I interview Steve Silberman about his bestselling book, Neurotribes

Post Reply New Topic

In another thread, there were some quite useful links to websites (including: this <click> and that <click>) which helped me understand the difference between 'neurodiversity' and the 'neurodiversity movement'.

Personally, I didn't realize that there was the need for a "social justice movement that seeks civil rights, equality, respect, and full societal inclusion for the neurodivergent". Then again, in this Internet-enabled social media world, I shouldn't be that surprised. There appears to be social movements <click> for everything.

Hmmm.

Is it possible that there are circumstances in which neurodivergent people are in some way wronged because of their status as members of a neurominority like autism?

Maybe for kids in schools?
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/children-with ... mbt48.html
http://fox40.com/2014/10/30/parents-say ... in-school/

Maybe also for some adults?
http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/1069/1234

I believe I've read the thread where you discuss your troubles and I hope that you'll be OK.



You're right, I should have done this and avoided derailing the thread. Though the discussion seems to be meeting at a middleground now that's somewhat relevant to the book.



In hindsight I don't think my original post belonged here, but as I said above the discussion now seems to be somewhat relevant to the book and I believe that aligns with typical thread progression. I have read the interview but I don't have much to say about it directly.

I'm not strongly against the core principles of the neurodiversity movement nor Steve's views there, but I do think too much idealism is involved. It's my understanding that the neurodiversity movement wants to shift away from autism being a 'disorder' to a 'difference' and that autistic people do not need a cure. IIRC Steve states in the interview that the best cure for negative autistic traits are understanding teachers, and to an extent I agree, but that glosses over many of the (particularly lower-functioning) autistic hardships from my point of view. He referred a couple of times to people with autistic traits (including Hans Asperger) and I would consider myself to be such a person, despite being recognized here as an NT. I don't need to rehash my friend's life story but I believe my own experiences as well as his are more than enough for me to hold a reasonable perspective.

I think the fact that society (in general) takes such offense to the behaviour of autistic individuals is enough to warrant it being a disorder, hence the focus on the social/communicative aspect. I don't mean to sound like a jerk but I think many proponents of the movement don't accept how (in general) frustrating it can be to deal with somebody socially inept and/or with extremely different ways of thinking to oneself. Recognition, teaching and acceptance would help but further support would still require a medical diagnosis.



I don't think an autistic person's life should be characterized as negative nor do I think identifying with autism is inherently negative. I do think it's bad when somebody is too positively attached to the autism label especially if they are not professionally diagnosed.

It is a nice idea for NTs to be more accepting of the diverse traits in individuals with autism etc. but that's where all the idealism lies. People will forever be frustrated, for example, having to turn the music way down in a car or at a gathering for my autistic friend. Asking them not to be is a stretch.

There are elements of truth in what you say, but taken as a whole, these ideas are bad.

Here's a blog post with elements of truth that directly addresses some of the points you raise:
http://www.autistichoya.com/2012/03/who ... y.html?m=1

I don't agree with everything that person says and don't always like the style she says it in, but I did immediately think of that blog when I read your post.

Point of clarification: you appear to be saying that it is unreasonable to accommodate an autistic person's sensitive hearing at a social event arranged FOR that autistic person and the people in that person's life. Is that right?

Steve Silberman and ASAN view Autism as a disability. They are arguably the two leading current major advocates of the Neurodiversidity movement at the moment
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/2015100 ... out-autism



People are forever frustrated by speed limit, stopping for red lights, making accommodations for the physically disabled, accommodating senior citizens(which includes turning down music and doling out a lot of taxes and family money) but for the most part they do it(Always going to be a few obstitinite people and people just so busy they forget or are unaware someone needs accomodations). But somehow Autistics must accept that the majority of people will never ever ever accommodate us.

That article/whatever you call it makes an awful lot of sense to me. I could agree with almost everything written there.



You're right here too.. hmm. I can't argue against that, nor do I want to. I do think it'd be a great struggle to see all the necessary accommodations take place however, for the social frustrations people experience as a result of autism (from my point of view) I don't think will ever truly be accepted, just as how bullying/outcasting of the socially inept has always been around. Misinterpretations especially in high-school years are likely to never go down so well.

