Feminist Aspie

Says nothing, quietly judges you, goes home to anonymously blog.

Dear Anyone Who’s Ever Had Their Disability Accommodations Ridiculed…

I’m afraid I’ve finally succumbed to The Open Letter. I was originally going to write a post aimed at the people who have spent the last few days trolling the NUS Women’s Conference hashtag, its organisers and participants, or just generally laughing loudly all over the internet, because they (like all NUS conferences have for years) requested the use of British Sign Language applause (“jazz hands”) rather than clapping, due to the impact sudden loud noises can have on people who have anxiety disorders, who are autistic and/or have other sensory processing issues, who are hard of hearing, the list goes on. I was going to write something about how all this mockery is massively ableist and horrible and should not continue. But if there’s one thing I’ve learned over the last few days, it’s that there’s little point trying to reason with the aforementioned ableist douchecanoes (some of whom have sadly been fellow disabled people; I’ll get to that later) – most of them are just trolling for the fun of it, quite a few of them seem to just hate activists/students/feminists/women and have taken the opportunity to be awful towards us without giving much thought to why, and all of them are a lot like the horrible school bullies I’m sure you’ll be all too familiar with. I didn’t fancy feeling like I was banging my head against a brick wall anymore, so instead I’m writing to you; disabled people who, this week or otherwise, have been subjected to that sort of treatment for requesting an accommodation abled people aren’t necessarily aware of – so most disabled people, I would imagine.

Bullies (let’s just call them what they are), especially in large numbers, can plant seeds of doubt in our minds and make us question ourselves. I don’t know about you, but I constantly find myself asking close friends for validation against those people. “Am I ridiculous, over-reacting, childish, selfishDoes the fact that I even need to ask you these things just demonstrate that they’re true? You’re nice to my face, but are you all laughing behind my back? Would you laugh at me if one of the adjustments you make for me was instead presented to you out of context on Twitter?” I’m sure I’m not the only one, so I thought I’d try to offer some of that validation to the rest of you.

So: your disability accommodations are valid. You’re not ridiculous or selfish for simply wanting the same level of access and comfort as abled people already get all the time, because the world is designed to meet their needs already. Sure, maybe you’re in a position where you can do without it if and when you have to, but at what cost to you? Abled people don’t have to just deal with it, and neither should we. Anyway, surely making your life easier in a way that doesn’t harm anyone else at all can only be a good thing? Remember that the only reason there’s been such a big fuss in the first place is because abled people are so insistent and and relentless in refusing to even allow a conference they’re not at to make a minor change in hand movement that harms nobody – they are the ones over-reacting. Please keep that in mind; just because they’re so numerous and vocal doesn’t mean that they’re right.

“How do you expect to survive in the real world?”, they might tell you. “You just need to work on your difficulties!” What they don’t know (or wilfully ignore) is that you already are doing that work, more than they could ever knowSociety or the “real world” (which, let’s not forget, is a human construct so shouldn’t be accepted as a given) is inaccessible and harmful in a multitude of ways. It is designed to exclude people like us, and even though it often goes un-noticed, you are working your socks off to live and to thrive in it anyway – and again, abled people don’t have to deal with that stuff at all. Most of them genuinely don’t realise this privilege, so it doesn’t occur to them that maybe they could move some of the way towards you. With apologies to Muse, they like to give an inch whilst you give them infinity. It is absolutely not selfish to more evenly distribute some of that load.

To disabled women: I’ve been saddened to see a lot of this ableism and bullying coming from abled feminists, who think that improving accessibility at the NUS Women’s Conference “trivialises feminism” or “makes women look weak”. I’m really sorry about them. I can’t believe this even needs saying, but you are not letting your gender down just by existing. You didn’t create a society which sees women as lesser – men did that. I think feminists really need to work on this ableist (and sexist!) idea that women have to be completely invulnerable, with no concept of emotions or physical or mental health or self-care, just to “earn” the respect that men automatically receive. You’re not trivialising feminism; in fact, by acting like you don’t exist and by holding women to an invincible-machine standard, it’s feminism that’s trivialising you. For what it’s worth, given that you’re facing patriarchy and ableism, and maybe some other oppressions as well, yet you’re still here trying to make a change, I think that if anything, you’re making women look amazing.

Going back to all genders now, I’m also really shocked by how many disabled people are willing to join in, say “but I have *relevant disability* and I don’t need this, they’re being ridiculous” and throw other disabled people under the bus; though maybe I shouldn’t have been, because a few years ago I probably would have been one of those people. Internalised ableism is something I’m still working on. Anyway: your access needs do not make other disabled people “look bad” – that’s based on the assumption that accommodations are a bad thing in the first place, and that assumption comes from abled people, not you. In addition, you are not the reason abled people don’t take disabled people seriously; abled people are the reason that abled people don’t take disabled people seriously. Your disability and related adjustments are not silly, cutesy or made-up just because they don’t match somebody else’s.

Having said that, it’s important to remember that the reverse is also true; other disabilities are not silly, cutesy or made-up just because they don’t match your own. I know it’s tempting to take out your frustrations on other disabled people with access needs you personally have never heard of before, to blame them for “making us look bad” whilst also potentially making yourself seem more “reasonable” and more likely to be taken seriously by abled people (“Look, you can’t call me ableist because this person agrees with me!”) – like I said, I’ve been there too. But the truth is, it’s a lot easier to attack each other than to confront abled people, because of the privilege structures involved. Think about where the structural power lies; it’s abled people and an ableist society that deny and/or ridicule your accommodations, not other disabled people.

Lastly, if it helps, something else I’ve learned this week is that the online trolls are not representative of humanity at large. It may be true that the dominant reaction of abled people to stories like this is confusion and maybe an initial “that’s ridiculous”, but most of the time, it isn’t out of malice but out of genuine ignorance, and that is something that can be changed. In amongst the awfulness of the past few days, I have been pleasantly surprised by how many of my friends took an interest in this, and were willing to listen and learn. Also, whilst it’s sad that this is the case, it seems that most people tend to be more accepting of people they know and interact with offline than of people they just find out about online, if that’s any comfort regarding the “Are my friends laughing at me behind my back?” question. Playground bullies do seem to grow up and follow us out into the world beyond the school gates, but please remember that being powerful doesn’t mean they’re right about you, or that they’re impossible to overcome.

So keep your heads up, keep fighting the good fight however you can… and then, just because it seems to annoy abled people so very much, might I suggest we celebrate with jazz hands?

7 Comments »

“Liar”: Why anonymity for sexual violence suspects is not the solution

(TRIGGER WARNINGS: Rape and other sexual violence, with detailed descriptions of victim-blaming and negative attitudes towards survivors; also mention of suicide. NOTE: In terms of the legal stuff, I’m referring to the UK throughout, although the underlying attitudes are present internationally)

The world is obsessed with proving that survivors of sexual violence are liars.

