Language about autism

For me, like many autistic people, precise language is important. But unfortunately not all autistic people agree on the language that’s best to use about autism. This is an attempt to summarise the main points about language and autism to promote understanding. If you’re talking about autism to an autistic person, though, you can also ask what language that person uses, or pick up the language that you hear them using.

Identity-first language

Identity-first vs. person-first is one of the big controversies of how you talk about autism. In other words, do you say “autistic person” or “person with autism”? You can see that I use “autistic person” and it seems likely that the majority of autistic people do too, and many of them – like Pete Wharmby – have written very clearly about it. Person-first language developed to prevent people with long term illnesses or disabilities being marginalised – you emphasise that someone is a person, rather than they have a disability. That may well make a lot of sense about a lot of conditions, and it may also have made a lot of sense in the past when the idea of seeing the person beyond the disability was a lot more controversial than it is now.

In the case of autism, however, many of us don’t regard autism as something we are “with”. It is part of who we are. If you took away the autism, I’m not sure who I would be, but it wouldn’t me; it’s part of my identity. There are plenty of characteristics that are part of a person’s identity rather than something they are “with”. For example – you wouldn’t say “a person with being gay” or “a person with being a parent” or whatever. Things that we regard as positive can be part of a positive identity, and for a lot of autistic people it’s important that the words they use make that clear. Autism is part of who I am, so I’d much rather refer to myself as an “autistic person” than a “person with autism”.

Autism is a “superpower”

Many people like to refer to autism as a “superpower” but that tends to down play the difficulties that autistic people face. After all, you hardly need reasonable adjustments for a superpower do you? I prefer not to use this language, but it’s not clear cut, so if you’re interested, please see my more nuanced thinking here.

“Suffering” from autism

I prefer to avoid the expression “suffering from autism” because autism is part of my identity. Also, the vast majority of the suffering experienced by autistics is unnecessary. We experience overwhelmed senses, misunderstandings and stigma, but those aren’t things that autism makes inevitable. They are things that happen because society doesn’t understand us or fears us or simply isn’t designed for us. If I was able to control my environment so that my sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch didn’t get overwhelmed, and if those around me fully accepted my autistic identity, then I would not have much to suffer from.

Autism is a “difference” not a disability

Given what I’ve said about not wanting to use the expression “suffering from autism” you might think that I’d reject the idea that autism is a disability too. However, I don’t, and that’s partly because disabilities have legal protections, which is a good thing. If I have a disability, then there are reasonable adjustments I can access – for example for job interviews – which make it more likely that I can do my best. And that’s a good thing.

But is autism really a disability in real life? Some people argue that if society was perfectly adapted to and accepting of autistic people then I and other autistic people wouldn’t have any problems. Autism would then be a difference and not a disability at all. This thinking is linked to the social model of disability which you can read about here. I disagree with that because although many of the things that I find difficult are caused by society, some of them are actually intrinsic to my autism. If I go outside on a bright sunny day, then my eyes hurt. That’s not society’s fault – it’s the result of hyper-sensitive senses. If I hear a loud noise, my ears will hurt, and if I eat many foods my mouth will hurt. Bright sun, loud noises and strong tastes occur in nature and cannot be got rid of by changes in society. You can work round them (sun glasses, ear defenders, careful menu choices) but not get rid of them. So I would say that there are aspects of my autism that definitely are inherently disabling, although the difficulties caused by lack of acceptance by other people are much greater.

Autism as a “mental illness”

I’ve written in more detail about this here, but as a general rule, if you’re describing someone’s autism as a mental illness, it will probably come out sounding as though you’re trying to invalidate their opinions.

Neurodiversity vs neurodivergent vs neurodifferent

“Neurodiversity” is a term that means “a variety of neuro-types” or, in plainer language “a number of different kinds of brain wiring”. Technically, one person cannot be “neurodiverse;” “neurodiverse” has to describe a group of people who have different kinds of brain wiring amongst them. A group of neurotypicals is not neurodiverse, and a group of autistics is not neurodiverse, but a group of neurotypicals and autistics together would be neurodiverse, because they would have variation amongst them. Again, using the technically correct language, an autistic person or group of people should be described as “neurodivergent” which means “neurologically differing from what’s normal”.

[If you’re thinking that was all a bit turgid – welcome to the level of precision autistic people are happy with in our language.]

Not everyone agrees on using the technically and grammatically correct language, however. People dodge the word “autistic” in our culture because “autistic” can be used as an insult. It shouldn’t be, but it is. In common speech “neurodiverse” is sometimes used as a euphemism for both “autistic” and “neurodivergent” because it sounds kinder to call someone “diverse” than “divergent” ; “divergent” can sound like it has a value judgement in it. For that reason, some people also prefer “neurodifferent”, which is grammatically correct and doesn’t have that tricky “divergent” word in it.

I personally don’t have strong views on this one, but many autistic people do, so as with all points of language, check that the person you’re talking to is happy.

In conclusion…

Having written all that down I’m not totally sure what language to use myself and it really is pretty tricky. If you check what language the autistic person you’re speaking to wants to use, though, you are unlikely to be wrong. And in terms of things that are generally OK, I’d recommend (without guarantees!):

• “autistic person” as opposed to “person with autism”;
• “autism is a brain difference that has the legal protections of a disability” rather than “autism is a disability” OR “autism isn’t a disability”; and
• “most of the suffering an autistic person experiences will be the result of society’s response to autism rather that autism itself” as opposed to “a person suffers from autism” OR “a person doesn’t suffer from autism”.