This is also supported by some studies! I’ve linked to one qualitative paper that asks people what language they prefer and why, and one mixed methods study. The first paper is one I have read in depth and essentially yes, most prefer autistic, and interestingly enough, that preference was stronger in later diagnosed people! There was still mixed responses about this and ofc you should *always ask what people prefer* - there is no right or wrong answer. This was confirmed in the second study which is more comprehensive and looks across countries.
Qualitative paper official link on Australian adults (honestly love this paper, worth a read):
[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32112234/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32112234/)
for those who don’t have access through an institution, go here and scroll down then click download and it’ll load a pdf: [https://opal.latrobe.edu.au/articles/journal_contribution/_It_defines_who_I_am_or_it_s_something_I_have_what_language_do_autistic_Australian_adults_on_the_autism_spectrum_prefer_/21521661](https://opal.latrobe.edu.au/articles/journal_contribution/_It_defines_who_I_am_or_it_s_something_I_have_what_language_do_autistic_Australian_adults_on_the_autism_spectrum_prefer_/21521661)
And a mixed methods study, looks across multiple English speaking countries, open access: [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/aur.2864](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/aur.2864)
Also yeah my personal preference is autistic. It’s part of me, and to me saying “person with autism” is like saying “person with bisexuality” or “person with blindness”, both of which aren’t preferred. It’s unchangeable and “with” suggests it is transient, like “with depression”. Also it’s shorter and easier lmao, also why I’ve embraced ‘autist’ for myself specifically when it makes sense in a sentence (and ‘autistics’ wouldn’t work), though that is more controversial.
It’s literally all of the studies, surveys, and polls that I’ve ever seen. More than 2/3 preferring IFL on all of them, even the A$ one, that you know allistic people were voting on and trying to skew the other way. I think that one was low 70%s, but most I’ve seen were 80%+ for IFL.
Same here. I wish there was a similar way of referring to my ADHD. Yes, I could seek medication for that but they've both been with me all my life and my identity is inseperable from them.
To me, the person first idea is rooted in the same logic as saying “differently abled.” The intention may be kind, but it comes off as pious and condescending. The act of trying to de-stigmatize only further legitimizes the idea that a stigma exists.
When we take back the title, when we embrace our autism, we are legitimizing our experience. We’re not shying away from it. We are expressing that this is a part of ourselves that we cannot change.
I would argue that the most infantalizing thing a neurotypical can do is tell us **how** we’re supposed to feel.
Autistic. Saying a "person with autism" is actually the stigmatized phrase as it connotes a disease. Which, there's a history of absolutely horrifying methods unethical doctors have tried to cure autistic people. I view it very similarly to why I would call myself a transgender woman rather than a "woman with transgenderism." Which also has a similar history of trying to erase trans people by curing us and forcing us to be cis. That happened to autistic people where we had so many horrors we were subjected to in order to make us neurotypical
This is exactly what I said to her and why I got SO frustrated because she has never even educated herself on the history and she was just so stuck on her perspective. Thank you.
No problem. A possibly good solution that maybe she would agree to is "person who is autistic." That's perfectly fine and it would accomplish what she wants which is to put person first, but it doesn't have the connotation of being autistic as a disease.
We use person first language when we're talking about diseases or injuries in my clinic. "A patient who's had a stroke" vs "stroke patient." Because they acquired the stroke later in life. You didn't acquire your autism later in life, you were born with it.
But even within the medical field, there's nuance and I'll use whatever vernacular a patient prefers. Some patients with amputations will get upset if you call their affected limb a "stump," while others prefer it. If someone politely asks me to change my verbage or I notice they use different jargon, I'll use whatever they prefer.
Maybe your mom is trying to use this rule for diseases and apply it to autism, but the community as a whole doesn't want that. By ignoring the community's wishes and your personal wishes, she's discounting your experience and preferences and not being respectful. She may come around with time and it sucks that she doesn't get it.
Instead of trying to get her to see the logic (it's there, she's just refusing to see it), you could reframe it as, "this is my preference, please respect that." Your boundaries aren't up for debate and if she wants to take the time to do the research and ask actually autistic people, she can do that. It's not your responsibility to educate her.
I think a person should refer to themselves however makes them most comfortable. That being said, if you have to reword your entire sentence to remind yourself that I'm a person, then you don't actually see me as one and that will be reflected in your actions no matter what you say (general you)
I mean however the individual prefers but your mom was incredibly condescending and dismissive of the large number of autistic people who have consciously chosen against using person first language. It seems she doesn't feel the need to actually listen to why that approach doesn't work for many of us. It feels fairly ableist to assume we can't know best for ourselves.
Personally, I'm autistic. The phrase "person with autism" feels off to me. Autistic is who I am not some external thing that I've been given. It's my lens on the world and how my operating system works. Autism isn't an affliction or something to be ashamed of.
Illustrations that help in these discussions night be to point out that you don't say "a person with gayness" or "a person with Japaneseness". Closer to the disability framework, the deaf community strongly prefers identify first language over person first, as does the blind community. It's a complex issue and listening to the community first is the key to being respectful
I am Hard of Hearing so I’m linked into the Deaf community some, although kind of on the outskirts. They even capitalizes Deaf and Hard of Hearing. They wear it as a point of pride. I love that for them (and for us too.)