If you were in a relationship with the perpetrator, they’ll call you a liar – despite the high prevalence of relationship abuse.
If you consented at some other time, they’ll call you a liar – apparently that means you’ve given up your freedom and autonomy forever.
If you “acted normal” afterwards, and only spoke out later, they’ll call you a liar – even though abuse takes time to process, or you could have feared retribution such as being repeatedly called a liar.
If there was no sign of a physical struggle, they’ll call you a liar - even though freezing or “friending” the perpetrator is the most common survival response.
If your statements contain even the slightest inconsistency, they’ll call you a liar - even though that’s exactly what trauma does to you.
If you were drinking, they’ll call you liar - apparently you don’t have the right to drink AND maintain bodily autonomy.
If the perpetrator was drinking, they’ll call you a liar - they’ve changed their minds, turns out alcohol actually absolves you of all responsibility and also magically erases the damage done.
If you were wearing clothes more revealing than the patriarchal world would approve of, they’ll call you a liar – it seems you should have known that the awful crime of “wearing what you want” is punished with sexual violence.
If you in some way don’t conform to an often impossible, racist, transphobic, ableist, fatphobic beauty standard, they’ll call you a liar - they’ll say “who would want you?!”
If you’re a male survivor, they’ll call you a liar – because “men’s rights activists” tend to ignore the fact that men are far more likely to suffer sexual assault themselves than they are to be falsely accused, and only even vaguely acknowledge you exist when they want to shut the damn feminists up.
If you enjoy sex, they’ll call you a liar – apparently they don’t think consent makes a difference, which frankly says a lot about them.
If you’re a sex worker, they’ll call you a liar – see above, and I’m assuming these people also think it would be okay for someone to drop a load of legal textbooks on my head because, like, isn’t that what you DO?!
If you’re mentally ill/neurodivergent, they’ll call you a liar – they’ll call you crazy, they’ll say you’re living in a fantasy world, they’ll say all sorts of ableist things, they’ll gaslight you because it’s more convenient for them if it’s all in your head.

I’m zoning in on the Eleanor de Freitas case here. In short, this woman, who had bipolar disorder, made an allegation of rape, which the CPS refused to prosecute. The accused man then took out a private prosecution against her for speaking up, and the CPS took that case; Eleanor de Freitas had been receiving counselling for rape trauma, this support was cut off, and she ultimately took her own life. I wrote a few tweets about this awful case the other day, and received a reply from an obviously-fake-news-account directing me to “proof Eleanor de Freitas was lying”; it was a professional-looking dot-com domain, certainly enough to fool people, and the only “proof” it contained was… that she was mentally ill, that the police didn’t like her very much, that she bought sex toys the next day, and that she was allegedly a sex worker.

None of those things say anything about whether or not a perpetrator raped her, but in the eyes of many, these failures to comply with patriarchal norms are “proof” and she’s a liar.

You’re all liars, they say, because the legal presumption of innocence until proven guilty exists. Even though the attitudes above mean that the police often “no-crime” sexual violence, so there’s no opportunity to go to trial. Even though making false accusations is also a crime, and there suddenly everyone forgets about the legal presumption, going so far as to set up websites dedicated to portraying the accuser as guilty, on no real evidence, without a trial, when they’re already dead due to how survivors are treated by the justice system as it stands. Even though when a perpetrator of sexual violence is proven guilty, they’ll still claim it’s a miscarriage of justice and set up websites to clear his name – Ched Evans, anyone? These people don’t really care about the legal presumption of innocence until proven guilty; they only care about the societal presumption of liar liar liar liar liar.

This is the dominant attitude of society, which means it’s also the dominant attitude of our judges, our lawyers, our CPS, our police, our juries, and the media they (and we all) consume. The conviction rates for rape and sexual violence are shockingly low. Is it any wonder, then, that feminists (and others) have lost their faith in the justice system, and taken the stance of believing everyone who speaks out about sexual violence against them, providing one voice of “I believe you” in amongst the constant noise of liar?

Some people are far more concerned about men being falsely accused and “having their lives ruined” even when found innocent. Honestly, I’m not sure this actually happens – it seems to me that if it’s high-profile enough to be newsworthy, they’re portrayed sympathetically (because the accuser is a liar, obviously), and indeed, anonymity for those suspected of sexual violence is actually being considered, even though the preferential treatment here above suspects of other crimes perpetuates the liar stereotype, and it is often the case that one survivor speaking out against their perpetrator gives others the courage to come forward (because maybe, just maybe, they’ll actually be believed).

But if you really are still so concerned about innocent people suspected of sexual violence, how about ending victim-blaming attitudes, ending the liar myth, combating rape culture, and creating a society and a justice system that provides verdicts we can trust?

A petition to the Home Office Select Committee to review their recommendation on anonymity for suspects accused of rape and other forms of sexual violence can be found here.

Leave a comment »

Functioning Labels 101: What’s The Big Deal?

If you’ve seen the #HighFunctioningMeans and #FunctioningLabelsMean Twitter hashtags, or more generally read or listened to a discussion by autistic people about functioning labels, you’ll know that, well, a lot of us really don’t like them, so I thought I’d write a 101 post about why that is, and what the alternatives are.

Wait, what’s a functioning label?
Many autistic people find themselves at some point being described as having “high-functioning” or “low-functioning” autism. Which label is given to the person can depend on a number of arbitrary factors, but often involves verbal ability, ability to live independently, and (especially in children) academic ability. In other words, functioning labels are basically another way of saying whether or not you think a certain autistic person can pass for neurotypical.

What’s so bad about functioning labels?
Well for a start, “passing for neurotypical” should not be the goal. We’re not defectively neurotypical, we’re autistic, and society needs to accommodate that. Being neurotypical should not be the only correct way to function. Calling an autistic person “low-functioning” is putting them down because they’re autistic. Meanwhile, calling an autistic person “high-functioning” works in much the same way as the “you’re not like other girls” trope – it sounds like a compliment and may well be intended as such, but in reality, you’re “complimenting” the person by insulting other people like them, which only serves to teach self-loathing and harmful attitudes towards those other people.

Having said that, I would argue that “high-functioning” is not only a thinly veiled insult, it’s a threat. People who cannot or will not pretend to be neurotypical to make you comfortable – the so-called “low-functioning autistics” – are treated appallingly in our ableist world; because their disability is visible, their personhood, feelings and strengths are ignored. Those of us who are more able to pass for NT more often – the so called “high-functioning autistics” – escape much of the worst of this hatred, but at a price; because we are accepted as people with feelings and strengths, our disability is ignored. When our autism is visible, if we openly discuss it, or – heaven forbid – if we request an accommodation, we’re told we’re over-reacting, we’re manipulative, we’re over-sensitive, we’re selfish killjoys; basically, we’re told we’re faking it, and should just try harder to miraculously not be autistic. In short, “high-functioning” means “act neurotypical at all costs, or we’ll see you as Really Autistic, and you know how we treat people who we think are Really Autistic”.

