Archive for Privilege

Neurodiversity, Grief, and the Normal Minority

May 18, 2011 Rachel Ableism, Community, Disabilities, Friendship, Loneliness, Marginalization, Modes of Thought, Neurodiversity, Privilege

“The worlds created by the human imagination are far more coherent and structured than the real social systems in which we live, and the mental constructs by which we make sense of society are only loosely related (sometimes inversely) to what is really going on. We take these conventional views of our social system as matter-of-fact, true representations of social reality, but they are socially constructed realities, human artifices whose purpose is to perpetuate society, not clarify it.”

— Robert Murphy, The Body Silent, page 30

I’ve been having a discussion lately with an email correspondent who was mentored by Robert Murphy, and who is himself disabled. He asked me about my feelings concerning the neurodiversity movement, and his questions gave me a chance to further understand the complicated nature of grief and disability. Some of my thoughts in this piece come directly from my portion of our emails, and others reflect the places that my thinking has gone in the midst of our ongoing discussion.

I want to be clear that I agree with many of the core tenets of the neurodiversity movement, which I consider to be no different than the core tenets of the disability rights movement, or any other human rights movement — that all people deserve respect and safety, that all people have the right to be front-and-center in conversations that affect them, that personhood should not be defined by an arbitrary standard of normal, and that there are many ways of being, learning, thinking, and perceiving. However, I no longer identify myself with the movement, in part because I saw how easily I was beginning to slip into polarizing positions that I now consider untenable — such as the absolute insistence that autism is so essential to the person that, by curing the autism, you want to get rid of the person.

I can understand that position; it very aptly describes how I feel about myself and the way in which autism is woven into the fabric of who I am. I personally don’t wish to be cured; were you to take away the autism, I would be someone else, and I do not wish to be someone else. What I wish for most fervently is to feel welcomed as an equal, just as I am. However, these feelings derive from my personal experience. There are a lot of different manifestations of autism; some people do not feel especially happy with being autistic, and some autistic people would like to be cured. Would I prefer that all autistic people be happy just as they are? Sure, but I don’t have to live in their bodies. I just have to live in mine.

And then, of course, most able-bodied parents who hear an autism diagnosis begin grasping at straws about how to proceed, because nothing in life has prepared them for going down the road ahead of them. When you combine the fear, uncertainty, doubt, and dread generated about disability in general with the fact that few able-bodied people understand the experience of disability at all, is it any surprise that most parents grasp at the “cure” straw at one time or another?

When you’ve got a parent in this position, responding with “cure the autism, destroy the person” is extremely counterproductive. It only ends up sounding like an indictment. Parents feel pushed up against the wall and criticized, so they stop listening at the very moment that they most need to hear from us.

Of course, there are people seeking a cure who take extreme positions, and who believe that autism is the worst scourge to hit mankind since the Black Death. And there are people who lose themselves in their anger that life didn’t work out according to plan. There is really no talking to people when they’re in that state of mind.

But a lot of people are on the fence about the cure issue, and they’d be open to a conversation if they felt that we respected where they are in their lives.

What’s most lacking in the conversation about a cure, from the neurodiversity perspective, is the acknowledgment that parents of autistic kids go through a grief process. I have to admit that I feel a lot of discomfort when I hear parents talking about grieving their children’s autism; sometimes, I just want to yell, “Are you grieving me? Because I don’t need your grief. I need your respect.” But, whatever my feelings on the matter, it’s essential that the grief process be recognized and respected if we’re to have any kind of constructive conversation at all.

From what I’ve observed, the grief comes from three different sources.

The loss of the idealized normal child
This grief is largely about the parents. I’m not saying that as a judgment at all; in fact, I understand it completely, and I’ve experienced my own version of it when looking at my idealized self. The way that parents hold on to the imagined normal child derives directly from the fact that, in American society, being normal is the most important value. The socially constructed idea of normal exercises a tremendous hold on the imagination. Aspiring to be normal is more important than aspiring to be a great teacher, or a brilliant researcher, or a bringer of peace to a war-torn country. In fact, it is considered to be the prerequisite to doing just about anything else. And that is because anyone who is even minimally aware knows what normal looks like, understands that he or she is supposed to aspire to it and, at one time or another, believes that normal and natural are exactly the same thing.

