You would think....

Post Reply New Topic

There have been a couple of people in my social skills group, myself included, who have used the terms NT and neurotypical to discuss, well, NTs/neurotypicals. We also use the term aspie as a "commonly understood" word in sentences.

I never heard the term NT before I came here either and to be truthful I'm not too keen on the term.

I don't "try to set myself apart" from NTs. I woefully and sadly get reminded I AM "apart" from them when they or their behavior in themselves or toward me remind me painfully of that fact.

Sorry, but the more I live the more I realize NTs really haven't ever understood me nor I them. I'm learning that actually more and more.

As for the term "NT," it's just the easiest way to refer to neurotypical people who have no spectrum issues as opposed to people on the spectrum who have spectrum issues.

Since there is such a thing as a neurotypical person and there is such a thing as a person on the autism spectrum, I don't know why it's a problem to call either one those things.

Jesus.....ya gotta call things SOMETHING. Sorry, I shouldn't call my laptop a laptop, I'd better find another name to call it that doesn't divide it from me being a human. Can't have that now can we? I and the laptop aren't so different, so what an insult it must be to call IT a laptop while I call MYSELF a human. Tsk tsk.

Seriously, what the hell politically correct BS is this, where now we can't or mustly acknowledge that sometimes things are called different things and even people are called different things BECAUSE THEY ARE?

Sometime things are "divided" because they are indeed different and divided. When did it become wrong to differentiate?

I don't hold with this BS that we shouldn't call them something that makes them "apart" or "other." The ARE apart. Face it.

I use it here for convenience, but I loathe it.

+1

I don't feel like "neurotypical" (especially in the sense of it being defined as the opposite of "autistic") is really all that accurate. There are other mental issues/neurodivergences non-autistics can have, but most of all, there's not a clear cut line between NT and ASD. It was even noticed historically that parents/relatives of autistic children were closer to their children's personalities than the general population. "Spectrum" seems to describe things more accurately. I'd say, in an ideal world, we could describe differences in brain types and personalities/traits under the term Neurodiversity.

However, I've usually thought of "people different than me" as "society people": mostly having an economic/class connotation, but also containing negative social traits like being obsessed with other people's status and things like that.

Can't reply because if captcha

Why loathe it?

In a world that has no good terms to denote "nonautistics" its the least loathsome term possible.

"Normal" doesnt work. A non autistic person could be a neurotic wierdo without being autistic. And many are!

"Allistic" doesnt mean anything. It sounds like the person is some kind of "jack of all trades" aptitude wise, which has nothing to do with whether you're autistic or not.

"Neurotypical" mean that your nerves are wired in the typical way. Its not particularly judgemental towards either autistics, nor non autistics. Its the least loathsome term for non autistics Ive run across. So I use it.

I'm guessing you don't like the idea of aspies being viewed as kooks. Like when there's a shooting and they make a point saying the killer had Aspergers. What bothers me about referring to non-autistics as loathsome, is I think it adds to a notion the autistic people have a major grudge against most of society. I think it just adds to a negative stereotype. 'Those rotten stinking NT's I hate them'.

Ah so, that makes sense. Thanks.

I don't see the term 'NT' as having an intrinsically negative connotation. It's like 'gay' - some people use it in a derogatory sense, but others just see it as a neutral word describing a specific type of person.

Yes, the term has been corrupted from a neutral standpoint into creating a scapegoat for all Autistic problems. "Damn those Neurotypicals!"

Like with any word/term it depends on how it's being used. You don't use it as a term of contempt, but many others do. And I believe you are right, that what it often really means is specific jerks who made that person's life miserable. But I think it is also often someone pinning a negative label on most everyone.

@naturalplastic:

In addition to what's already been said, I'm not particularly accepting of the idea of meaningful "neurotypes", so the implication of such in the term sticks in my craw.

"Normal" isn't quite accurate either, as you pointed out. But it works well enough for me and I'm a lot more comfortable with it.

Hmmm... Not sure if you,I, and Babybird, are all on the same page or not. I was talking about the term itself being 'loathsome'. Loathsome because its unasthetic, or misleading. Not necessarily that it makes the people you're labeling look "loathsome". Though if I considered a label to be derogatory to the folks so labelled then -yes- that would be a factor in me considering the label "loathsome" as well. But I dont think that calling NTs "NTs" is derogatory to NTs.

And people on WP use "NT" in sentences frequently because you have to call them something. And since a site like this is a safe place for ASD's to vent you're going to see folks say nasty things about "nts" here. But they would do the same if we decided to call NTs "babycakes",instead, or whatever. "Those damned babycakes wont cut me any slack!".

I think "neurotypical" gives the idea that all of them think the same way, which is not true.
But on the other hand, autists have a different way of thinking.

The "others" gives the idea that there is a separation between us, which is not true neither.

"normal" gives the idea that because we are different, we are inferior, not true.

I quite like the term "non-autistic" proposed above.