This binary stems from the refusal of abled people to recognise that disability and personality can co-exist – in fact, they ALWAYS co-exist, because disabled people are people. (And if, as an abled person*, you now want to correct me on my language because people-first requires literally putting the word “person” first, maybe think about why you feel the need to go against all syntax to show that in your words, and how instead you could show that in your attitudes and your actions.) It’s also used to silence autistic people standing up for themselves and their rights as a whole; we’re either too low-functioning to really know what’s best for ourselves, or too high-functioning to “count” as autistic (unless they want to include us in scare statistics, of course!) so in the end, the only ones that neurotypical people actually listen to are… well, neurotypical people.

Surely there’s some truth in them though? You’re not like my child!
There is a good reason why I’m not like your child, or anyone else’s child, or anyone else in general; every person is different. Autistic people are people. Therefore, every autistic person is different. I am an adult; of course I’m not like your child, I’m not even like myself as a child anymore. Anyway, leaving that aside, not only are functioning labels harmful, they’re also wildly inaccurate. Here’s a quick test, which I first saw by Musings of an Aspie but have also seen by various other autistic people online, in which I’m going to describe two autistic people.

Laura is verbal, and lives independently. Over the past few years she has undertaken a variety of responsibilities and committee positions, some related to her special interests, and has used these to develop an active social life. Laura is highly organised and rule-orientated, characteristics which have greatly helped her in her studies. She very rarely has full-scale meltdowns, and given the time and space, she is virtually always able to deal with shutdowns and the aftereffects of sensory overload by herself.

Faith is often anxious, particularly in social situations and crowds, and rarely leaves home without her earphones. She often prefers to communicate by typing rather than talking, and will avoid the phone wherever possible. Faith sometimes struggles to keep up with everyday self-care/household tasks, which can lead to overload in and of itself. She has a habit of pacing around her room on her tiptoes, particularly to music, and spent a large portion of last night listening to one song on repeat and spinning.

Based on these descriptions, one of these women would be considered high-functioning. One would be considered low-functioning. These women are both the same person, more specifically me. And that last part, about listening to one song on repeat? Muse are back! 90% of the fandom would have been doing exactly the same. The only reason “Faith” would be seen as weird for doing so is because of the additional stimming as well as the rest of her description; in other words, she’s already being seen as “low-functioning” so even the most innocuous of new information is automatically used to support that existing bias.

I include that last point to show how much of our “functioning level” is highly context-dependent. Everyone sometimes acts differently or feels more or less able to cope based on their mood, stress, events in their life, illness, being hungry or tired or uncomfortable, or even depending on where they are or who they’re with. As @theoriesofminds notes, functioning labels mean “how was your day going when you saw the person who diagnosed you”. It’s random, it’s arbitrary, and it’s based on two stereotypes in which no person wholly fits. So no, there isn’t much truth in them at all!

Okay, but some people do need more/less/different support to other people; how else can I acknowledge this?
As I said above, every autistic person is different, so in my opinion, the only way to accurately get across the support someone needs is to talk about them as an individual. For example, based on me again (though not my real name):

Gemma can communicate verbally, though in many cases finds typing easier, and finds the phone particularly difficult. She lives independently, but sometimes struggles to keep up with everyday self-care/household tasks. Gemma is often very anxious, particularly in social situations and crowds, but she very rarely has full-scale meltdowns, and given the time and space she is virtually always able to deal with shutdowns and the effects of sensory overload by herself.

Having said that, the support often depends on the situation. For example, in exams, I don’t need any particular accommodations, but another autistic person may need to, say, take the exam in a different room away from the distraction of other people. In parties, I might need my friends to occasionally check I’m okay and know to get me out of there/what to do if things go wrong, but another autistic person might not need any extra help at all. In short, functioning labels can be replaced with “you should be aware that this person is autistic, and in particular they have Autistic Traits A, B and C and will therefore need Supports D, E and F” and again answer any further questions based on the person themselves.

To sum up:
Functioning labels are used to demean and silence autistic people; they hold up “pretending to be neurotypical” as the ultimate ideal,and are based on two opposing stereotypes which no autistic person wholly fits. In addition, they are inaccurate due to being highly context-dependent; in the examples I use above, a band changes my perceived functioning level. Seriously, that’s how fragile these things are. As an alternative way of describing the strengths, weaknesses and support needs of the autistic people in your life, try talking about them as individuals, and actually describing those strengths, weaknesses and support needs rather than trying to force them into an ill-fitting box.


*I say “as an abled person” because some people with disabilities to prefer to be called “people with disabilities” and I don’t have a problem with that – it’s not what I use myself, but if that’s how other people want to refer to themselves, that’s their business, not mine. However, what I DO have a problem with is abled people reading posts and articles about the ableism they’re perpetuating and essentially reacting with “you’re the one who’s being offensive to yourself because I can’t see ‘disabled people’ as people”.

10 Comments »

Why I Need Feminism

TRIGGER WARNING: Brief discussion of rape/consent/victim-blaming, weight/food/disordered eating

I haven’t got time to do a proper blog post but felt I should probably acknowledge International Women’s Day (and also my executive function has gone completely to pot and I’m procrastinating from All The Things) so here’s a very quick introspective self-centred list of reasons why, despite the constant societal message that it’s irrational and whiny and over-reacting and silly, I still need feminism.

The loudest, most persistent, most sure-of-themselves voices are automatically deemed to be the best voices.

Living independently won’t get easier if I ever marry. If anything, it’s likely to get harder as I’m left to pick up a large portion of my hypothetical husband’s share of the household labour.

Only a verbal “no” is deemed by many to count as lack of consent – tough luck if the stress of intimidation and fear of imminent assault makes you go non-verbal.

Men are never taught not to rape. We’re all taught that “rape” is being attacked by a stranger in a dark alleyway, so men think that if they don’t attack strangers in dark alleyways, they can’t be rapists. Men are never taught to ask for consent; they’re taught to assume it. Many laugh at the idea of consent workshops at university. And then sexual violence is justified because “he didn’t know any better”.

Our paradigm is the irrational paradigm. The male-centric status quo is seen as “objective”. Where my views and perceptions differ from this, it’s mine that are considered to be wrong and abnormal.

My summer issues are often dismissed as confidence or body image issues. But having said that, some other women have summer issues that ARE confidence and/or body image issues – or fear of abuse by men.

The standard “big night out” goes like this: I’m autistic so I can’t stay, I’m a woman so I can’t leave, the only solution is for me to stay home, and even then I’m a cowardly anti-fun killjoy.

Young women are expected to instantly become independent domestic goddesses, and asking for help or admitting you haven’t yet learned certain skills is shameful. When young men barely even try, it becomes a running joke.

