What do you call non NT's who arn't aspies?

Post Reply New Topic

You know, people who are obviously not NT, who come off as really quite different, original, odd, weird, but who are also not autistic, maybe they have some mental illness, but primarily they have a personality that is so different that they just can't be NT.

What would you call this person?

what got me thinking of this was Ethernal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, remember Clementine in it? She made me think "She's not autistic, but shes really different, unstable, odd, what do you call that?"
Or how about the basketcase chick in The Breakfast Club? or Vivian in Snow Cake, who has an aspie mother.

generic terms like oddball, weirdo, crazy and such don't do it justice, is their a more proper term for these fellow travalers?

Are you using "aspie" to generically mean "autistic?"

Anyway, someone who is not neurotypical is neuroatypical. They have diagnosable conditions (like ADHD, dyslexia, dyspraxia, bipolar, etc) that place them outside the NT category.

I don't know that it would necessarily apply to any of the three people you listed as they are fictional characters written with perhaps no diagnoses in mind at all.

Do you want to put them all in one box? What about outsiders? I love outsiders

i am using aspie to mean all ASD's in this case

unfortunately neuroatypical is a cumbersome term.

Neurodiverse

'Others'

a NAW (Non Autistic Weirdo) (I might be one of these)

That makes no sense.



NaT.



I always thought that "neurodiversity" included all neurotypes, not just neurotypes that aren't NT.

Oh true. That makes sense. Neurodivergent?

Isn't NT just a term for someone who isn't Autistic? Thus anyone who isn't autistic is automatically NT?

I could be wrong, though!

i realise that, it was a mistake, but I meant all ASD's

people with schizophrenia, bipolar, personality disorders and various other mental conditions are not NT, so i think you're wrong.

NaT would do, I'd like that to become popular.

It's irritaing to society just to be different, so we will add a silent "G" to this as: GNaT.

I think politically correct terms would vary, depending on individual preference, and whom one is talking to in describing an individual.

The girl in the breakfast club was obviously troubled, although we could attempt a diagnosis for her fictional character. Troubled would probably be a common term, since if she existed in real life, she probably wouldn't have a diagnosis and we wouldn't be qualified to make one for her.

We go through life and see eccentric, troubled and many other types of people outside of the norm, that might have neurological differences and could possibly be given a diagnosis if the person were to visit a psychiatrist.

Eccentric could mean Aspie, ADHD, Autistic, Bi-Polar or Schizophrenic
Troubled could mean Aspie, ADHD, Autistic, Bi-Polar or Schizophrenic

Just using those 4 Diagnoses as an example because they have all been linked to similar genetic markers in recent studies. So it would be safe to assume they may involve neurological differences.

Eccentric is a nicer term for oddball or weirdo
Troubled is a nicer term for crazy or unstable

It would be nice if we could just call everyone neurodivergent or describe them by their name, but it's human nature to categorize atypical behavior in people, so that won't work in everyday conversation, unless one is talking to someone who understands Autism Politics or is using it as a term for personal understanding.

My personal rule was to come up with the kindest descriptor I could think of that wasn't disparaging.

Eccentric and/or Troubled covers quite a bit of neurodivergent territory in describing atypical behavior. Neurodivergent sounds the best to me, but it's not a small enough category for a human nature designed to categorize atypical behaviors in people.

I would guess someone who isn't NT would HAVE to be either on the Autism Spectrum or MAYBE mentally ill. That's all that makes sense to me.

Can you NOT be neurotypical and NOT have some disorder or something else wrong with you?
I doubt very seriously that minds are supposed to be a 'one size fits all' neurology.

There is no clear concensus as to what constitutes a neuroatypical person. It ranges from just non-autistic people to no mental health illnesses to all mental health illnesses and neurological conditions. The terms Neurotypical, Neuroatypical, and Neurodiverse have no significance in the medical community, so it is all a matter of opinion at this point as to who is neuroatypical. It's pretty easy to define a person as neuroatypical when they have a diagnosis, but next to impossible to define who is neurotypical by observing someone, depending on what diagnoses are included in a definition of neuroatypical.

Dyslexia is included as a neuroatypical condition by most opinion now. There is no outward behavioral or social characteristic that defines a person with dyslexia so it is impossible to observe someone's physical behavior or social interaction to determine whether or not they are neurotypical if we include dyslexia as one of the diagnosed conditions that makes a person neuroatypical.

The newer definitions are relevant to individual rights in the neurodiversity movement, but it is no longer possible to make any kind of objective judgement by observing outward physical behavior as to whether or not someone is neurotypical, when using the newer definitions.

I'm still trying to figure it out as I go. I didn't realize how diverse the opinions were on this until recently.

I think the problem is that we can no longer accurately define people we observe with normal social interaction as people who are NT with the new definition of what diagnoses are included as Neuroatypical.

I have a vague memory of getting in trouble in the psych ward for referring to the other patients as 'psychos'

I don't use an all encompassing term usually. If an explanation is required about someone's behavior I might say "she's a little troubled."

_________________
http://defeatingthedoginthedaytime.blogspot.com/

the trials and tribulations of a girl pretending to be normal