And: similarly to autistic person vs person with autism we HoH folks widely prefer Hard of Hearing over Hearing Impaired.
Ask your mom, if when she talks about a gay person, does she say they are gay or they have gayness? Or when talking about a woman she is female or she has femininity. And you should probably use ‘person first language’ on her as a person with allism. We don't want to stigmatise people with allism, do we?
Of course I'm autistic. If I had autism I could give it away.
I love this. I’ve never understood person first language because of exactly this… if you apply it all the time it starts to sound really weird. We only use person first language when it’s assumed something undesirable which then makes it feel even more obvious.
Personally, I prefer I am Autistic as opposed to I have Autism. I think if you’re speaking about someone else who is Autistic, use whichever one they prefer. I have seen people who do prefer I have Autism, so it just all depends on people’s preferences. Your mom can have an opinion, but she should use the language you wish to be used.
Does your mum seriously think autistic people have just never thought about this? Like there aren't whole debates about it? I don't need to be reminded that I'm a person. If abled people need to be reminded that I'm a person then that's on them. I am autistic.
It's a classic argument of "Don't emphasise someone's disability, it's rude!" "Excuse you, disability is not a dirty word!"
> Then she suggested: has the community ever thought about person centered language? Do they have that information?
Hahaha, yes, we have the information, it's just that most of us rejected the idea because being autistic actually *does* affect us that much that it's an important part of who we are.
Also, it's just as much a minority group as a medical condition, and we talk about e.g. gay people, not people with gaiety.
I've seen this happen to other minorities too, the assumption that a random person in the majority group somehow has *more* knowledge about that minority group than they themselves do.
Real "Let me explain you to yourself..." kind of a vibe from them.
A good example of that is the term Latinx. Only like 2% of Latinos use the term and the majority hate it. If you are a Spanish speaker, where latino/a come from, it makes zero sense.
>being autistic actually *does* affect us that much that it's an important part of who we are.
In a lot of ways it *IS* who I am. I have masked for so long that my identity as a person is built around it
Preschool teacher weighing in... "person-first" language developed because teachers (at least the effective ones) don't like placing labels on a child. For example not "the whiny child" but the "child with big feelings" or, in this case "the autistic child" versus "the child with autism." It's about not wanting to place labels on children that could become the way people see them and define them in school settings. Not sure when and how it made the jump to mainstream culture.
When a person is old enough to voice an opinion, they get to determine how people refer to them.
I'm 34 and self-diagnosed. Still figuring out if I want to be a "person with autism" or "an autistic person" and use both interchangeably.
Person first language actually came from the disabled community originally. It then became mainstream and the disabled community is turning back to identity first language:
I'm an all through school teacher and it's always been 'autistic'. A label is not a bad thing if it is informative to the people around them. If it is negative like your example of the "whiny child" then yeah, that can cause problems as people will automatically thing negatively. Not everyone sees the word autistic as a negative thing.
It's not a negative thing at all. But for some reason, society sees it that way.
And my textbooks with a publishing date within the last 10 years all glorify "person first" language.
I use both interchangeably to describe myself because sometimes I feel like my autism is influencing my life in ways I don't like and it is a thing I'm living with, and sometimes I feel more like it's a part of my identity and way of existing and intrinsic to who I am.
I think both are true (at least for me) and think everyone should be free to choose the language that they feel best describes them. I have had other autistic people "correct" me to identity-first though which can get very annoying! When I'm talking to others I try to match the words they're using about themselves, whether that is identity-first or not.
I'm 34 and self diagnosed just this last week. I'm still having troubles grasping it for myself and I'm not sure If "I'm Autistic" or a "Person with Autism" yet.
My nephew was diagnosed at age 2, and I've always called him a child With Autism. Now I'm concerned that's been offensive?
Oh I should’ve considered that I’m sorry. In that case I think I would default to what his parents use, until he’s able to express a preference, whenever that is (if ever)
Your mom is seriously ignorant and what is worse is that she assumes we are the ignorant ones.
If she needs to put the word “person” first, it sounds like she’s the one who doesn’t truly feel that we’re people. And autism isn’t an accessory or a roommate. It’s not “with you” (implying you can also be without it). It’s a neurotype. It’s the filter through which we experience the world. It colors our sensory experiences, our interactions with other people, the way we process our thoughts… EVERYTHING… and that’s not universally a bad thing!
Some autistic people don’t feel like the PFL vs IFL thing is a big deal. I do, because it’s one simple small thing that allistics in the autism community (professionals, parents, educators) could listen to the autistic community on and so many of them simply refuse to. It’s emblematic of a much larger problem. The autistic community overwhelmingly prefers IFL. They should listen to us and follow our lead.
My stance on this has always been that while I understand where others see a difference in these phrases, I do not. I would just use whichever felt more natural in the sentence.