Of course, they aren’t. Normal is a social construct, first and foremost. In every society, it’s a different creature. In 21st-century America, normal looks something like this:

Walking is normal.
Speaking is normal.
Seeing is normal.
Hearing is normal.
Having white skin is normal.
Being a Christian is normal.
Being heterosexual is normal.
Socializing in large groups is normal.
Having an Anglo-Saxon surname is normal.
Celebrating Christmas is normal.
Speaking English is normal.
Having European ancestors is normal.
Being middle class is normal.
Being educated is normal.
Having children is normal.
Being happy is normal.
Believing in God is normal.

Of course, this list is far from exhaustive; after all, being normal is a very complex business. But if you look carefully at even this very partial list, what becomes clear is that being normal is not normative. Anyone with a characteristic not on that list falls outside the bounds of normal, to a greater or lesser degree. Having several characteristics not on that list pushes one further toward the margins. If you put together all of us who do not fulfill all the criteria, you get the majority of people on this planet.

But the illusion by which we live is that most people are normal. This illusion is a prime example of Murphy’s assertion that “the mental constructs by which we make sense of society are only loosely related (sometimes inversely) to what is really going on.” When it comes to the myth of normal, those words are especially apt.

And part of what’s “really going on” is that parents of autistic children find themselves dragged, often kicking and screaming, out of the land of normal — a terrain that they had formerly taken entirely for granted. This phenomenon leads to the second source of grief.

Leaving behind one’s own normality
Having an autistic child means that an able-bodied parent can no longer lay claim to being normal. I don’t care if that autistic child grows up to win the Nobel Prize, marry the President’s daughter, and buy a retirement home in the Swiss Alps; the minute a parent gets that autism diagnosis, normal is over. All done. Kaput. Never to return.

You know those angels with the flaming swords, guarding the path to the garden of Eden? They’re the same ones standing between able-bodied autism parents and their formerly normal selves.

You hang out with marginalized people and, sooner or later, you get marginalized. Anyone who has ever been in a public school knows this to be the case. Parents, remember the kids you didn’t want to hang out with, the ones you avoided like the plague, the ones you secretly (or not so secretly) made fun of, the ones by whom you didn’t want to be tainted by association?

Now your kid is one of them — which makes you one of them.

This inconvenient truth is what leads people to scream their heads off about how it must be the vaccines that cause autism, or the environmental toxins, or anything other than genetics because — gah! — if autism is genetic, that must mean that you’re one of us.

I’ll let you in on a little secret: You are one of us. Bwahahaha! Welcome to our world.

Sometimes, I wonder whether parents exclude autistic people from the conversation about autism in an attempt to maintain the illusion of their own normality. Perhaps, in their heart of hearts, they want to believe that their autistic children will never grow up to be us — as wonderful as we are — so that the parents can somehow disassociate themselves from us and return to the grieved-for land of normal. I’m not sure, but it certainly seems that there is a disdain for autistic adults in the autism community that borders on the irrational. I’m not sure exactly where it all comes from, but I think that a desire to avoid being tainted for life by us is certainly part of it.

The fact is that, like it or not, autism parents have entered the condition of most people who live on this earth. Few of us are normal. In fact, the people who fit the criteria of normal are a very distinct minority, indeed. But for this minority, all kinds of accommodations, privileges, and services are available — a point that leads me to the third source of grief.

Feeling frightened about the autistic child’s future
My feeling is that grief is a natural part of the process of having a disabled child and, contrary to somewhat popular opinion, it’s not always about wanting a different child. It’s often about just being scared shitless on behalf of the one you have. You watch your kid getting bullied, you see the pain the child experiences from being made to feel apart, and you worry about whether your adult child will find a partner, have even a small circle of supportive friends, and be happy. And these fears are not unfounded. A great deal of the time, the unhappiness that we face is not caused by the autism itself, but by the bigotry and cruelty of other people.

As a parent, I see nothing wrong with grieving that your child is going to face prejudice and attempts at exclusion for his or her entire life. You’d have to be living in a fantasy world to think that a disabled person is going to avoid all that in society as presently constituted, and the question of the child’s happiness under those circumstances is crucial.