Even older men, or rather, older abled men who live with at least one woman, are seen as being completely unable to take care of themselves; it’s often seen as the norm for women to “look after” male partners and relatives, to the extent that when women are away for any length of time, they’ll get snarky “jokes” about leaving the poor menz to fend for themselves. I need feminism because I, an autistic female adult-in-training currently living well away from family and most friends, am seen as less in need of “being taken care of” than an abled middle-aged man who has lived independently of his parents for many years and has a strong support network of people nearby.

“No” is often taken to mean “not yet, try again later”. Sex is seen as an inevitability; eventually, you have to just “compromise” and forget about your fundamental right to bodily autonomy for a while.

As an internet-dwelling slightly-nerdy unashamed fangirl, the concept of “fake geek girls” and male or male-centred gatekeeping of fandoms is absolutely everywhere. And some of the standards used, whilst completely unnecessary and awful anyway, are also ableist; not everyone has the energy or the spoons to tick an infinite list of boxes.

Female representation is seen as disenfranchising men. Male representation is seen as… well, it isn’t really seen as anything, it’s just the norm from which anything else is a deviation.

If the next Doctor was female, I’d be too concerned about the fandom backlash and about the inevitable sexist jokes and gimmicks to actually enjoy it.

There are so many times that so many women don’t stand up for ourselves or for women more generally or for other marginalised groups because we know what the response is going to be and it’s just not worth doing to ourselves. How many times have you kept quiet because “it’s not worth it”? I know I do that at least once most days.

Some male friends and relatives see me as “you’re alright, not like those feminists” because I’m too anxious to outright openly disagree with people.

A feminist Facebook group I’m a part of is constantly, constantly, constantly criticised for, well, not taking any shit. If people are scared to comment on a Facebook group in case people criticise them, that’s seen as our problem. If I’m too scared to speak up in the entire bloody offline world because of the many and varied repercussions, that’s ALSO seen as my problem. I should just be more confident and not care what people think, even though “what people think” does have a big impact on your life.

I’ve lost weight recently because, long story short, I sometimes have issues Making Food Happen. People are complementing me. I’ve seen other women lose weight due to illness and then be complimented on it, or think “well, at least I’ve lost weight!”. You know, just in case anyone still thought fat-shaming was anything to do with health at all.

I’m lucky enough to not have full-blown meltdowns very often, but when I think about it, my last three all have one thing in common – one part of the cause was yelling, insistent, intimidating men who won’t take “no” or “you’re wrong” or “please stop yelling” for an answer. Afterwards, two of the three incidents I’m talking about were described simply as “she had a meltdown” with the causes of this meltdown completely erased, completely absolved.

Too often, neurotypical MRAs use autism as a scapegoat, portraying autistic men as tragic burdens, violent, incapable of understanding consent. Autistic women usually aren’t acknowledged as even existing under this narrative.

Disabled women often have their choices and bodily autonomy removed from them in the name of “life skills”. Make-up, shaving, and other unnecessary grooming is seen as mandatory for women. That stuff over time takes up so much energy, especially for disabled women.

As an shy, introverted, anxious, standoffish, teetotal woman who lives in jeans and T-shirts and doesn’t go out much, I basically exhibit model behaviour for what misogynist men think women should do to “protect themselves” from the sexual violence they inflict on us. Guess what? It doesn’t work.

6 Comments »

#DDoM2015: We Are Not Just Things To Be Dealt With

TRIGGER WARNING: Abuse, including child abuse, murder and references to autism “therapies”.

Tomorrow, 1st March, is the annual Disability Day of Mourning, organised by disability rights organisations such as Autistic Self-Advocacy Network, ADAPT, Not Dead Yet, the National Council on Independent Living, and the Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund. Disabled people organise vigils and read out the names of disabled people killed by their parents or caregivers; a list which grows year on year at a horrifying rate. It’s reached the point where ASAN has compiled an Anti-Filicide Toolkit; the point where we need to actively teach people not to murder us for being who we are. Worse, when such a killing reaches mainstream media, the world reacts not with horror but with sympathy for the killer for dealing with us for so long – that is to say, for not doing it sooner – and their sentences, if they are even given, are lighter. The victim, meanwhile, is seen as nothing but a burden, a problem, a thing to be dealt with.

Sadly, this awful thought pattern shouldn’t come as a surprise when you consider the way we think about disabled people.

For example, autism is far too often considered from the point of view of a neurotypical outsider, rather than from the autistic person. Our sensory processing differences are rarely even acknowledged; our coping mechanisms are seen as “behaviours” which are different to neurotypical behaviours and therefore must be stopped. Our communication methods are dismissed; we are framed as deficient for lacking fluency in neurotypical non-verbal communication, yet neurotypical people make no attempt to learn ours, even for those people who can only communicate non-verbally. Even if we are diagnosed young, we often only learn about our own neurotype from the point of view of someone in our position via the Internet, for those of us able and allowed to access it.

When many neurotypical people talk about “the autism community”, they view it as including neurotypical people themselves, not as allies but as the main voices and authorities. The focus is on “autism parents” and “autism families”; not autistic people themselves, because we’re the things to be dealt with. Sometimes I even see phrases like “families with autism” (to describe families where one person is autistic), just to make it absolutely clear that they see autism as a thing to be dealt with by neurotypical family members.

The biggest voice of all is the neurotypical-run organisation Autism Speaks, despite being abhorred by the vast majority of autistic people for reasons outlined here; amongst them, a video called “Autism Every Day” in which a (then) board member talks about wanting to drive herself and her autistic daughter off a bridge, stopping only because of the effects it would have on her other, non-autistic, daughter. She says all this in front of her autistic daughter; nobody thinks of her as listening and understanding, because she’s not seen as a human, she’s seen as a thing to be dealt with. Just four days after the release of this video, Katherine “Katie” McCarron was murdered by her own mother. In November 2014, London McCabe was murdered by his own mother too – by being thrown from a bridge.

Autism Speaks, amongst others, signifies autism using a puzzle piece. Because we’re puzzles to be solved. Things to be dealt with.

And how are we dealt with? Abuse (abuse trigger warning for all links in this paragraph). Institutionalisation. The unimaginable horrors of the Judge Rotenberg Center. “Therapies”, like ABA, aimed at making autistic people outwardly act neurotypical; because what’s on the outside is all that matters, we’re not seen as having an “inside”, we’re seen as things to be dealt with. “Quiet Hands”. I’ve even heard of clicker training – yes, as in clicker training for dogs – being used. Ultimately, the result is conditioned compliance. The result is people feeling unable to say “no”.

They don’t really see us as people, and overcompensate in their language. As a general rule, autistic people prefer identity first language, but many neurotypical people often actively argue against this, telling us time and time again that we’re somehow being offensive to ourselves, even in response to our words about the aforementioned abuse. Their sentences do all sorts of gymnastics to avoid the word “autistic”- person with autism, person living with autism, person who just so happens to have autism – and all I hear is “I can only see you as a person if in my mind I push your autism as far away from you as possible, because it gets in the way of my view of you as a person”. Again, things to be dealt with.