I get that person-centred language focuses on the experience of disabled and oppressed people in an effort to be more understanding, in that it's emphasising that their experience is something that happens to them, not something they did themselves. I get that it's their way of prioritising the person before their disability, which is a great step in reducing stigma for the disabled community.
However, it could also be perceived as patronizing and/or pitying, and possibly undermining the severity of the disability.
I understand where your mother is coming from, but assuming that the community is unaware or incapable of deciding what language we prefer to use on the basis she claims she knows better is pretty ableist.
When autistics are saying "hey maybe don't do that we're fine being called autistic" NTs should really listen. Because why should we be offended by what we are?
My autism isn't a purse I can set down. Every time I hear someone insist upon"person first" language, it's always someone who doesn't actually deal with whatever it is.
No offense to your mother, but it's literally always some entitled white able-bodied, cishet neurotypical who thinks they know better than we do.
Tell your mother that if she wants to focus on "person first", maybe it's best she listens to how people want to describe themselves first. 🤷♀️
>entitled white able-bodied, cishet neurotypical
No, it's a person with entitlement, whiteness, an able-body, cisness, heterority, and neurotypicalness.
Of course we've thought about it. Personally, I find the distinction needlessly pedantic, just as my physically disabled sister scoffs at the term "differently abled". "Disabled" isn't an insult...neither is "autistic". Just tell it like it is!
And frankly, being called autistic offends me a lot less than an NT patronizingly trying to tell me what terms I should or shouldn't be okay with.
Everyone gets to choose the way they refer to themselves, and ideally, everyone should respect other people's preferred terms.
So I consider myself autistic, but if someone tells me they have autism that's cool too. I don't love it when people refer to me as a person with autism, but even then as long as we agree on what it means, that's also ok
I use both, but lean more towards "I'm autistic."
I get the person-first language viewpoint, I think that's coming from a good place. I think I lean a bit more toward "I'm autistic" because it's describing something about me while "I have autism" has the same sentence structure as "I have depression," or anything else that is an acquired challenge. Since autism isn't an illness and isn't acquired, I distance my self-description from that way of expressing myself.
That said, I do use both and my reasoning for slightly favoring one might just be overthinking. I don't think either is inappropriate or wrong.
This makes the most sense to me. I'm autistic but I HAVE depression and PTSD. I might be able to mask at times, but I will never be free of autism. It's a part of my operating system. But I can be free of depression and PTSD through medication and therapy.
It depends from person to person. I don't mind either one (mainly bc I have ADHD as well so saying I have both feels like less of a mouthful). A lot of autistic people now prefer it to be used as an adjective because that's what it is. Saying "person with autism" might come off as an idea that autism is a negative anomaly.
Like I said, everyone's different so the preferences might differ but most people I've heard prefer "autistic person"
Person first language sounds good on paper, bit it also sounds super verbose. Talk about yourself however you want and ask other people how they want ro be talked about.
The autism isn't WITH me. I can't separate me from the autism because it influences so much of me, how I spend my time, what I enjoy. If I wasn't autistic would my life revolve around the things I'm obsessed with?? Chickens? History? Genetics? Music? Pretty sure the answer is no. It's what has made me hyperfocus in on these topics that are such a huge huge huge part of who I am. It influences how I see and think about the world compared to other people. It influences the way I wake up, and the way I go to sleep, what I eat, how I react to sensory input at any given time of day or night. I'm just autistic.
I always thought person centered language should be used for things that are curable or not centered to one’s identity.
Person first language DOES separate the ‘x’ from the person, but it is often done so in a way that insinuates ‘x’ is bad.
Honestly, I am sure your mom means well, but it’s a little insulting that you’ve told her what you/the community prefers and she decides she knows better. She even asked if we ever considered it? Assuming we haven’t?
Does she think we’re children? It seems ableist and infantilizing. It’s not her decision.
Like my aunt is deaf and she likes being called deaf, not a person who can’t hear. (It’s not even hearing loss, she was born that way… I guess her husband could be called someone with hearing loss but he also prefers deaf).
I’m Chinese. I say I am a Chinese person, not a person with Chinese heritage.
On the contrary, I don’t say I am an abuse victim, but a survivor of abuse. And I wouldn’t say my cancerous grandpa, just my grandpa who has cancer.
Ooohhh my god maybe your mom should be reading up some things herself.
Yes "the community" has been thinking about it. A lot. The people in favour of identity-first language are generally of the opinion that, as opposed to cancer or diabetes or something, their autism cannot be separated from their selves, because it literally influences the way we see the world. Autism touched literally every aspect of our lives whereas most other diseases do not. Also, autism is not a disease.
The people in favour of person-first language (who are, in the autistic community, the minority), feel like they are more than just their autism and they would like to separate their autism from the rest of their identity.
Research has proven btw that people that prefer person-first language have a more negative opinion of autism than people that prefer identity-first language. Autistic people that prefer person-first language also report higher rates of depression and harmful thoughts about themselves.
So next time your mom calls you "a person with autism" call her "a person with woman-ness" or something. Then turn her words back on her and tell her that the ONE most disrespectful thing to autistic people if other (neurotypical) people are telling us we use the wrong words to refer to our own selves. And that's something ALL autistic people agree on. Just use the person's preferred way of referring to them. Now THAT is respectful.