What any parent of any child wants is that doors open for the child, not close. And most people understand that being normal means that you have access to the best jobs, the best educational opportunities, and the widest range of social opportunities. Normal people get to apply to college and, if they get in, they just pay their money and show up. They don’t have to fill out several pages’ worth of information about the accommodations they need and hope like hell that those accommodations are deemed “reasonable” (by non-disabled people, no less!), so that they can go to the college they’ve worked so hard to get into.

No, normal people already have those accommodations provided for them, without even asking. It’s a wondrous thing.

And what happens when you don’t have those accommodations provided as a matter of course? An easy life, it isn’t. It’s natural to grieve that. Of course, the main thing is not to get stuck in the grief and turn your kid (and yourself) into a victim.

So what do we do?
Do we focus on a cure, do we focus on making autistic people “indistinguishable from peers,” or do we work to build a world in which all the people who fall outside the realm of normal have equal access and equal rights? If we set out to do more than one of these tasks, how do we apportion our time and attention?

I consider it vital that we not make autistic people hold all the responsibility for change. Certainly, there is nothing wrong with trying to help an autistic child communicate effectively and navigate the world, but doing so cannot be a substitute for fighting to change social and cultural attitudes about normality. And the reason is simple: We will never be normal, and idle dreams about elusive cures are a distraction from the work that needs doing.

I passed for normal, to a greater or lesser extent, for most of my life. I still can, in certain contexts. Does that mean that my problems are solved? No. Does it mean that I can walk through the world, assuming that I will be respected and included? No. My difference becomes apparent eventually and, given the wrong circumstances, immediately. Being married, having a child, earning a graduate degree, writing books, and owning a house — none of it changes the fact that the quality of my life is deeply affected by the attitudes I encounter regarding my difference, by the degree to which people accommodate it, and by the ways in which people exclude me on the basis of it. No amount of passing, and no amount of achievement, will ever change that.

Autism parents, do you not want to know this?

I have always known that I am different. Others have always known that I am different. At some very blessed and happy times in my life, other people have seen my difference as a very good thing. And at some very low and very unhappy times in my life, other people have found my difference something to be derided, shamed, even beaten out of me.

Over the course of my life, I’ve acquired skills and learned to adapt, but at my core, I’ve never really changed. I’ve always been autistic. My context changed — sometimes for the better, sometimes not — and those changes had a tremendous influence on whether I succeeded at work, in relationships, and with friends. They made the difference between being abled and being disabled. And the impact upon my self-esteem and self-respect was directly proportional to how much support and respect I received.

So, if you aim for apparent normality as a way to resolve your fears about your autistic child’s life, please be aware that you will not fully solve the problem. Yes, helping your child to navigate the world is crucial, but it can’t be the end of the story. Your child will always be different. Your child will always know that he or she is different — as will others. Your child will never blend completely. Accepting a socially constructed reality called normal, as though it is available to your child means, to borrow Murphy’s words, being complicit in one of the “human artifices whose purpose is to perpetuate society, not clarify it.”

Perpetuating the status quo will not help anyone who has left the land of normal. Clarifying the status quo and fighting to change it means creating a world in which many millions of people — including your child — will finally take their place in the full light of human dignity.

© 2011 by Rachel Cohen-Rottenberg

Share

65 comments

My Path to a Strong Sense of Self, Part 2

November 11, 2010 Rachel Diagnosis, Disabilities, Judaism and Jewish Life, Privilege, Spiritual Beliefs

One of the oddest results of my Asperger’s assessment was my lightning-fast transformation from “regular human being” to “collection of impairments.” I really hadn’t changed at all from the minute before my assessment to the minute after my assessment and yet, the way in which the world saw me began to change in significant ways. And because the world began to see me differently, I began to struggle with my sense of myself all over again.

I’m not sure that I can explain to someone who hasn’t been through it, or who hasn’t watched a loved one go through it, the devastating impact of the way that people see autistics. The insistence on looking at us through the lens of deficit is so extreme that we begin to see “deficit” as key to the definition of who we are. I have difficulties with eye contact: deficit. I can’t read nonverbal cues: deficit. I like routine: deficit. I can’t do small talk: deficit. I can’t lie: deficit. I can’t be indirect: deficit. I’m blunt: deficit. I depend upon my lists: deficit. I stim: deficit. And on. And on. And on.

How dare anyone define us in terms of what we can’t do? In my worst moments over the past two years, I’ve felt like a piece of swiss cheese, recognizable only by what isn’t there.

