zlacker

[parent] [thread] 10 comments
1. nis0s+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-12-06 13:17:28
This fits in with another thread on an article about over-diagnosis.

I think it’s safe to say that if someone appears “weird” to the hive mind of a community, that person is more likely to be correctly diagnosed.

There are people who desire a diagnosis for special treatment, but if the first time you find out about a person’s diagnosis is after knowing them as “weird” the whole time, then they’re not acting weird on purpose, or saying they are X for attention or special treatment.

Disabled people, mentally or otherwise, usually like to keep their business to themselves, unless they absolutely don’t need to. Some mentally disabled people might even forgo getting special treatment via disability services at their colleges, or getting parking permits for disability because they’re not interested in bringing attention to their difficulties or differences, or using these issues as a cause for special treatment. Though, I’d advised that people who need accommodations should get them.

I also saw a comment about disability becoming normalized due to late stage capitalism, which sounds like a thesis out of postmodernist thinking. The fact is that group behavior has always isolated “weird” behaviors and put undue negative attention on them, but it just happened to be the case that that weird behavior was evolutionary helpful, which is why it has persisted for millions of generations of humans across their evolutionary history.

This only applies to high-functioning categories of behaviors. But I’ve found that more often than not, it’s the social reaction of groups that is the problem for high-functioning autists, and less the autism itself. Maybe neurotypical behavior or neurotypical mindedness is the disease because I don’t understand why or how some people find it so hard to think differently. Are they not individuals, are they zombies?

replies(2): >>nis0s+n1 >>bitwiz+tQ
2. nis0s+n1[view] [source] 2025-12-06 13:28:10
>>nis0s+(OP)
Let’s also shed light on what behaviors neurotypicals usually have a problem with that they cast as negatives in high-functioning autists:

1) Not being mindful of hierarchy

2) Not being mindful of socially determined rules, that is rules which are not codified in any official language of conduct

3) Not wanting to socialize, or wanting to socialize differently

4) Trouble with emotional regulation, possibly due to social issues

Tell me, which of these points, and there are many more, point to this being an individual’s problem?

For high-functioning autists, the problem is other people.

People need to realize that they’re not great to deal with on average, and if someone chooses to not engage with you, don’t take that as an insult. Maybe you’re all better off not interacting with each other, but that doesn’t imply causing someone financial, emotional or physical harm just because they’re autistic.

Society both explicitly and implicitly punishes high-functioning autism.

replies(1): >>LorenP+iL
◧◩
3. LorenP+iL[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-06 19:44:59
>>nis0s+n1
But note that the not interacting bit messes with you in both the job and romantic markets. That's not intentional but it sure hurts them.
replies(1): >>nis0s+y01
4. bitwiz+tQ[view] [source] 2025-12-06 20:30:57
>>nis0s+(OP)
> I think it’s safe to say that if someone appears “weird” to the hive mind of a community, that person is more likely to be correctly diagnosed.

It's officially frowned upon, but doctors still use the term "FLK" (for "funny looking kid") to describe babies or children with nonspecific facial deformities, which are pretty reliable indicators of cognitive or learning disability even if the doctor can't put his finger on what the deformity actually is.

> This only applies to high-functioning categories of behaviors. But I’ve found that more often than not, it’s the social reaction of groups that is the problem for high-functioning autists, and less the autism itself. Maybe neurotypical behavior or neurotypical mindedness is the disease because I don’t understand why or how some people find it so hard to think differently. Are they not individuals, are they zombies?

It's the uncanny valley effect. I'm convinced that one of our primal atavistic fears, besides snakes, spiders, and so forth, is "something evil or hostile disguised as one of our own". In the EEA this fear would have protected a community against spies, as well as profoundly sick (e.g. rabies) individuals who risked spreading their disease throughout the whole village. Different cultures give different names to creatures of this sort: vampire, zombie, changeling, skinwalker, bakemono, etc.

Profoundly autistic people are clearly disabled, and so attract nurturing and care; "high functioning" autistic people resemble humans who can function independently, but their behavior is different enough to trigger what I call the Kendrick Lamar response ("they not like us, they not like us") and hence are viewed with fear and suspicion. It's a flaw in the neurotypical mindset born of a trait that helped preserve neurotypical communities against invasion or outbreak, but it's not very specific so others get caught in its dragnet.

That's my idea anyway. Maybe I'm just steelmanning the NT perspective. There has to be a reason why the poor blighters are the way they are...

replies(1): >>nis0s+kS
◧◩
5. nis0s+kS[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-06 20:50:19
>>bitwiz+tQ
> There has to be a reason why the poor blighters are the way they are...

Maybe I am biased, but to me NT appear as cognitively lazy. They don’t question norms or standards, unless those norms or standards interfere with their feed-fuck cycles.

replies(1): >>bitwiz+Y21
◧◩◪
6. nis0s+y01[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-06 22:08:09
>>LorenP+iL
It shouldn’t interfere with the job market, but the sad truth is that NTs need to make everything into a social game because otherwise they can’t compete or survive.
replies(1): >>LorenP+F71
◧◩◪
7. bitwiz+Y21[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-06 22:28:12
>>nis0s+kS
They come built in with a set of heuristics that help them interact with other NT minds very well with very little cognitive effort, so why spend it if you don't need to? There's a certain perverse genius to it which you'd see if you spend any time around profoundly NT people: for example those who fit the "theatre kid" archetype, or even skilled marketers. They can shape the trajectory of an interpersonal relationship in real time as easily as we breathe.

Expending large amounts of cognitive effort to better understand and deal with others can be exhausting. We do it because we have to just to survive. The benefit is we have a lot of uncommitted neural capacity potentially freed up for other things, like experimenting with computers. But it's a stiff price to pay, and in the EEA it's advantageous to be able to participate in a cohesive group without thinking much about it. Our brains are our most energy-hungry organs, and sustenance could get scarce...

replies(1): >>nis0s+Ij1
◧◩◪◨
8. LorenP+F71[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-06 23:09:57
>>nis0s+y01
It does because you aren't as good at presenting yourself, you don't fare well at corporate politics etc.
replies(1): >>nis0s+xi1
◧◩◪◨⬒
9. nis0s+xi1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-07 00:37:56
>>LorenP+F71
Neither of those things is job related, necessarily
◧◩◪◨
10. nis0s+Ij1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-07 00:49:24
>>bitwiz+Y21
It depends on the task at hand, that unspoken understanding can work against your best interests. In general, the NT way leads to stagnation and complacency for building and maintaining systems as conditions change. I am not saying one way of thinking is better than the other, you bring up a great point about conserving resources. I think survival pressures have always necessitated a balance of human cognitive abilities. I guess only time can tell how things may transpire, and what’s actually useful. Maybe there’s a way to simulate this in silico…
replies(1): >>bitwiz+Ik1
◧◩◪◨⬒
11. bitwiz+Ik1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-07 01:00:16
>>nis0s+Ij1
For thousands of years, the way humans lived changed so slowly as to be imperceptible. That's no longer the case. Starry-eyed types who think of their autistic children as "indigo" or "crystal" children may wax poetic about autism being the next phase of human evolution, but recent scientific work lends a kernel of credence to that: autism is now thought to be one of the side effects of rapid changes to our brains that were evolutionarily necessary to cope with our rapidly changing world and circumstances.
[go to top]