To be honest, I think LFA is and will remain to be far easier for society to accommodate than HFA. HFA individuals appear NT and as every diagnosed person here knows, the expectations are not easy to live with.

I can see the message there. To interpret it literally I don't think of myself as an ally, I only really come here to discuss autism now. Originally I came here because I suspected that maybe I was autistic, because I do have autistic traits and after my friend whom I thought resembled me the most told me he had autism, that point of view was reinforced. Now I don't know what to think of this community, because over my time here this forum increasingly seemed much more 'NT' than I thought it would.

I do agree that the autistic experience is best explained by those that are autistic (obviously), but I feel that one point with that blog is missed, for example the lines:

"You are not an ally if you insist that we or your kids are broken, diseased, or defective."
"You are not an ally if you patronize or talk down to an Autistic person."
"You are not an ally if you routinely attack or dismiss an Autistic person's opinions or ideas."

The meaning/intentions are nice and emotional, but to me self-diagnosis, BAP, NT with autistic traits are all forsaken.. essentially the fact that autism is a spectrum is ignored. HFA 'cannot speak' for LFA either. As an NT, an easy going extrovert cannot speak for me. I'm sure my friend's experience is vastly different to most here whom for the most part are not intellectually disabled etc. These lines REALLY emphasize that NTs (perhaps including BAP and self-diagnosed depending on point of view) cannot relate to or have any valid opinions on autism.



No, not an event arranged for that autistic person. I have a small group of friends, one of them is autistic. I love him (as a friend), but it is still a huge pain to turn the music down all the time or have to initiate every single conversation, feeling neglected and burned out. It isn't easy to hear that one of my best friends that I work so hard for 'would not notice' if we stopped being friends.

The way I worded the above is strange, because it actually isn't my autistic friend we turn the music down for, but another who has autistic traits and sensitive hearing is one of them (yes 3 of us do). That was more a general point and TBH quite a bad example because such things are far easier to accommodate than the social.

You seem to be saying that because perfection is impossible, people should not try to make improvements in the current situation.

You seem to be arguing that people who are trying to make improvements should include self-defeating language and concessions in everything they do.

I may be misunderstanding you, but you have repeatedly played off the needs of your lfa friend against attempts by others to improve their situations. I don't understand why anyone would do that.

Nah, I do think that improvements should be made. My disagreements are only with the ideas of autism only being a difference in need of acceptance from society etc.

I'm not sure why you think I want people to use self-defeating language for (I assume) non-constructive purposes but I guess I do think people should be realistic rather than upbeat positive and delusional.

I think this is a misinterpretation because I haven't intended for that to be the case. I just use him as an example for many different things.

I am basically reaching the point where I say as little as possible. Its a waste of time. The only solution as I see it is for those who can, to get on with things and leave the others to do as they will as do they will. Some of these efforts are good admittedly but generally, this issue will be confined within a narrow perspective. And really, other than going to ones doctor for the diagnosis, one is best quietly working away in the background to empower oneself.

But you are raising these disagreements against people who aren't saying that. Almost nobody is saying that, from what I have seen. People are saying "difference, not just disability" and sometimes "the disabling thing in this specific situation is socially constructed and could be socially fixed" but I don't see people saying, "No autistic person is disabled" or "no autistic traits are disabling." If anyone was saying that, it would probably be someone like Lydia on AutisticHoya--that blog I linked to--because she tends toward hyperbole and confrontational political rhetoric. But she also acknowledges disability.

If this is your main disagreement with the neurodiversity movement or discussions of neurodiversity, then I don't think you really have any and are just misled or confused. You might as well take issue with Republicans for their advocacy of free cheese for dolphins--it's not really happening.

It's because you keep saying that people should not say positive things about their autism because you know someone for whom autism is not positive and any positive statement that doesn't adequately address that persons disabled state is somehow wrong. I can go back and find the places in this thread where you did exactly that. How is that not requiring people who make a positive statement about autism to use self-defeating language?

I am trying to imagine a positive statement that would pass that kind of purity test: "I have the ability to hyperfocus and see the minute details of complex projects and this could be an asset in my job, though it is a disabling nightmare and source of unending misery for many..."