Those of us who are verbal and who can pass for neurotypical are categorised as “high-functioning”; it sounds like a compliment, but it’s a trap. It means we’re put on a neurotypical pedestal, deemed “not really autistic” or “recovered” (Autism Speaks are still happy to count us in their scare-statistics though…) and therefore not taken seriously. Our differences are still, suppressed, openly mocked and used against us, but when we acknowledge them ourselves – for example, if we request accommodations – these same differences are denied totally, and we’re told we’re over-reacting. “High-functioning” is, ultimately, a threat; you know how we treat the autistic people who can’t or won’t pretend to be neurotypical, it says, so you must pretend – at all costs. The impact of those messages is so hard to undo, even when you know rationally that it’s wrong and ableist for people to expect that of you. And frankly, it’s exhausting.

Most people don’t think about autistic adults at all; media focuses almost entirely on children (or rather, almost entirely on the parents of autistic children…) and representation of autistic adults in fiction is usually very one-dimensional and stereotypical, and rarely involves input from actual autistic people, because it’s aimed instead at neurotypical people as “inspiration”. We’re not considered a part of the audience, we’re just a one-off “inspirational” plot line to boost ratings. We’re things to be dealt with.

This all means that everyday, unquestioned, “normal” expectations – how experiences should be, the amounts and methods of everything you should do, how you should feel in some cases – do not include us. The exclusion is subtle, and usually accidental, but it’s there, because society at large doesn’t consider that humans exist with different needs which need to be accommodated. In the UK, only 15% of autistic adults are in full-time paid employment, and of course there’s the social aspect, which cannot be measured with numbers. We keep quiet, partly because we know we won’t be taken seriously, and partly because we were never given the tools to ask for help.

Neurotypical people use this false high/low functioning dichotomy to silence us; if we speak out, they think we’re clearly too high-functioning to count, and Not Like Their Child; never mind that most adults are not like most children, and no person is the same as any other, and they’re neurotypical themselves so have no right to say we’re not autistic enough to be part of “the autism community”. Too often, “autism experts”, or to use Autism Speaks’ phrasing “autism champions”, are neurotypical – be they professionals or parents – because they have the experience of dealing with us.

Our own activism is dismissed as too negative or political because it goes against widely believed autism narratives, or dismissed as not real or a fringe issue because, due to the inaccessibility of the neurotypical world, it mostly takes place online. We’re stereotyped as lacking empathy, tact and compassion, and these stereotypes are used against us. We’re always the ones apparently failing to see other points of view, even though neurotypical people built and maintain this society to accommodate only themselves. Neurotypical and autistic perceptions are different, but it’s always ours that are deemed to be wrong. We’re too impolite, up until the point where we’re just compliant. We’re too vocal. Too selfish. Too sensitive.

Autism Speaks switched hashtags in a (failed) attempt to escape the voices of actually autistic people speaking, so we know they can hear us; they’d just rather we shut up. When mainstream media does listen to us, it requires the “balance” of comments from Autism Speaks. We have to fight our way into the conversation about our own lives. This only demonstrates that it’s not actually about us. It’s never been about us. We’re not the subjects, we’re the objects. The things to be dealt with.

With all that in mind, is it any wonder so many disabled people are dying at the hands of the people who claim to love and care about them the most? The whole way we think about disability frames us not as people with feelings and needs and rights, but as things to be dealt with, whatever the means.

This has to change. Ableism kills.

The list the names of disabled people murdered by their parents or caregivers remembered tomorrow can be found here, alongside more information about the Disability Day of Mourning 2015.

8 Comments »

On transphobia and TERF hypocrisy

(TRIGGER WARNING: Discussion of misogynistic, transphobic and transmisogynistic violence, and transphobia more generally. DISCLAIMER: I’m a cis woman attempting to be vaguely useful; trans people, if I’ve got anything wrong, please do let me know.)

Feminists. I’m not angry, just disappointed. No wait, I’m also angry. As women, we have first-hand experience of oppression under patriarchy. As feminists, we understand how sexist men react when we point out that, well, society as it stands really isn’t all that fair. They mock, derail, try out all the usual tropes to avoid taking any responsibility for the problem, and/or losing any of their current male privilege. We’ve seen and heard it all before. We’ve questioned ourselves. We’ve learned how to not defer to them every time, we’ve learned to spot and dismantle those tropes as they appear. Basically, I’d like to think we know our stuff when it comes to how privilege and oppression works. So why is it that I keep seeing feminists go on to use those very same tactics to avoid taking responsibility for cis privilege and transphobia?

I’m going to use both the terms “transphobe” and “TERF”, so it may be helpful first to properly differentiate between the two. Transphobes are cis people who hate, and/or perpetuate the oppression of, trans people. TERF stands for Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists – basically, TERFs are transphobic feminists who use feminism to deflect criticism for their transphobia. Not all transphobes are TERFs, not all feminists (or radfems) are TERFs, but all TERFs are transphobic and all TERFs purport to be feminists. And no, “TERF” is not a slur. Slurs are words used against the oppressed group to remind them of their place, their historical oppression, the power that the slur-user has over them; in many ways, slurs are a threat. The word “TERF” does not remind TERFs of their historical oppression by trans people, because that oppression obviously does not exist. The word “TERF” simply reminds TERFs that they’re transphobic, and a lot of people seriously don’t agree with them. You know how misogynists don’t like being called misogynists? That’s the same reaction that’s happening here.

terf venn diagram[Image description: A Venn diagram labelled “transphobes” on the left, “feminists” on the right, and “TERFs” in the middle]

In feminist circles (pun not intended…) the fight against transphobia tends to be focused on TERFs, so they respond with things like “but it’s not just us!” and “what about THOSE transphobes?”. I’ll look at that response in more detail later, but for now, suffice to say that many TERFs have media platforms, which means they have a great influence over others (particularly other feminists), and in many cases they are presented as the face of mainstream feminism, so other feminists have to work hard to ensure that trans women feel safe and are included in the feminist movement, and this of course requires standing up to the TERFs. Weirdly, despite being feminists, TERFs tend to use many of the same arguments as sexist men…

Misogynists: “I got told this was “misogynistic”! The “patriarchy” isn’t real!”
Transphobes: “part of a worrying pattern of intimidation and silencing of individuals whose views are deemed “transphobic” or “whorephobic”.”
The latter is, of course, a direct quote from That Free Speech Letter (which also attacked sex workers, because attacking trans people apparently wasn’t enough). Putting words in quote marks doesn’t make the concepts behind them any less real. Calling words “made-up” is futile too, because that’s true of all words.

Misogynists: “Not all men are like that”
Transphobes: “Not all cis people are like that”
TERFs: “Not all radfems are like that”
Who cares? Stop talking about how you’re Definitely Not Like That and start speaking out against those who are Like That. Calling out transphobia is not an attack on all cis people or an attack on all feminists (or radfems), it’s an attack on transphobia and our response as cis people and/or feminists should be to listen and change to avoid transphobia in future.