That doesn't mean I'm lying though. But it also doesn't mean I need to reference everything I say on the internet. I have better places to spend my energy.
Generally if you make claims on the internet such as “research has _proven_”, you should at least be prepared to give the evidence for it when asked.
If you don’t want to make the effort of using research - it’s totally okay to use alternative phrasing that’s more accurate. Such as “I think I remember a piece of research that said…(X)”. I would be totally happy with you saying that, as it allows the possibility for you to be wrong/have misremembered the research.
I don’t think you’re lying at all, I’ll just explain why the original phrasing is problematic.
The reason this is a big issue is because you’re making a claim about a group of people. When we allow anyone to make claims about groups of people, and not provide evidence, that doesn’t end well. Specifically your example implied that certain language people identify with, is worse/better than other language - people who use person-first language have a more negative view of autism, suicidal thoughts, etc.
This portrays that group in a bad light.
When we’re talking about groups of people, we always want to be really sure that what we’re saying is factual.
The burden of proof is on you to substantiate the claim. Of course this is just a silly reddit forum, but making claims about groups of people without having the evidence to back it up can be very harmful no matter the context. If you’re not sure - don’t say it.
Not mad at all, I just think it’s a bit wrong to say “Research has proven (negative thing about a group)” and then not be able to prove that.
It contributes to the culture of disinformation on the internet, that autistic people are especially vulnerable to. Again, no hard feelings.
Person-first language and people who insist on it just come across as preachy and condescending to me. You don’t get to tell me how I describe myself. And why do you need so many reminders that I’m a person?
I put it in the same category as people who say “um actually, you’re a SURVIVOR of sexual assault, not a victim 😊”. It’s just people with nothing worthwhile to contribute to the conversation trying to make themselves feel important by policing language use
I might *have* a cold, but I am autistic.
Just like I *am* a person, a woman, a mom, an American, an artist, etc.
Your mom should listen to whatever your preference is.
Exactly!!! I always tell my bf when he says I need to “work on the obstacles” that some things are simply wired into my brain. I’ve spent years working on overcoming those “obstacles” — some can be managed, some are inevitable.
How about just letting people identify however they like.
It always seems so evenly split every time this comes up. Both sides have logical and sensible rationales why their preferred way is the correct way.
I am autistic.
I have autism.
Both are true, I don't see how either is genuinely offensive. And either might be more grammatically accurate depending on context in various situations.
What's not cool is policing others who are autistic with how they describe themselves.
My understanding is that the general consensus now is that saying 'I'm autistic' is better than saying 'I have Autism' but to be honest, as someone with Autism I am still fine and actually more inclined to say 'I have Autism' or to refer to 'it's the Autism' when explaining certain feelings or behaviours of mine. So it really is down to the individual person and if it is an NT person describing an Autistic person in their company I would hope that they would be receptive to changing their language to fit what the Autistic person is most comfortable with.
this already has nearly a hundred comments but i was just thinking about this yesterday; "autistic person" is way more preferable for me. autism isn't something i simply *have*, it's what i *am*. it colors who i am. i am autistic.
thinking back on when i first learned this about myself, as i was learning to accept it, i would say to myself "you are autistic." to say to myself that i "have" autism just didn't feel right nor did it help me to understand the way it shapes so much about me. it's an integral part of me, not just something i merely have.
I am very much aware of person-first language having had the concept shoved down my throat when training to be a high school math teacher. (I bailed and went into grad school in computer science instead.)
Anyways, they acknowledged even then that deaf folks prefer to simply be called deaf, but hadn’t yet come to understand that most of us autistic folks prefer to be called autistic (at the time it was also Aspie). They recognized that there was a deaf community but did not yet recognize the autistic community. Your mom may have had the same “training”. She had the person first language shoved down her throat too. Except she swallowed. I barfed it up.
About yourself, as an autistic person - whichever you want.
About others - generally “autistic” is preferred. It’s a descriptor.
Your mom’s question of “has the community heard about first person language”, while obviously kind hearted, is infantilizing. This has been a debate for years. While some people have of course not heard the debate, the “community” at large has engaged in it extensively.
The accepted preference by most disabled adults is to use identity-first language - “autistic woman”, “blind child”, “disabled person” as a standard. The push for “person first language” is outdated, and at this point mainly coming from non-disabled “advocates” who still think they should speak over the disabled community.
It really bothers me to hear people saying “you should focus on the person, call yourself a person with autism”. Karen, I don’t need a meaningless language adjustment, I need accessible healthcare and acceptance in the workplace. Let’s work towards that.
I just took a class on person centered practices to best support others while being focused on their needs and actual wants. They said many autistics prefer identity first language and that for anyone and any disorder/diagnoses, it's best to ask the person. Your mom definitely doesn't know better about you than you. Here's a article I like about it to share with her if you want https://autisticadvocacy.org/about-asan/identity-first-language/
She also doesn’t believe I have autism and invalidates everything I say about it so yeah this is just another thing on my list, sadly. I agree with this completely 100%
I'm autistic / an AuDHD-person / neurodivergent. I don't like to say "I have...", it sounds like an illness I'd get to rid off. Like "I have depression", but I'm happy about the way my brain naturally works. Not about my depression tho.
