NT vs Non-Austistic (NA)

Post Reply New Topic

I humbly propose a slight nomenclature change when referring to non autistic people, Neuro-Typical suggests that they are completely "normal", and in many cases this is not quite true. My mother and girlfriend, for example, are clearly not AS, yet I would sharply hesitate to call either of them "typical", my mother having many AS like traits and my GF having a few tics of her own that I would call far from typical. I also don't like the way the term "NT" is often used as a derogatory, fostering an us vs them mentality which I really don't feel is healthy for anyone. I know the term NT is pretty well entrenched and don't really hope to replace it, but perhaps supplement and supplant it with a more accurate term.

Any thoughts?

Last edited by Unorthodox on 18 Feb 2010, 5:13 am, edited 1 time in total.

You're right - "neuro-typical" is not really a meaningful or precise expression. I heard NTs being called "traditional people" - but I personally don't want to be described as "traditional". This term suggests that being an Aspie is something new, or progressive.

If we were to start using NA how soon would it take for it to be used as an insult too?

Maybe, maybe not. "Typical" in and of itself can be used in a disparaging way, where as "non-autistic" is pretty neutral. Besides which, my main point is that NT is often not an accurate description of a non-autistic person, and is also more easily understood by people who aren't up on their AS community lexicon.

Hey, my NA thing is catching

It makes more sense, because actual NTs are in the minority since loads also have things like dyslexia, etc.

I agree with the idea of non-autistic instead of NT. I think there was another thread about this topic. Though, there will be a bit of time before it becomes commonly used.

I often use non-Autistic, but I will not use "NA" to refer to people of any kind.

I've always thought this but as NA is not generally used it's difficult to start using it. Perhaps I could use it in long posts, starting with saying 'non-autistic (NA)' and then just using 'NA'. My mum said NT sounded derogatory but that's not my problem with it - my problem is it's not the same as 'non-autistic'. For example, people with Down Syndrome or clinical depression are not neurologically typical (well I suppose you could argue the latter are, but they are not mentally typical, certainly, it's how much distinction you make between the brain and mind...), but these conditions do not make them autistic. They think differently from 'normal' and from what's normal for autistic people.

I like the term, NA, better than the term, NT. It's not as harsh.

I would STILL think you mean the term Non-Applicable, but non-autistic seems to have a friendlier name to it compared to NT, I doubt anyone would take it the right way at times.

Pretty interesting.

I always see people write Non-Applicable as N/A, not NA.

I like the term NA because I too acknowledge the fact that NT is in itself a minority as compared to the masses. When I use the term NT, I think about other groups that would not be included---other differences. So, NA should be used in my opinion---as long as it isn't considered as an insult.

Hmm, I too write N/A when I mean "not applicable", I actually don't recall having seen it written as just NA. I suppose non-autistic could be abbreviated NAS (non-autism spectrum) though that might cause confusion with the rapper of that name, perhaps N-A or N-AS, or even N/AS would be more appropriate.

NAS also stands for National Autistic Society.

As a NA person, I prefer the term to NT because as you are all saying NT is simply imprecise. What's typical, anyway? I'd argue that the happy, social and handicap free people many here are imagining are probably the minority, rather than the norm - an ideal.

As for the "NT being used as an insult", I don't really care. People who wish to use a slur will use NA as a slur, too. We've got to make the distinction in some way and NA just makes sense.

I tried to use N-AS as Not-Autistic Spectrum before, I think it will take a while before many people will use it. NT is in common use but it's not accurate, although some may disagree with this viewpoint.