So, what did I do to find my way back to a sense of wholeness? I started looking at my strengths. The truly mind-bending result was that, once I had the autistic label, even my strengths started looking like deficits. I’m gifted at discerning patterns and organizing the objects of space: Those are just splinter skills. I can focus like a laser beam on any task: I am inflexible. I am good with the written word: I’m overcompensating for my difficulties with verbal communication. I have a keen eye for hypocrisy: I just don’t understand the usefulness of social forms. I value my non-conformity: I just don’t understand the usefulness of social forms. I’m very good at discussing subjects of mutual interest: I just don’t understand the usefulness of social forms. I express empathy by asking what a person needs from me and then doing it: I just don’t understand the usefulness of social forms. And on. And on. And on.

At some point, my healthy sense of outrage began kicking in and, in addition to reclaiming my strengths as actual strengths, thank you, I began reclaiming my so-called “deficits” as actual strengths, too. I have difficulties with eye contact because I am so sensitive to the information coming at me from a person’s eyes. I can’t read nonverbal cues because I am so sensitive to the fullness of a person’s energy. I like routine because I’m an organized person. I can’t do small talk because I’m sincere. I can’t lie because I’m ethical. I can’t be indirect because I’m honest. I’m blunt because life is short and there is much to be done. I make lists because I’m responsible and don’t ever want to forget to do anything that someone, somewhere, might be depending upon me to do. And I stim because, in case someone hasn’t noticed, the world is a pretty noisy, chaotic place full of highly irrational people, and I just need a little soothing. That’s a problem?

It’s a lot of work to have to continually fight this battle against the impact of the autism discourse. And what’s most exhausting is the fact that every time I fight this battle, I’m reminded that words like deficit, disorder, impairment, and disease permeate most discussions about us. That’s when I’m back to feeling that something is wrong with me, something that the literature calls a pervasive developmental disorder rather than simply a difference. Gee, thanks. Just when I thought I’d defeated the demon of pervasive wrongness, there it is again, and this time, it isn’t just my abuser doing the talking. Well-respected professionals, loony-toon wackos, and everyone in between can all agree on it.

Wonderful. But here’s the way I look at it: If all that someone can see are all the things we can’t do, and all the things we aren’t, rather than all the things we can do, and all the things we are, I’m not sure I can do a thing about it except to refuse to participate.

That’s when I return to the pivotal moment on my healing path: I have a pure soul. If there is one thing that is pervasive, that touches everything I do, it’s the spark of the Divine in me, and that spark is far more powerful and far more valuable and far more sacred than anything else. If all that someone can use to describe me is the language of deficit, disorder, and impairment, that’s the other person’s illusion, not mine. I don’t have to take it on, and I won’t. All I can do is to stay clear in my mind that a society that defines people by what they can’t do is a society with a pervasive problem, and the problem isn’t us.

© 2010 by Rachel Cohen-Rottenberg

32 comments

Neurodiversity, Self-Determination, and the Magic Pill

November 3, 2010 Rachel Ableism, Diagnosis, Marginalization, Medications, Privilege, Spectrum Pride

Every now and then, I get caught up in the whole question of a cure for autism.

It’s not that I believe that a cure is possible. I don’t. How can you cure who I am and leave me whole? How can you isolate something called “autism” when it pervades every part of me? And it’s not that I would want to be cured were it even possible. I wouldn’t. I like myself just fine. What I don’t like are the loud, insistent voices that tell me I’m not fine.

What hooks me into the discussion about a cure is the accusation that, by criticizing the overriding focus on a cure, I’m telling people what’s best for their autistic children, and that I want to take away free choice. After all, people say, what would be so bad about having a cure? You could choose to take it or not. I’m absolutely committed to the principle of self-determination for every person on the planet, so the accusation that I might be compromising that principle gives me pause and makes me examine my thinking.

What would be the consequences of a magic pill to cure autism? Certainly, some people could choose to take it, and I’m all for free choice. But free choice assumes a neutral environment in which there is no pressure to make one choice or the other. We don’t have a neutral environment. We have an environment in which professionals, teachers, lay people, and well-funded organizations tell us that we are impaired, broken, sick, diseased, tragic, disordered burdens on those we love. They say that we don’t know how to love, that we can’t speak for ourselves, and that our lives aren’t of worth equal to the lives of others.

