some people use it to mean undiagnosed HFA/Asperger's, and some people use it to refer to traits associated with ASD without making any judgement regarding a diagnosis. That makes it useless as a descriptive word, in my opinion.

2. I hate the way it sounds. It sounds like someone is dying of suffocation when I hear it. Assssspie. Yuck. (just sharing my opinion and not making a judgement towards people who think the word has an appealing sound)

I prefer the term autistic. But like amythest schabard said you are welcome to idenitify and introduce your self as anything you want rather it's a transhelicopter or a autie it doesn't really matter.

I'm autistic. I prefer to be referred to as an autistic.
And just that - not even "a person with autism," which someone in a medical capacity amusingly PC corrected themselves with when talking to me once, and I corrected back with "No, autistic."
I don't like "Aspie" and don't use it in reference to me.

Some people think that it sounds too 'cutesy', but I like the term as it demonstrates that we can be casual and comfortable with our Aspergers rather than always giving it a serious name. Plus it's just shorter.