General political stance of an autistic-friendly subculture?

Post Reply New Topic

Here, in the thread The "no contact" thing in today's American culture:

Are there any specific "general rules of NTs" that you are thinking of here, that an ND subculture would still follow, and that would be bad for NDs? If so, which specific "general rules of NTs" do you have in mind?

It seems to me that a subculture of autistic, autistic-like, and autistic-friendly people would need to have somewhat different rules. I think it would need, for example, to have a strong ethic of assertiveness (as distinct from both passivity and aggressiveness). Because we're bad at social subtleties, we need people to be assertive.


The best economies are neither left wing nor right wing, but mixed. The trick is getting the right mixture. In the U.S.A. this view is considered center-left. In Europe, perhaps it's considered center-right?

Anyhow, I think it's likely that the autistic community will continue be left-leaning overall, but will also continue to have a significant right wing sector -- as it does now, judging by the posts here on WP, including yours.

I think this will continue to be the case because, in conservative families, autistic kids are less likely to be thrown out (or worse) than LGBT kids are. The latter is, I think, the main reason why the LGBT community is as close-to-solidly left-wing as it now is (although even the LGBT community does have its right wing sector).

John Michael Carley, the founder of GRASP, has written about the bipartisan nature of the NT-dominated "autism community" (parents and professionals), which he believes is leaning more and more to the right, if anything. In a blog post We’re Not “Bad at Sex,” But We Sure Are Bad at Teaching It – Part 2: The Autism World Is NOT “Sex Positive.” Here’s Why, he wrote:


I'm not sure I agree with him that the "autism parents" community has become predominantly right-wing. This probably varies by region. It might be true in the Bible Belt, but not here in NYC.


I don't think this is likely to happen. I think the autistic community will continue to include people from all kinds of different backgrounds. And, if the community is sufficiently organized yet sufficiently de-centralized, it will not be possible for any would-be dictators to take over. In the long run, any new social rules that are accepted on a community-wide basis would, most likely, be those rules that actually work well for autistic and autistic-like people from a variety of backgrounds. If some particular rule doesn't work well, then there will eventually be a critical mass of people who speak up and resist.


Actually I think it is VERY natural for ND's (or at least a relatively extroverted minority among ND's) to be founders of subcultures. Not fitting in to mainstream society, it is only natural to look for fellow oddballs, and if possible to organize groups of fellow oddballs.

I suspect that there are lots of oddball subcultures that were founded by ND's, then later taken over by NT's.

Example: The bisexual wing of the LGBT community. I briefly attended some bisexual support groups back in the 1980's. Looking back on those days, I think many of the founding members were probably autistic. (I personally was close friends with one of them.)

Another example: The polyamory community. At least here in NYC, the polyamory community has a long history of being surprisingly autistic-friendly, and was so even before anyone had ever heard of HFA or Asperger's syndrome. Apparently it still is, according to the blog post Autism and Consent by Kirsten Lindsmith.

Another possible example: The hippie movement. I don't know who the founders were, but, judging by that subculture's fondness for comfortable clothes, I would guess that it might have been founded by people with sensory issues.

It's often subtle things, and so many of them might go unnoticed.

One thing is how conversations are carried out. NTs feel awkward when people don't talk all the time, but NDs prefer to only talk when they have something to say, which can create shorter or longer silence in a conversation.

Another thing is the greeting ceremonies and the small talk NTs do. This is completely alien to many NDs. Many NDs would prefer to skip small talk and start talking about things that are interesting for them directly.

The preferred organization model for NDs are flat organizations, and many NDs have problems with authority and large, hierarchical organizations.

Many NDs will not "mingle" when they are on meetings, rather will stay where they initially sat down. To make NDs talk to more than just their immediate table neighbors there is a need to force movement, and so meetings where people walk outdoors probably are a lot better than those where people are sitting at a table.

I'm sure there are more things in this area that I've forgot (or even don't know about).

My immediate thought is to look into the ethnography of LGBTQI+ groups as a starting point for how to structure ND groups. Different mode of dress, language, political attitudes, and the like.