Given this environment, no matter what our place on the spectrum, how long would it be until you or I would be pressured to take “the cure”? How long would it be before parents were pressured to give their autistic children “the cure”? How long would it be before any autistic person, self-injuring or not, verbal or not, intellectually disabled or not, were pressured to take “the cure”? In the world as currently constituted, it wouldn’t be long at all.

And what might be the consequences of refusal? What might happen to a parent who refused to cure his or her child, especially if that child had been deemed “low-functioning”? There are people who believe it is child abuse to bring a disabled child into this world. What might they think of a parent who made a free-willed choice not to give the cure to his or her self-injuring child? These are the questions that give me pause.

I have realized of late, and to my great dismay, that all of the things I’ve taken pride in all my life—my intense focus, my seriousness, my blunt honesty, my rejection of social hypocrisy, my innocence, my insistence that people follow rules, my passion for fairness, my huge vocabulary, my early reading ability, my uniqueness, my acute sensitivity, my love of patterns, my nearly photographic memory—are now all evidence of a disorder. Does anyone really believe that it’s just our so-called “low-functioning” fellow travellers who might be pressured to be cured? It’s not—not when the pressure to medicate children all along the spectrum in order to render them fit for school and life is reaching dangerous proportions. The definition of what is “normal” is getting more narrow every day, and we autistics don’t fit, no matter where on the spectrum we find ourselves. I simply can’t separate myself from anyone on the spectrum and say that perhaps they should be cured and I shouldn’t. Until everyone on the spectrum has full self-determination in an environment in which free choice is a real possibility, the choices get narrower, not wider.

Parents often accuse people in the neurodiversity movement of telling them how to treat their kids. I’m not particularly comfortable with aligning myself with any movement, for a number of reasons, chief among which is that when I do, discussions tend to become polarized and unproductive. People begin seeing one another as purveyors of an ideology, rather than as human beings, with the result that both nuance and sensitivity go right out the window. But I will be an ally of anyone who fights for what’s right, and from what I can see, the neurodiversity movement is fighting for an environment in which parents and their autistic children can make free-willed, empowering choices. I have no problem stepping up and making myself an ally in that fight, because we’re all in this together, no matter how many times some people try to dismiss autistic self-advocates by telling us that we’re not really autistic and don’t really suffer.

We suffer. We suffer from all the sickness that saturates the culture in which we live. Heal this culture from its obsession with disorders. Heal the nastiness of the “autism wars.” Heal the impact of the vitriol flung at those of us who are simply asking for someone to listen. Heal the damage inflicted on entire generations of children who will grow up believing that they are broken and need to be fixed simply because they perceive the world in non-normative ways. Heal the ignorance. Heal the privilege of defining what’s “normal.” Heal a society that turns difference into disease in the blink of an eye.

And then maybe we’ll be able to have a rational conversation about the concept of cure. Until then, the conversation is simply an excuse to take out our suffering on one another, and inflicting pain doesn’t move the process forward. So I’ll keep fighting for a world that respects and celebrates each and every person, because that’s the only kind of world in which true self-determination is possible.

© 2010 by Rachel Cohen-Rottenberg

44 comments

Reflections on Being Jewish and Autistic: Different Minorities, Same Critique

September 27, 2010 Rachel Ableism, Critiques of Autism Theories, Empathy, Judaism and Jewish Life, Marginalization, Modes of Thought, Myths about Autism, Privilege

For almost two years now, I’ve become increasingly aware of how other people regard autistics. As you all know, the news is not altogether good. As I’ve waded my way through all manner of error and nonsense, I’ve had the most familiar feeling, as though I had heard it all before. The other day, it finally occurred to me: I’ve encountered the same basic stereotypes and misinformation about Jewish people as I have about autistic people.

All minority people, to some extent, have to endure similar false charges, but the similarities between my experience of prejudice as a Jew and my experience of prejudice as an autist are striking. Here are some of the most damaging myths:

We don’t love properly. In the larger, mainly Christian culture in which I’ve lived my life, the view seems to be that the Jews of the “Old Testament” were all about strict justice, and that the Christians of the “New Testament” were all about love. (I put the names of the books in quotation marks because I don’t see one as being old and outmoded and the other as having superseded it; I see them both as valid traditions in their own right.)