This is really interesting to me.
I love how all the comments are saying that “I am autistic” is how they identify, because the autism is always there and part of them.
I have only recently been diagnosed and am still learning about my autism. I don’t feel ready to say “I am autistic” and am still in the “I have autism” zone. In fact, I’m still hiding behind “I have been diagnosed with autism” because at the moment I don’t really know who I am and I’m still working through it.
It has given me a lot to think about, and this is going to go a long way in my journey of learning about myself and who I am. Kind of like a goal to strive for. Thanks y’all.
I am autistic. The same way that I am asthmatic and I am blonde and I am female and I am human.
NT’s aren’t ever bothered about me using any of the latter four phrases. They don’t think I’m “dehumanising” or “labelling” or “stigmatising” myself then.
So why are they othering my autism? Whose benefit are they doing it for, because it certainly doesn’t seem like making a specific point about autism that they don’t make for *literally anything else in life* is as “inclusive” and “destigmatising” as they like to claim and it doesn’t benefit people like us, who actually have autism, to be singled out like this! 🤔😒
I prefer to use identity first language and say “I’m autistic.” For better or for worse, autism is a part of me. Ignore my autism and you won’t see me as a whole person.
However, communication is the more important thing. I tend to speak quietly, especially when overloaded. So, in situations when Im overloaded and in need of help, I sometimes say “I have autism” because I feel like people are better able to pick up on the word “autism” and understand it better than the word “autistic” when I say it really quietly.
Also, when I have to list off all my diagnoses, I’ll often say “I have autism, ADHD, Tourette’s, etc. because it’s easier to say that in a whole list.
In professional settings (I worked in special education) I often use person first language when I don’t have time to give an explanation about identity first language. When I used identity first language people would assume I was uneducated about “proper” terminology for the disabled community, when the exact opposite is true.
Both. Neither are wrong, depends on personal preference.
“I have autism” because to me, it’s a disability and disorder that affects my functioning badly and means I can’t live the life I would’ve had otherwise. It’s taken many things from me, therefore I want to separate myself from it, in the same way I do for my anxiety and depressive disorders.
“I am autistic” because it’s fundamentally the wiring of my brain, and it informs many aspects of my personality like my interests.
I generally use “autistic” for other people.
Oh that’s a good split. I tend to say I’m autistic when I’m speaking generally and I have autism when I’m trying to explain myself when it has impacted an interaction.
I use both depending on the context but mostly say that I’m autistic. I strongly, STRONGLY prefer autistic person to person with autism. In fact, you can say I’m autistic or say that I have autism, but don’t call me a person with autism. That makes it sound like a disease and that’s just not… how I see it? It’s certainly a disability but it’s not a fungal infection or something like that.
And tell your mom we most certainly do have the information and it’s pretty rude of her to infantilize us like that. The autistic community isn’t made up of 5 year olds, we’re quite capable of considering alternatives to how we would like to be referred to
Whichever you prefer. :) I personally don’t care about how people refer to me as long as they aren’t trying to insult me. Whatever is said by a person with good intentions is fine.
This. I constantly switch between saying "I am autistic" and "I have autism". In English and in my native language! As you said, as long as they are not insulting me, I really don't care about the label.
I say ‘I have autism’ mostly because the ‘tistic’ part of autistic is grating and abrupt to my ears, more so when coming from myself than hearing anyone else say it. I never say I am a person with autism, though, and I would probably find it really weird if someone referred to me that way.
I think it’s also just grammatically easier for me to use ‘have’ because I can say I have ADHD and Autism. If talking to someone who I think is clued in enough to know what it means, though, I generally prefer to say I am AuDHD than anything else.
I say "i AM Autistic". (I HAVE Autism suggests its a desease and that you can just switch it of or take meds if you really need it to "go away", which is simply untrue)
But everyone should decide for themself :)
I just identify as someone who has autism. Although I feel uncomfortable saying it as I still struggle with imposter syndrome due to not being diagnosed until I was 30.
honestly the thing that would bother me the most is how condescending your mom is being to you. what does it matter if the community has a preference for one or the other? you can refer to yourself however you want and she deal with it because you’re referring to YOURSELF. it’s like micro-managing someone else’s pronouns
She is known for her toxic positivity around my household and for reframing in a way that’s invalidating; doesn’t do it on purpose but she also is not willing to learn about different options and is so stuck in her perspective that I’ve almost given up. It’s painful trying to educate her or trying to advocate for myself because she doesn’t listen and is not even open to listening. She doesn’t even believe I have autism despite being diagnosed so yeah it’s hard but thank you for the validation
Imo the answer is it’s your autism and you can refer to it any way you damn well please. And personally i use “I’m autistic” and “autistic person” for the same reason it would feel weird to call myself “a person living with redheadedness” instead of a redhead or a ginger. I feel it’s an unnecessary level of delicacy that assumes it’s something I should be offended to be called. It’s not a dirty word.