My perception is that you are doing that and have done that repeatedly in this thread.

You raise "my autistic friend who doesn't care about me" as an objection to positive statements by autistic people about themselves: "you should not say that your autism is a difference, not a disability because of my autistic friend."
You also raise "my autistic friend" as a shield against criticism of the positions you are taking: "you can't say I am doing anything wrong in describing autism as a terrible thing that needs to be cured because of my autistic friend."

I think this is an unworthy rhetorical strategy.

I think you should argue the merits of the actual issues and take more time to consider what the statements you are challenging mean to the people who are making them, rather than what they might mean for your friend.

For example, here is an old piece about viewing autism as a difference rather than a disability:
http://psychcentral.com/news/2011/11/04 ... 31091.html

Is there anything there that you disagree with? Anything that you can take issue with without reference to your autistic friend?

Is there any comment on my post about a different track in neurodiversity movement?
i think Asan in particular is not helping ideas of neurodiversity and I couldn't find any org or person to do something practical with.
Usually they were interested in talking, but never in doing something practical.
Also I agree that HFA can't get LFA, I think it is harder than for NT or BAP to get HFA.
I can't understand or imagine what it is like to be intellectually disabled, there is no experience to guide me there.

It's bad that people treated you that way. That is not consistent with the inclusive idea that most neurodiversity advocates express. Practical steps toward better lives for individual neurodivergent people should logically be a priority for people who support recognition of the ideas of neurodiversity.

Not all neurodiversity advocates share the same views and I also create my own. I have seen many times views expressed on this forum where society, parents etc. are vilified for expressing their points of view, most of which I don't think are harmful to an accurate understanding of autism. I don't think many rational people would actually think that strengths be ignored or that autistic people should just be converted to NTs. However, a pro-cure view does make sense to me, not only the neurodiverse view. Both are ideological.



I really don't feel I have done this, at least it was never my intention. If you quote anything of mine then I will explain it.



You're talking about individual cases, I only speak in a general context. When people preach that autism is only a difference or that HFA should be separated from LFA it bothers me. Usually these people have very spiteful views of anybody that is pro-cure because they only think of their individual case. This reminds me of the self-diagnosis issue, where people feel attacked or invalidated simply because some disagree with self-diagnosis - nobody says anything of the individual but people interpret it that way, and that's why I always emphasize when discussing that subject that I refer to the process in general.

I think you're interpreting my opinions as though I am laying down rules or something. I feel that I am only adding a perspective, as people with more positive views do theirs. If I'm unable to do that it feels that I have to walk on eggshells and use very specific wording which nobody else here does when they feel passionate about a subject.

As for that specific article, I don't really disagree with anything, but it doesn't seem to offer much, only a really vague and generally agreeable view.

Neurodiversity advocates can talk about ideals and inclusion, but their behaviors may not match their talking, as I have found.

One problem is that when I have criticized or questioned some behavior or approach in neurodiversity movement, advocates usually can't take a criticism from someone who is part of the group they advocate for. Instead, it turns back into me being morally inferior for rejecting their ideals, which I didn't ackshuly reject.

Compared to neurodiversity groups run by autistic people, I have been much more included and never dismissed or attacked by groups run by parents of autistic people.

I am surprised by that, though I can see that there might be problems in autistic groups that stem from some common traits in autistic people, specifically difficulties in imagining or perceiving other perspectives. I can think of several fairly sharp conflicts like that and I am sorry to say that I have this tendency, too. I see what I see and think everyone else sees the same thing and thinks the same way about it, even though I know on an abstract level that this is not true.

But really that should not happen. It seems very clear to me that you have talents, skills and training that would be very valuable if applied to the goals of the neurodiversity movement groups that I have learned about. I have seen very good advice from you for students in high school and college and it seemed in accord with the things in ASAN's Navigating College book and website.

http://navigatingcollege.org/

I think if you keep putting out the good, practical advice that you do and do good science on the research side, you will be making life better for autistic people and furthering the goals of the neurodiversity movement in your own way.

Maybe living well is one of the best forms of advocacy as well as the best revenge.