The Jewish God, the critique goes, is only a God of judgment, a God of punishment, a God who lacks forgiveness, and we are just like our God: cold, judgmental, merciless. The Christian God, on the other hand, is a God of love and forgiveness. When I was growing up, without much of a Jewish education, I actually believed all of this. I believed it until I was in my late thirties, and I asked a rabbi whether there was anything in Judaism to help me heal my broken heart. His reply? “Yes. Our people brought the truth to the world that there is a God who loves us and cares about our lives.” I nearly fainted. When I began to study and practice Judaism in adulthood, I was startled to find that we are instructed to love our neighbors, to love our enemies, to love mercy, and to make right the wrongs of the world.

And what did I believe about autistic people until I found out that I actually am one? I believed that autistic people don’t have empathy, the very basis of loving relationships. The lack-of- empathy trope has been at the core of autism theory for a number of years, and it’s appalling how many people still believe it. Of course, they don’t appear to have met any of the autistic people I know, nor do they seem to have much empathy for the pain and suffering this canard causes autistic people on a daily basis.

We think terms of black and white. Now, the interesting thing about this particular myth is that it betrays some pretty black-and-white thinking on the part of the people who accuse us of black-and-white thinking. For example, when people say that Jews are only about justice, it’s justice of a kind that brooks no shades of gray. Christians, on the other hand, are said to be all about love, which encompasses many, many shades of gray. But the truth is that Jewish tradition has always been concerned with a concept called tzedakah, which is essentially an action that combines justice (righting a wrong) with love (easing and, ultimately, healing the suffering of other beings). We do not think in black and white about justice and love; in fact, we combine them. To split them apart is an example of black-and-white thinking at its best.

Now, consider the myth that autistics think in black and white, usually expressed as our being all about logic and systems. In fact, some researchers believe that we have Extremely Male Brains that are high on systemizing, while non-autistics have brains that are high on empathizing. And yet, when I look at my own life, and that of other autistic people, I often see a capacity for high levels of both systemizing and empathizing, and I see them working together. We don’t split them apart. Other people do, and then they tell us that we’re the ones with the black-and-white thinking. It’s enough to make you weep.

We are excessively logical. Many people believe that Judaism is all about “legalisms,” and that it does not concentrate on coming from the heart. This particular myth is very old and very intractable, in part because most people believe that Judaism begins and ends with the “Old Testament,” ignoring thousands of years of mysticism, story-telling, discussion, ritual, and practice that are all about opening one’s heart. I’m not saying that all Jews come from the heart, any more than all Christians come from the heart. I’m saying that Jewish culture has its own ways of combining head-thinking with heart-wisdom that are little known or understood by others.

Of course, autistics are constantly stereotyped as being overly logical—except when we’re stereotyped as being out of control. And yet, somehow, we manage to have friends, families, relationships, children, and ethical lives.

We insist upon being different. For a number of years, I wore garb that clearly identified me as Jewish. For awhile, I wore a yarmulke and tzitzis (ritual fringes) every day, all day. During another period, I only wore headscarves and dresses. I now dress in a thoroughly secular fashion. When I didn’t, I got all kinds of attitude about “setting myself apart.” Of course, I wasn’t setting myself apart. I was just being myself. And I wear what I wear now because I am just being myself.

I grow. I change. I morph. I explore. I’m inconsistent. I’m human. Go figure.

Not surprisingly, I have gotten similar messages regarding my autistic sensitivities to all things sensory. I’m told that I’m “choosing” to be so sensitive, that I’m setting myself apart, when I’m really just being myself. And when my sensitivities are not as troubling, I’m also just being myself.

I grow. I change. I morph. I explore. I’m inconsistent. I’m human. Go figure.

Other people are normal, and we are abnormal. Many years ago, when my daughter was small, her father used to pick up one of her friends after school and bring him home. One December, on the way home, the young man said, “We celebrate Christmas at my house. We don’t celebrate Chanuka. We’re not like you. We’re normal.” My ex-husband took the long way home and patiently explained the concept of diversity to the young man until he got the picture.

And of course, we autists get stuck with the “abnormal” label all the time—more evidence of that dualistic, black-and-white thinking that “normal” people aren’t supposed to engage in.