Misogynists: “But I don’t hate women! What happened was awful, but…”
Transphobes: “But I don’t hate trans people! What happened was awful, but…”
Our society has pushed awful oppressive ideas on us all our lives; even those of us who recognise this fact mess up so many times, because it’s just so normalised. You don’t have to actively hate an oppressed group to perpetuate hate against them; most people perpetuate this hate without realising. Don’t get defensive – look at where you’ve messed up and learn from it.

Misogynists: “And here is a token woman who agrees with me!”
Transphobes: “And here is a token trans person who agrees with me!”
Your one token does not negate the views of the many others disagreeing with them. Trans people are not a hive mind, just as women are not a hive mind.

Misogynists: “How come you’re focusing on women when gender stereotypes hurt everyone?”
Transphobes: “How come you’re identifying as non-binary when the gender binary hurts everyone?”
First I should point out the glaring discrepancy in this comparison: the former is a choice, whereas the latter is not. Having said that, both arguments are based on the same false idea that everyone being affected means that everyone is affected equally. Not true. The gender binary coerces cis people to conform to roles in which very few people (if anyone) actually fit. The gender binary forces trans people to conform to an entire gender which goes directly against who they really are. Trans people are being murdered and abused for not conforming. Men do not experience misogyny. Cis people do not experience transphobia. It’s that simple.

Misogynists: “Hahaha, Tumblr throws a tantrum over every little thing”
Transphobes: “Hahaha, Twitter throws a tantrum over every little thing”
The specific websites aren’t really relevant, they’re just the versions I hear most often from these people; however, what is relevant is that these people are often saying these things on the very websites they’re apparently criticising. Often on Tumblr, “Tumblr” is used as a euphemism for “the various oppressed groups who are making the most of this one space they have to talk about their own experiences”; basically, laughing at “Tumblr” sounds less obviously awful than laughing at women, or trans people, or anyone else who has the sheer audacity to exist whilst not being a cis straight white abled man. Substitute “Tumblr” for “Twitter” and you’ve got every tweet from a TERF over the past week laughing at how “Twitter” gets angry so easily. And for the record, “little things” aren’t quite so little when you’re actually experiencing them.

Misogynists: “Stop whining about sexist articles, what about women in other countries who can’t vote or work outside the home?” (usually accompanied by a load of racism too)
Transphobes: “Stop whining about transphobic articles, what about the mass murder of trans women?”
TERFs: “Stop whining about us, what about transphobic men/male violence?”
This week, several cis people have basically accused trans people of not caring about themselves enough. Really not okay. Usually, the person making this argument only ever raises the “bigger problem” when making this argument; they don’t care themselves, they just want the people calling them out to shut up. Aside from that, someone else’s bigotry doesn’t magically make yours okay, even if it is less violent. In fact, so-called “harmful views” are exactly that, harmful – transphobia perpetuates violence against trans people, just as misogynist men don’t have to be physically violent themselves to perpetuate violence against women. I’ve included the specific TERF argument I’ve seen everywhere because although it has the same basis as the first two statements, it’s wrong on a few extra levels; TERFs are being focused on because trans people and other feminists want to make the feminist movement safe for and inclusive of trans people, and because the TERFs are themselves focusing on hating trans people (trans women in particular) rather than combating male violence and/or using their cis privilege to confront transphobic men, plus many feminists and trans activists aren’t focusing on the “bigger problem” right now because the TERFs have caused harm which now needs to be undone.

Misogynists: “Focusing on violence against women is giving women special treatment, what about this other issue that affects us *all*?”
TERFs: “Focusing on transmisogynistic murders is giving trans women special treatment, what about this other form of sexism that affects *all* women?”
Nobody should have to wait their turn to be seen as full humans with full human rights. Nobody should have to wait their turn to not be murdered at an horrifying rate. Just because an issue doesn’t affect you personally doesn’t mean it isn’t important or urgent.

Misogynists: “Feminists are so angry and irrational, you can’t have an objective debate with them.”
Transphobes: “Trans people and their allies are so angry and irrational, you can’t have an objective debate with them.”
Nobody should have to debate their own rights, their own experiences, their own life, every single day. It’s much easier to stay calm, civil, patient and polite when you’re not the one whose existence is on trial. The experience of the dominant group isn’t objective; to say it is perpetuates the idea of the dominant group as the norm. Women are constantly dismissed for being irrational and emotional, putting us on the defensive whilst the initial misogyny goes without comment or criticism. Feminists must surely know how that feels. It really confuses and saddens me that some feminists, having experienced this themselves, go on to inflict it on others anyway.

Misogynists: “Men won’t listen to you if you’re this hostile all the time!”
Transphobes: “Cis people won’t listen to you if you’re this hostile all the time!”
Except they won’t listen if you’re nice, either, because to many of these people, “nice” means “quiet and compliant”. Sometimes this is twisted into “people just want to learn and you’re just driving them away”. Strangely, that argument only ever appears after somebody has either been malicious from the start or outright refused to listen after being called out. People who just want to learn, well, they listen, and learn, without major drama, and it goes unnoticed.

Misogynists: “You hurt my feelings! Apologise for pointing out that sexism just then!”
Transphobes: “You hurt my feelings! Apologise for pointing out that transphobia just then!”
The hurt feelings of the oppressed group – the ones attacked in the first place, and in the context of being attacked constantly – never come into the equation, because the harm done to them is normal, not noteworthy.

Misogynists: “I know I’ll get criticised for this, but *is sexist* LOOK AT HOW BRAVE I AM FOR SAYING THE THING FEMINISTS DON’T WANT ME TO SAY”
Transphobes: “I know I’ll get criticised for this, but *is transphobic* LOOK AT HOW BRAVE I AM FOR STANDING UP TO THE TRANS BULLIES”
See also the racist “we’re not allowed to talk about immigration” trope, when in fact that’s ALL the person is talking about. The idea of this is to frame the oppressed group as a powerful mob who somehow control us all; and yet, mysteriously, the “silenced” views are everywhere whilst the “dominant”, “bullying” views are rarely heard at all.

Misogynists: “Criticism and boycotts by feminists are taking away my freedom of speech!”
Transphobes: “Criticism and boycotts by trans people are taking away my freedom of speech!”
The Freeze Peach trope has been done to death already, and I discussed it only a couple of weeks ago. But take a look at this. Here is an interview with Dapper Laughs – yep, apparently he’s still a thing – in The Independent today (TW: rape). Look at what he says, and compare it with That Free Speech Letter. The gist of the arguments is terrifying similar. Actual literal Dapper Laughs, for crying out loud. Need I say anymore?

