Another expert opinion

Post Reply New Topic

I just read this today on msnbc..

So she's basically arguing semantics. Does anything change if we all call it "SuperSpecialBrainHappyHappy" or whatever? No. It reminds me of the migration of terminology applied to mental retardation. When too many people came to associate the term ret*d with the people so labeled, it was seen as derogatory, though it's actually a very appropriate, literal term. The same is true for the word disorder, which is a valid descriptor for conditions which fall outside the normal order. The words themselves are sterile and neutral. Changing the terminology isn't going to alter anything. The new terms will slowly become associated with the same conceptions that lead to the discarded terms being vilified, and you're back in the same position.

I'm annoyed by people who want to do away with labels for the sake of making everyone (or themselves) feel better. People are different, and sometimes they're different in a manner similar enough to be useful as a descriptor of that difference. It's what words were invented for. People with no hair are bald. Cars with open cabins are convertibles. Money not made by the government is counterfeit. Ultimately, it's the real world subject/object and people's experience of it that shapes people's beliefs about it.

I also reject the parental stance that such people have which says I shouldn't be labeled. I don't feel that having AS is a negative thing, so I'm fine with the label. It's nice to know there are others like me in some regards, and provides an avenue for me to find information and research that may be of value to me. It doesn't define me, but it does describe aspects of me. People don't think twice about the value of labels such as diabetic or asthmatic, but blanch at anything involving the brain, which is held in some supernatural regard. I don't see the difference.

The problem with labels is that they may not be accurate and can do more damage than good for an individual. They categorize people and "stereotype" them which is fundamentally wrong.

I don't mind my label-in fact, I rather enjoy it, and I don't care what it is called. What I care about is that people that speak out about it are always doing so in a negative way, which misleads a lot of people to thinking we are absolutely miserable and that we want it gone. They don't hear our side of things usually and are ill-informed. Every parent thinks their child is a genius and doesn't feel right about a label due to it. It doesn't matter what their kid is doing, they are a freakin genius... to the parent. So we get all of these riled up parents, ranting and raving about how it should be gone, how horrible it makes them (the parents) feel, and it overpowers how we actually feel about it...

Sorry, random thoughts.

Bingo. People generally form an opinion on another person with the first 30 seconds. Their predispositions toward them occur within the first 2 seconds (based on the sorts of facial queues and looks that those of us with AS don't usually pick up on). Similarly, opinions are formed simply based on the form of language that something takes. "Disorder," for instance, is associated with something being broken or sick, there is an inherent negativity, an implication that that thing must be fixed or cured, it is defective. Simply by saying "Autism Spectrum Disorder," you've already loaded someone with the opinion that the individual with an ASD is defective and must be fixed, you've caused a negative opinion right from the start. I'm not sure whether "Syndrome," has the same negative connotations, I tend to think of it as a neutral term, but that may just be me. Still, don't underestimate the power of language in making people form quick opinions, opinions which will often not be easily swayed once they're formed. If you believe that AS is a syndrome which doesn't necessarily need cured or eliminated, then the label we use to describe it is very, very important within wider society, it defines how others think of us.

Words and their meaning remind me of money. A country can try to peg its currency's value to an artificial amount, but ultimately the market will determine their true worth. Though it may take a while for the value to adjust, information can't be fully suppressed, and it ultimately adjusts. If there's too much money being printed, or the government isn't reliable in paying on its bonds, inflation results. Nobody's fooled. What matters are the fundamentals that underlie the tokens.

For matters in which someone has no personal experience, I buy that the specific wording shapes their specious evaluation of it. Perhaps hearing that someone is a "little person" as opposed to a "midget" makes someone view the condition more favorably. If you actually know someone with the condition, however, experience trumps pragmatics.

I think, on a more fundamental level, I'm just not impressed with the idea that eschewing or rebranding labels changes anything in a lasting way. If there's anything wrong with labels, it's ignorance on the part of someone who doesn't understand the condition the label represents. Changing the label won't change that.

The term disorder isn't technically correct anyway. It's Asperger's Syndrome.

True, but I would argue that it is wishful thinking to say that people don't stereotype simply because they say so. It's the very nature of our brains to do so. We all pay lip service to the idea that we're eglitarian, and are quick to point out when someone else is making a socially unacceptable assumption, but we can't change our nature.

Here's a nice blog post stating this more eloquently.

I, for one, APPRECIATE posts like the one you made above. Your avatar is nice also! Keep those random thoughts coming!

Frankly, I think getting away from the ideas of "pathology" and "disorder" in general are probably a good thing. There are difficulties which naturally come with particular conditions; however, I think a pathological view OVER-focuses on the bad and ignores the good, the abilities, all too often.

I don't mean to not label someone autistic. That is what we are. It is accurate. And can be a helpful label.

However, for such a negative connotation to be attached to labels, this is a bad thing. And I think science and the public should become more aware of this. It is like the analogy, "I am not a defective dog, I'm a cat": same thing. It doesn't suggest to not call a cat a cat. It simply means don't always view cats in reference to a world of dogs, because it's a fruitless and potentially harmful comparison.

So for those who think words don't matter, I don't think this is true at all. If people MAKE words matter, they do. And right now, the media and the public are so negatively focused that I think it matters even more what is said.