We are all alike. In response to all the many myths surrounding Judaism and Jewish people, I did interfaith work for a number of years, teaching workshops in areas schools and churches. Some of the most common questions I got began with the words, “So what do Jews believe?”—as though we all believe the same thing! That was the moment I’d introduce the mantra of “You get two Jews in a room, you get three opinions.”

Likewise, it seems, people have an excessive need to see autistic people as being all alike. It usually expresses itself in terms of narrowing the definition of what autistic means. (I recently saw a YouTube video in which the mother of an autistic young man actually said that you can’t be autistic if you can speak. I was flabbergasted. ) At other times, this need to see us as alike expresses itself in conclusions by researchers that autistic people are a collection of deficits and impairments without any strengths at all. If we have strengths, they are usually called “splinter skills” (a term I despise, even though it’s got some cool alliteration and assonance going on).

Of course, we’re as varied as any other group. I’m not sure what kind of impairment, oops, I mean, neurological difference keeps people from seeing that variation. It might be interesting to do some genetic research on the matter.

We are not fully human. I first became aware that some people believe that Jews are not fully human when I was in Hebrew school and saw a piece of Nazi propaganda in which Jews were likened to vermin. I felt such pride in who I was that I just couldn’t believe my eyes. Who could really think that Jews weren’t people? Apparently, at certain times in history, a great many people.

I was reminded of this experience when I happened upon some writing by Dr. Ivar Lovaas, the psychologist who pioneered the treatment now known as Applied Behavioral Analysis. In discussing the basis of his treatment, he wrote of autistics in 1974:

“You see, you start pretty much from scratch when you work with an autistic child. You have a person in the physical sense—they have hair, a nose and a mouth—but they are not people in the psychological sense. One way to look at the job of helping autistic kids is to see it as a matter of constructing a person. You have the raw materials, but you have to build the person.”

I shudder to think of how many people still believe this kind of thing.

Of course, Jews, autistics, and members of any other minority group share similar experiences: we are vulnerable no matter how well we “pass” and live up to the standards of the larger culture, and we constantly have to fight against the appropriation of our own voices. Moreover, the solution to whatever problem we appear to pose consists of attempts to do at least one of the following: a) efface our differences to make us indistinguishable from others, b) demand at least a pro forma conversion to the dominant paradigm, which means that we can stim/rock back and forth in prayer/be ourselves, but only out of the public eye, or c) isolate us in ways both visible and invisible.

There are many, many autistic people who cannot do a “pro forma conversion,” who cannot “pass” as I do, and who have endured severe levels of bullying, assault, and isolation as a result. I shy away from the word Aspie and I use the word autistic to describe myself in order to make common cause with people across the spectrum (in the same way that I refer to myself as a Jew, not a denominational Jew, in order to make common cause with other Jews, no matter how differently they may think and practice, and how vehemently I may disagree with them). I will continue to do both. I have Asperger’s Syndrome, and that makes me autistic. I had Jewish parents, and that makes me a Jew. I may present differently from others in my group, but then again, so do trees and birds and rocks. Why should people be any less diverse than the whole of creation?

© 2010 by Rachel Cohen-Rottenberg

16 comments

On Puzzles, Privilege, and Missing Pronouns

August 24, 2010 Rachel Ableism, Critiques of Autism Theories, Marginalization, Privilege, Theory of Mind (ToM)

When I read blogs by the parents of autistic children, I often happen across the puzzle metaphor. It finds its way into statements such as “My autistic daughter is such a puzzle” or “We’re still putting together the pieces of the puzzle that is my son.” I’ve always had a visceral response to the puzzle image to describe autism and autistic people, especially when used in the puzzle-piece logo of the Organization-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named. It’s so offensive on a gut level that I’m having difficulty even beginning to write about it.

A puzzle suggests the idea that there might be some pieces missing. Of course, such an idea is anathema to me, when applied to any person on the planet. The only way in which you could look at a person and see pieces missing is if you begin with a preconceived notion of what a person is supposed to look like. If the person doesn’t fit that preconceived picture in your mind, then you see all kinds of gaps. But if you see the person for himself or herself, and accept the person as a given, without reference to an outside standard, then the picture becomes whole. The person is simply a person, on his or her own terms—nothing more and nothing less.