So there you have it – right now, certain feminists are starting to sound a lot like the misogynists they’re supposed to be countering, without a hint of irony or self-awareness. Identifying as a feminist does not absolve you of transphobia, no matter how you frame it. TERFs call it feminism, but this is not the kind of feminism that I want to be a part of.

13 Comments »

Lost In Translation

“Do you want to go get a coffee?” I want a coffee. I want to have a chat with you. I want a date with you.

“I had a nightmare on Friday.” I had a really bad dream on Friday night. Friday itself was awful.

“Don’t come unless you really want to.” Come, but only if you really want to. Please please please come. Please please please don’t come.

“It’s at 10.” We need to arrive before it starts at 10. We need to arrive at some point after 10. We need to arrive somewhere else entirely for pre-drinks at 9, and I have no idea what’s happening after that.

“This is against the rules.” This is against the rules. This is technically against the rules, but everyone does it and literally nobody cares – I mean, I’m only a sign, I can’t stop you – just use commonsense and don’t do anything dangerous, disruptive or harmful to others.

“I’d hate me if I were you.” If I had problems interpreting neurotypical language like you, I’d be really annoyed at me because I’m sometimes unclear and don’t say what I mean. Quick, reassure me that you don’t hate me. I think we’re a bit of a mismatch and you should direct your affections elsewhere.

“BYOB.” Bring your own booze. Bring your own beverage, whatever that may be.  Bring your own booze, but if you just want soft drinks, we have those already; they’re supposed to be mixers, but nobody will mind if you drink them on their own. Also bring cups. We have cups, you don’t need to bring those.

“I’ll just wait for everyone to settle down…” Quite a few people are still arriving and/or doing other things, so I’ll wait a few seconds until they’re finished. You there, the one that’s just arrived and is still ordering her diet coke, hurry up and sit down.

“Oh, you came, thanks so much!” Thank you so much for coming. What are you doing here?! YOU ACTUALLY CARE!! You’re creepy.

“Do you want to go get a coffee?” I want a coffee. We haven’t had the chance to talk in a while and I want to catch up. You asked me on a date a while back and this is me reciprocating.

(Inspired by this Dinah The Aspie Dinosaur comic, and also by my own cluelessness)

3 Comments »

Free Speech: You keep using that phrase…

free speech inigo montoya

[Image description: A picture of Inigo Montoya from The Princess Bride, captioned with the following: “Free speech”. You keep using that phrase, but I do not think it means what you think it means]

Seeing as everybody else is doing it – let’s talk about freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech means that you have the right to express yourself without being killed, imprisoned, arrested, or generally having your other rights and freedoms removed – and even in the strictly legal sense, this has qualifiers. For example, the European Convention of Human Rights (enshrined in UK law by the Human Rights Act 1998) notes that freedom of expression may be subject to “such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society” including “for the protection of the reputation or rights of others”.  In other words, branding universities as anti-free-speech for things like harassment policies or rules against racist, sexist and/or homophobic language is seriously misguided.

Again, freedom of speech means that you have the right to hold and express opinions. It does not mean that other people have to listen to you, agree with you, or accept your bigotry without dissent. And it definitely does not mean you have the right to a platform. I mean, I haven’t spoken at a prestigious university institution or written for a nationwide publication either. Believe it or not, neither have most people. Incidentally, marginalised groups who are regularly put down by The Freeze Peach Debate are even less likely than more privileged people to have these, well, privileges. Those platforms are far from a right.

We have got to the point where people are are complaining about how ~completely silenced~ they are via the medium of their national newspaper columns, or in articles and blog posts that go viral. Alternatively, these people sometimes have their oppressive views quoted uncritically in such articles as part of The Freeze Peach Debate. They’re not being silenced at all.

Yet, some of them are even comparing their lack of (an additional) platform to the Charlie Hebdo attacks. Comparing being no-platformed or being disagreed with to literally being murdered . Invoking an unrelated tragedy to manipulate the reader’s emotions and make no-platforming seem horrific by association. I’ve seen this from people on all sides and it’s really not on. It’s trivialising, it’s upsetting… Just bloody don’t.**

Moving swiftly on, why is it that the poor, silenced Freeze Peach Advocates are never as vocal when the police kettle peaceful protests, or create violent conflicts that are later blamed on protesters? Why are they never as vocal when such protests and vigils are targeted by individuals from the often more powerful institutions being called out, whether by online trolls beforehand or (actual or threatened) disruption of the event itself, with the intention of making people feel too unsafe to show up? Freedom of expression means freedom of expression for everyone. It’s almost as if the anti-no-platformers are more concerned about protecting bigotry than actually advocating for free speech… By the way, the concepts of “safe” and “unsafe” are not just buzzwords for you to dismiss as a fad. I can’t believe this needs to be said, but anti-sex-work rhetoric actually does harm sex workers; TERF rhetoric actually does harm trans people; racist rhetoric actually does harm people of colour. As highlighted brilliantly by Stillicides’ Misogyny Triangle, oppressive attitudes aren’t just an opinion. They’re actually dangerous. Remember, the protection of the rights of others.

In these contexts, the Freeze Peach Debate is usually little more than a derailing tactic. When someone is perpetuating an oppression and the relevant oppressed group stands up for themselves, the big conversation ends up always being the Freeze Peach Debate, and never being about the awfulness that created the situation in the first place. Rather than raising awareness of the underlying issues, marginalised groups are put straight on the defensive- again. And it is always marginalised groups; the anti-no-platformers will only ever refer to them as “students” to try and avoid looking like they’re perpetuating oppression, but the students in question are invariably from liberation campaigns. It’s like when people criticise “Tumblr” when they themselves are Tumblr users; they usually mean either social justice advocates more generally, or particularly people in marginalised groups never represented in mainstream media.

Importantly, though, that’s not to say you can’t criticise people who experience oppression – I mean, freedom of speech, right? Feminists: Remember that women can be oppressive too. No-platforming a woman for views harmful to sex workers is not misogynistic, any more than no-platforming a gay man for misogynistic views would be homophobic. Intersectionality isn’t just a word that looks good in your Twitter bio, it’s a very real concept. Women can be oppressive too. As a student who has spent the past few months debating on student feminist Facebook groups about no-platforming men, I’ve found it really bizarre that, in light the Kate Smurthwaite debacle, there’s suddenly this idea that only women are no-platformed, when some quick research proves otherwise. Or even short-term memory – a pro-life Oxford society inviting two cis men to “debate” abortion, anyone? It was only three months ago… Basically, no-platforming is far from being a tool of misogyny; in fact, as Stavvers pointed out earlier today, the heavy criticism of no-platforming by feminist societies is strongly linked to the patriarchal idea that women are not permitted to have boundaries.

Finally: For people who are so passionate about freedom of expression, the anti-no-platformers sure are angry about people disagreeing with them…

**Relax, I don’t have the power to stop you saying things I don’t like, nor would I want that. But I do have the power to tell you you’re being a dick.