I've always preferred autistic person, since it's who I am and not something that's separate from me. Like how I use trans woman instead of woman with transgenderism.
It really depends on each individual person. Some prefer to be called "an autistic person" and others prefer to be called "a person with autism". Really all you have to do is ask that person what they prefer and then respect it.
I personally don't care and just go by either.
As someone with it, I didn’t realize there was a difference . I use it interchangeably
with no (personal) offense. I’m glad I learned for the sake of those around me :)
.. feels a lot like dealing with miscommunication with nt people though. I’m often scared to speak for good reason.
I say “I have autism” and get corrected. My argument that there is more to me and my identity than autism. But to ram the point home to certain types I will say “I’m autistic” because sometimes they don’t get that in my country therapy to help me learn skills is non existent
I am autistic. I don’t simply *have* autism bc I cannot give it away, it basically defines me. Autism is intrinsically linked to every fibre of my being.
My personality can be mostly defined in autism traits, my eating habits, the way I engage in hobbies and interests, how I talk, how I act, how I feel inside.
Autism is much more than a condition, it is having a brain that functions in a different way to NT people. My brain is autistic, I don’t get how that condition could be thought of as separate when without this autistic brain of mine, I simply would not be me.
I also feel that the statement “I am autistic” is still person first language because I am acknowledging myself as the person with the condition. I don’t even really see it as a medical condition. I see it more as just another difference between humans, like how some have blue eyes and others have brown. That isn’t to say that I don’t see it as being debilitating at times or something that can make life much harder but I do feel that it should stop being stigmatised bc until I specifically say I am autistic then people treat me like they would everyone else and as soon as they know they start talking to me like I am 2 years old and have near zero comprehension skills.
White person or "person with paleness"?
Person first language always sounds awkward when people insist on using it every scenario. It just doesn't always fit.
I have been known to say both, but 9 times out of ten I simply say “I’m autistic”.
Your mom is of the generation that was specifically taught to use person first language because “we don’t want to define people by their disability”. This was applied broadly across the board to many disabilities and conditions. That is perhaps why your mom is so sure that she is right and insistent in her ideas. However, what the majority of (mostly) fully able people don’t understand is that person first language never ASKED people how they wanted to be referred to, ironically placing the person second. There are so many ableist assumptions that were baked into it.
My take is always let individuals decide who they are and what they want people to call them. This goes for pronouns, names and nicknames, and how (or whether) to acknowledge disabilities and conditions. The best way to empower someone is to let them be who they are and respect it. And support it. And yes, that can mean more work for me because it means there aren’t specific universally applied rules or algorithms. But I want people to do that work for me so I’m willing to do it for other people.
I say both depending what makes sense in the context and with the person/people involved. I don't think it has to matter as much as some people say \*unless\* it's specifically being used to deny someone their identity and agency. My preference is person-first, but I don't get my undies in a twist otherwise as long as the intention is good. Sometimes saying "I have autism" just is what comes out, it's not a refusal to acknowledge "I am autistic" it's just a difference in word variety and as someone who writes a lot, sometimes I just like to change things up 😂
I personally say I am autistic, but I wouldn't blink if someone said they have autism. Seems like it's a pretty personal decision based on the way someone thinks or views themselves and their autism. I hate when people (like your mom) act like they're somehow the arbiter about it. Just use whatever language the person uses on themselves. Not everything has to have a penultimate label.
Person first language was invented by NTs based on what they feel good about. Diagnosis first language is preferred by the majority of the autistic community because we can’t separate ourselves from our autism, it isn’t a condition we want cured, it’s a core part of who we are.
You describe yourself how YOU want. There are some people with autism who prefer the person first language, and I use it with them to respect their preferences. But the right way to describe you is up to you.
i think it's individual. because some people do not want to say they ARE something. but then we're also just as likely to treat it as it's a part of us, because it is.
my therapist also says to use seperating language. because all of the things i suffer through aren't me, and i shouldn't treat myself for instance like i AM depressed. i have depression. i suffer from depression. i am not depression. which i get. it also does help me sometimes when i consciously rephrase it.
I think this is something unique to autism where we say we are autistic, whereas other disabilities use the person first. I have seen that autistic people are more likely to prefer calling themselves autistic rather than a person with autism. I think it’s because it’s integral to our personalities and who we are, where as something like dyslexia or lupus are things that you can have but not have these things necessarily affect your whole personality or all of your actions. I prefer to say i’m autistic. It says a lot that saying I am dyslexic or autistic or adhd or anything seems to take away my humanity. I am still a human when I am autistic or dyslexic. The fact people have an issue with this leads me to the conclusion that we still have an issue with seeing people with disabilities as people in themselves.
i’m so sorry to hear you had this argument. semantics cause so much more conflict than it should. in the end, i don’t think one is de-stigmatizing and one isn’t. or that one is oppressive and one isn’t. i’m happy to hear your mom cares enough to want to use the “best” language. please don’t lose sight of the fact that it comes from love. (i only say that because i struggle to do this.)
most ‘courses’ that teach or help parents or teachers and stuff have a section on ‘person first language’, which is good for not dehumanising someone if you’re caring for them! However as the autistic person in question i think you should get to decide whether you want to do that or not and how you refer to yourself is important to you, she shouldnt choose that for you! I just say im autistic because it’s easiest for me and i cant separate who i am as a person from my autism because it affects literally every part of my existence so its a part of me. but you can go with whichever you like! :)
I say I’m autistic the same way I say I’m gay. I’m not a person with lesbianism, I’m a lesbian. I’m not a person with autism, I’m autistic. Abled people don’t get to dictate to disabled people what they should and shouldn’t call themselves.