If you begin with an idea of “normal” that says that a person should be able to speak by the age of two like “normal” children, enjoy the same kinds of activities as “normal” adults, and socialize in a “normal” fashion, you’ve got a seriously complex, preconceived image of what it means to be a whole person. It’s nearly impossible that any atypical person could even begin to approach that image of normal. When we don’t, some of us are told that we’ve got pieces missing. Autistic people are told that we lack empathy, theory of mind, central coherence, and the ability to live as social beings—which, by the by, is all complete and utter nonsense, just in case you were wondering.

So who gets to decide what picture is normal? Other people who have the privilege of defining themselves as normal, that’s who. It’s a nearly invisible privilege for the most part, because it’s everywhere. It’s taken me a long time to see it and, ironically enough, I’ve begun to see it by virtue of what is missing from the language of many of the non-autistic people who talk about us.

Two words are missing from the statement “My autistic daughter is such a puzzle”—two little words that would change that sentence from an expression of privilege to an expression of a personal experience. And those two little words are to me. If someone were to write, “My daughter is such a puzzle to me,” then we’d be getting somewhere. All it takes is the inclusion of the personal pronoun. Of course, there is still that little issue of the puzzle metaphor, which runs the risk of portraying the child as a series of pieces, but at least the source of the fragmented perception would stay where it belongs: in the eye of the beholder. The speaker would be taking responsibility for describing his or her own limited perception rather than an objective fact.

Another example of this limited perception appeared on a recent blog by a parent who said that her autistic child is afraid of things “that just aren’t scary.” She didn’t say “that just aren’t scary to me.” She said, “that just aren’t scary,” as though there were an objective measure of what’s scary. These words imply that somewhere in the far reaches of the universe, there is some ideal called scary, we all know what it is and, if we’re scared of things that don’t measure up to that ideal of scary, something is terribly wrong. Now, I have always assumed that being frightened was a subjective experience, and that an image or a situation that frightened one person might not frighten another. I have never assumed that what went on in my own mind was exactly the same as what went on in other people’s minds. Far from it.

But wait a minute. I remember reading somewhere that being able to understand that other people think differently than I do is called having Theory of Mind (ToM). So, miracle of miracles, I actually have ToM, autistic though I am! And when a non-autistic person can’t imagine why an autistic person might be afraid of something, that non-autistic person seems to lack ToM. I see evidence that non-autistic people lack ToM regarding autistic people all the time. In fact, I see it in the work of “experts” on autism, and yet rarely does anyone call them on it. Usually, the ones who do the calling out are autistic people like me, who by definition don’t understand ToM, so we’re dismissed before we begin.

And once we’re dismissed, people can own the discourse about us and say just about anything they want. Consider the following:

A non-autistic person says that the world of an autistic person is a puzzle. That statement is taken as objective truth by most non-autistic people. In fact, it is irrefutable evidence that the person speaking is “normal” and that the person being spoken of has a “disorder.” All too often, family, friends, teachers, and professionals look at the autistic person, shake their heads, and say, “Yes, you’re right. Poor thing. He certainly is a puzzle!”

An autistic person says that the world of neurotypical people is a puzzle. That statement is taken as a purely subjective perception by most non-autistic people. In fact, it is irrefutable evidence that the person speaking has a “disorder” and that the people being spoken of are “normal.” All too often, family, friends, teachers, and professionals look at the autistic person, shake their heads, and say, “Poor thing. He’s so impaired. He just doesn’t understand us.”

Could the arbitrary nature of privilege be any clearer when one set of people has “understanding” when they don’t understand, and the other set of people is “impaired” when they don’t understand? Maybe it’s that I’m autistic, or a born democrat, or hopelessly addicted to fairness, but I find this kind of imbalance deeply disturbing and painfully unjust.

So what do I do when I meet the puzzle metaphor? Well, obviously, I write about it. And yet, the best response to it I’ve seen is a photo on the blog of my friend Elesia Ashkenazy. I’ve taken her lead and created a sign of my own:


















If you want one, send me a photo by email and tell me what colors you’d like for the top and bottom, and I’ll make you your own sign. And if you’re comfortable with my publishing it on my blog, let me know. I’d love to have a post filled with signs like this, but only if people are comfortable with their faces being out there for the world to see. I do not “out” people, and I never will.

© 2010 by Rachel Cohen-Rottenberg

18 comments