5 Comments »

You Don’t Know What It’s Like

(Sidenote: This is in response to a conversation that’s taking place amongst people I know IRL, and if I can somehow figure out a way to communicate this message to the people that really need to hear it, I may remove this post from the blog for anonymity reasons)

You don’t know what it’s like to have to choose between spending time with friends, or in a community which purports to include you, and not putting yourself through huge levels of anxiety at best and a meltdown at worst.

You don’t know what it’s like to look forward to it anyway, because it’s all you’ve got, and sometimes it hasn’t been too bad; you don’t know what it’s like for “I probably won’t freak out too much, and if I do there might be a way around it” to be the very definition of “looking forward to it”.

You don’t know what it’s like to put on your favourite clothes and your favourite music and everyone else’s favourite neurotypical-passing brave face and persuade yourself that you will have fun tonight, only for it to go as badly as, deep down, you knew it would all along.

You don’t know what it’s like to feel out of sorts for days and to blame yourself for it because you knew you couldn’t handle it and you should have stayed at home. Again.

You don’t know what it’s like to have had a recent meltdown on a loud, crowded, chaotic, drunken night out, to remember how that felt, and to not want to just relax and try again next time.

You don’t know what it’s like to feel isolated and lonely even when you’re literally living amongst the biggest social circle you’ve ever had, and more than likely the biggest social circle you will ever have, in a city with seemingly infinite opportunities, because all they ever want to do is that one kind of socialising mentioned above.

You don’t know what it’s like to suddenly do a U-turn and start blaming yourself not only for going, but also for not going.

You don’t know what it’s like for people who care about you to think “Please don’t feel pressured, it’s okay if you don’t want to come” is enough; it doesn’t occur to them to find alternatives that don’t need to come with a warning. You don’t know what it’s like for them to think “You don’t have to drink” is enough; it doesn’t occur to them that if everyone else’s night is revolving around the idea of getting drunk, you’re maybe going to feel a little bit left out. You don’t know what it’s like for people to think not literally forcing you to do things you don’t want to means that they deserve an ally cookie.

You don’t know what it’s like to feel selfish for even thinking about this issue, for not just going with the majority and accepting you can’t always have your own way and compromising, even just in your own head, when all your life all you’ve ever done is fucking compromise.

You don’t know what it’s like to be feel like you’re judgmental and anti-fun, because you’ve heard people talk badly about others who stay quiet on the sidelines and don’t drink and don’t get involved much, and maybe they’re tolerating it from you because they know you’re autistic, but even so, that’s all that you are. Tolerated.

You don’t know what it’s like for people to assume you just don’t want social interaction, because you’re autistic.

You don’t know what it’s like for people to assume you’re just bad at social interaction, even though you’ve lost count of the number of times you’ve left an overloading event only to sit and talk for hours with your best friend back in halls, and the number of times you’ve arranged lunch or coffee or cinema or so many other things with individuals or smaller groups.

You don’t know what it’s like to have the problem framed as just a fact of autistic life, a sad tragedy that cannot be resolved, because nobody stops to wonder if they’re part of the problem, however small. You don’t know what it’s like to be told, in whatever way, “you can’t just change society” by countless people who, themselves, constitute “society” – to paraphrase a friend, we are disabled by you.

You don’t know what it’s like to be told how complicated you’re told it is to do one thing, yet how easy it apparently is to sort out pre-drinks, a bar, a club, have a few back-up clubs in mind in case you don’t get into the first one, and the nightbus route home, all with increasing alcohol levels as they progress through the night – impressive if you ask me, especially given the rate at which other suggestions are dismissed because nobody can be bothered to organise them.

You don’t know what it’s like to be told to just arrange it all yourself and to actually do so, only for it all to fall apart later that day in favour of Drinks In Someone’s Room, Part Infinity, when you know that’s going to involve more people in one small space than you can manage, and to have people reassure you that it’s all going to be totally okay because you can just bring Diet Coke. You don’t know what it’s like when the Diet Coke doesn’t miraculously level out your sensory input, or how frustrating it is when, inevitably, it ends badly.

You don’t know what it’s like to, after all that, resign yourself to taking the path of least resistance and play along with the “autistic person can’t control their emotions and doesn’t have empathy and threw a tantrum and now they’re really sorry” trope, and try in future try to be more calm and tactful when raising the issue, which of course usually means “don’t raise it at all”.

You don’t know what it’s like for people to refuse to hear this unless you have positive solutions, when this exclusionary system of socialising has become so unquestioned, so normal, that nobody can conceive of anything else.

You don’t know what it’s like to be the inconvenience.

You don’t know what it’s like to be the afterthought.

You don’t know what it’s like.

You don’t.

So don’t fucking tell me that I have to accept it.

19 Comments »

I’m still here!

Just a quick update. Earlier today I took the decision to make private my most recent post from just over a week ago, because it was quite personal and aimless and made a bit of a mess of a really tricky subject with loads of different issues mainly ignored in favour of whining about my feels. There’s a small chance that my (unrelated) post from late December may eventually follow suit, although I’ve decided to leave it up for now, and that will make it look like I’ve been off the radar for two months. So basically, I’d just like to let you all know that I still exist, I still read the blogs I follow fairly regularly, I can still be found on Twitter from time to time, and a new blog post will happen whenever it happens.

I love writing this blog, and I wish I could better maintain it, but in the short term I have exams until next week, and in the long term I’ve had quite a hard time recently with the mental health stuff, to the point that I’m finally starting to put together a plan to Talk To People and Do Something About This – and now that I’ve written that on here, I’ll have to do it! Any advice on Talking To People and Doing Something About This is welcome.

And I can’t work out how to end this post, so here’s an Imgur gallery of owls.

4 Comments »

Parenting Autistic Children With Love & Acceptance

Change the world, not your Autistic child!

Spider Circus (and other stories)

Books and blogs by Alice Nuttall

Aspects of Aspergers

perspectives from the spectrum

Conditionally Accepted

a space for scholars on the margins of academia

Radicus Rants

Musings on politics, intersectional social justice, & living with an invisible disability.

oddlyshapedmarbles

Everything changes, and we know it does.

Dinah the Aspie Dinosaur

The adventures and misadventures of Dinah, a young dinosaur who has Asperger's Syndrome.

genders, bodies, politics

writing by Alison Phipps

Ink and Tea Stains

write, edit, repeat, cry

INNER THOUGHTS

INNER THOUGHTS

Captain Awkward

Advice. Staircase Wit. Faux Pas. Movies.

seventhvoice

WASP Women's Asperger's Syndrome Awareness Page - http://www.facebook.com/waspwantsyou

Faint With Hunger

A Vegan Cooking Blog

yetanotherlefty

Things that I think about stuff

love explosions

when the love for your child overwhelms you

David Snape's blog - An ordinary guy with Autism

Talking about everyday subjects with humor and inspiration

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,080 other followers