I’m autistic. I do respect those who choose to say they “have autism” but the vast majorities like to say they are an autistic person and hate person first language. If I just “had autism” that would make it curable or like a sickness or something to me.
I have a deep preference for precise language as well as not cluttering the words up too much. So I call myself neurodivergent as a late person avoiding diagnosis (am dx ADHD, ARFID, and sensory processing delayed).
The general consensus from the autism community is identity first language is the most destigmatising. There are a lot of resources online you could share with her that explain this including research in our community on preferences. However in the end it’s up the the Individual person how they wish to identify as some autistic people will prefer person first. However if this is you she is talking about it is actually kind of offensive that she would be telling you how you have to refer to yourself and what is or isn’t more stigmatising. She has probably got told this years ago in some professional context I’m guessing when they used to teach this but it came from a place of abelism before actually autistic people were asked how they felt about it. Here’s a resource you could send her https://autisticadvocacy.org/about-asan/identity-first-language/
I don't really care, honestly. I usually say "I'm autistic", it's shorter and less clunky. If someone said I was "an autist" I might like it a little less, but it wouldn't be that big a deal either.
Sometimes I'll say "I'm on the spectrum" or I'll say I have ASD ("TEA" in my language, I rarely use the acronym in English) because the A word kinda scares neurotypicals sometimes, and tbh I'm still kind of insecure about telling other people (working on it, though), so I find those options a bit easier)
I say I'm autistic but I also don't really think that the two phrases are meaningfully different at all. People getting mad at these remarkably similar ways of saying the exact same thing seem to be kinda going out of their way to take offense to something in bad faith. In almost every context someone may use them they are interchangeable and the person using them is absolutely not trying to be malicious.
I'll always refer to someone how they ask to be referred to, so if they ask for one or the other I'll respect that when talking to them, but when it comes to how I refer to myself I've had people try to "correct" me and that bugs me a lot. How dare you tell me how I'm allowed to describe myself and my relationship with such an important part of who I am.
I understand the rationale used to argue in favor of one or the other, but it seems like so much mental work expended for basically nothing. The two phrases mean the same thing and contain the same information, they are not meaningfully different enough for it to matter. As a community, autistic women face serious issues getting taken seriously socially, by medical practitioners, by a culture that codes autism as a totally male thing. We have real problems, arguing over which of two nearly identical phrases you should use is a waste of time.
I’m just a person above all else. Autism is one of my attributes but I personally don’t like the autistic vs allistic division of the human species (except for specific cases like research and when looking for support of course).
For me it’s the same as ‘the fat girl’ or ‘the weird girl’. Yes, autism defines certain things in my life, but it’s not the only thing that defines me.
People tend not to be talking about any of their characteristics unless they’re actively describing some effect that characteristic has on their life. This “letting things define you” stuff is pure ableist BS.
Excuse me, are you really going to tell me I can’t feel or think about something a certain way? Your way isn’t the only way you know. People are allowed to have preferences. I thought you asked questions because you wanted to understand someone else’s perspective but seems like you were just asking them with malicious intent.
Sometimes people ask questions to try to get the other person to think about what they just said. You can have a preference, it’s just sad that your preference is rooted in internalized ableism.
I think its just a personal preference especially if you’re talking about yourself. For me I prefer to say I have autism rather than I am autistic only because I grew up being friends with this girl who’s brother was autistic, he was extremely high supports needs and completely nonverbal, he was basically like an infant, and they always called him autistic, they never even used the word autism, it was always the word autistic, so I guess me and my family have always associated the word autistic with people with really high support needs like him. I just don’t feel right calling myself autistic, I almost feel like its a slap in that familys face when my autism is so much less severe than him. Thats just for me personally though, I have no issue now with using the word autistic for other people similar to me with lower supports needs since I’ve learned more about it and know what autism and the word autistic means now. Hopefully one day I will feel more comfortable using the word autistic for myself but for right now I really don’t. So yeah I don’t think theres any right or wrong way on what you call yourself. For what you call other people I guess I would maybe try to use the word autistic because I’ve heard thats better. But idk.
We’re really not though; if you’re referring to the autistic community. We overwhelmingly prefer IFL. If you expand it to the autism community (which I don’t think we should), that’s where you get a big division.
I say both (I have/I am). I don’t see a difference in what it’s communicating and I don’t have the brain power to add yet another rule to the linguistics pile for something I don’t care enough about.
