why is the word neurotypical used on this forum all the time

Post Reply New Topic

why is the word neurotypical used on this forum all the time?
as it confuses people looking at this forum who don't know what neurotypical means and its not in the collins or oxford.

True, jargon needs to be learned.

It refers to everyone who doesn't have autism of some kind, like people are so easily categorize into "autistic" and "not autistic". For some NT = the people who are as*holes to me because I'm autistic and not like them and for others its a type of bogeyman. Maybe there's truth to the term but I don't like it.

It's a positive descriptor, as opposed to a negative such as non-autistic. Positive descriptors are often less likely to cause offence.
It is a term accepted by National Autistic Society (UK) and a number of other groups, so it's not just on this forum

I thought neurotypical meant anyone thaat is not on the autistic spectrum but it may be too broad a description of people off the autistic spectrum. Also a person without a developmental disability of any kind is also termed allistic and neurotypical is a wide spectrum including some neurological conditions and British learning disabilities for example Down syndrome could be seen as neurotypical but not allistic. That well that is what i think anyway.

Autism FAQs and Terms: http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt186115.html

Also, a google search for the world will find its meaning plastered all over the web.

The problem is that it's a positive descriptor applied to a 'demographic' that is defined by a negative trait: the absence of autism. It's very much an 'everybody else' category. Of course, one could say that 'neurotypicality' belongs on a broader spectrum of neurology including autism, but the problem I have with this is that the very term 'neurotypical' was coined by autistics, and not so much by anyone else with other neurological disorders. So it's too much of an insider's term for me to be of any use, and on top of that people are never certain whether 'neurotypical' should mean anyone who is not autistic, or anyone who has no mental disorder.

Honestly, while I've recently adopted using the word, for concerns of conciseness and clarity on this forum, I would prefer the word 'normal people'. So sue me.

It's a useful, descriptive term, so it's used. Of course someone who's not familiar with the subject of the forum won't know all the terms, but the same could be said for almost any forum.

I prefer to think of and use it as meaning someone who is not impaired in life by a psychological condition or state.

Actually, I think defining NTs as people who lack autism is a really weird decision. It's not a negative trait at all. NTs have a lot of traits that autistic people tend not to have. I would argue that autism is more defined by negative traits than NT ever will be.

Agreed. Some do also use the term neurodiverse / neurodiversity.

I use the term ''neurotypical'' as a person who had typically developed as a child and doesn't have any diagnosable neurological conditions that affect the individual's behaviour and learning in any way that signiffictantly differs from the norm enough to be notable. (or physical conditions that also affect the brain like Down's Syndrome), either mild, moderate or severe, which are obviously varied from person to person with a condition.

I never believe that Autism is the only disorder in the whole world. Just like cancer is not the only illness in the whole world, there are plenty of other illnesses people can get besides cancer.

I think it's used mostly because people don't like seeing them described as "normal." because, if the general population is described as "normal," that makes the rest of us "abnormal." and it's hard for some not to see that as a value judgement, rather than a simple descriptor.

This.
I actually get offended when people call NTs ''normal'', because then I think of people who do wicked things to other people and children and animals, and still get to be called ''normal people'' whereas people like me are referred to as ''abnormal''. Anyway, I don't use the word ''normal'' to describe a whole person, I just use it in a subjective form like ''he has normal social skills'', ''he has a normal relationship'', et cetera.

Meh. I don't mind being categorized as abnormal. What I mind is having a group of millions of people who all have the meaningless umbrella label of "normal." "Normal" doesn't mean anything when applied to an infinitely diverse group. Neurotypical indicates information about the subject. It's just good writing habit to use the most precise word available.