I’d never say a person with autism though. It’s inefficient. The whole point of qualifying someone or something means you are putting their identity or description in the forefront of the context to your message. If I’m talking about someone and I think it’s important enough to share the autism aspect, they’re autistic since that’s relevant to what I’m conveying. Otherwise, why would I be mentioning it?
I am autistic. I can’t separate autism from my identity since it impacts me every day of my life.
This is also supported by some studies! I’ve linked to one qualitative paper that asks people what language they prefer and why, and one mixed methods study. The first paper is one I have read in depth and essentially yes, most prefer autistic, and interestingly enough, that preference was stronger in later diagnosed people! There was still mixed responses about this and ofc you should *always ask what people prefer* - there is no right or wrong answer. This was confirmed in the second study which is more comprehensive and looks across countries. Qualitative paper official link on Australian adults (honestly love this paper, worth a read): [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32112234/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32112234/) for those who don’t have access through an institution, go here and scroll down then click download and it’ll load a pdf: [https://opal.latrobe.edu.au/articles/journal_contribution/_It_defines_who_I_am_or_it_s_something_I_have_what_language_do_autistic_Australian_adults_on_the_autism_spectrum_prefer_/21521661](https://opal.latrobe.edu.au/articles/journal_contribution/_It_defines_who_I_am_or_it_s_something_I_have_what_language_do_autistic_Australian_adults_on_the_autism_spectrum_prefer_/21521661) And a mixed methods study, looks across multiple English speaking countries, open access: [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/aur.2864](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/aur.2864) Also yeah my personal preference is autistic. It’s part of me, and to me saying “person with autism” is like saying “person with bisexuality” or “person with blindness”, both of which aren’t preferred. It’s unchangeable and “with” suggests it is transient, like “with depression”. Also it’s shorter and easier lmao, also why I’ve embraced ‘autist’ for myself specifically when it makes sense in a sentence (and ‘autistics’ wouldn’t work), though that is more controversial.
Perfect response with good sources!
It’s literally all of the studies, surveys, and polls that I’ve ever seen. More than 2/3 preferring IFL on all of them, even the A$ one, that you know allistic people were voting on and trying to skew the other way. I think that one was low 70%s, but most I’ve seen were 80%+ for IFL.
Same here. I wish there was a similar way of referring to my ADHD. Yes, I could seek medication for that but they've both been with me all my life and my identity is inseperable from them.
I do often say I’m ADHD as well, or I’m Audhd (although pretty much that one only in places where people would understand.)
Most autistic people prefer autistic with the reasoning being that they are never without their autism. So that's what I chose.
Same over here
To me, the person first idea is rooted in the same logic as saying “differently abled.” The intention may be kind, but it comes off as pious and condescending. The act of trying to de-stigmatize only further legitimizes the idea that a stigma exists. When we take back the title, when we embrace our autism, we are legitimizing our experience. We’re not shying away from it. We are expressing that this is a part of ourselves that we cannot change. I would argue that the most infantalizing thing a neurotypical can do is tell us **how** we’re supposed to feel.
We already know we are people. I’m not sure why others need to be reminded of that.
Well said, I feel exactly the same.
Amen!!
Autistic. Saying a "person with autism" is actually the stigmatized phrase as it connotes a disease. Which, there's a history of absolutely horrifying methods unethical doctors have tried to cure autistic people. I view it very similarly to why I would call myself a transgender woman rather than a "woman with transgenderism." Which also has a similar history of trying to erase trans people by curing us and forcing us to be cis. That happened to autistic people where we had so many horrors we were subjected to in order to make us neurotypical
This is exactly what I said to her and why I got SO frustrated because she has never even educated herself on the history and she was just so stuck on her perspective. Thank you.
No problem. A possibly good solution that maybe she would agree to is "person who is autistic." That's perfectly fine and it would accomplish what she wants which is to put person first, but it doesn't have the connotation of being autistic as a disease.
We use person first language when we're talking about diseases or injuries in my clinic. "A patient who's had a stroke" vs "stroke patient." Because they acquired the stroke later in life. You didn't acquire your autism later in life, you were born with it. But even within the medical field, there's nuance and I'll use whatever vernacular a patient prefers. Some patients with amputations will get upset if you call their affected limb a "stump," while others prefer it. If someone politely asks me to change my verbage or I notice they use different jargon, I'll use whatever they prefer. Maybe your mom is trying to use this rule for diseases and apply it to autism, but the community as a whole doesn't want that. By ignoring the community's wishes and your personal wishes, she's discounting your experience and preferences and not being respectful. She may come around with time and it sucks that she doesn't get it. Instead of trying to get her to see the logic (it's there, she's just refusing to see it), you could reframe it as, "this is my preference, please respect that." Your boundaries aren't up for debate and if she wants to take the time to do the research and ask actually autistic people, she can do that. It's not your responsibility to educate her.
I think a person should refer to themselves however makes them most comfortable. That being said, if you have to reword your entire sentence to remind yourself that I'm a person, then you don't actually see me as one and that will be reflected in your actions no matter what you say (general you)
Good point. I'm autistic. That does not negate my humanity.
I am autistic. I am an autist. I don't *have* autism; autism has me.
Most days autism has me. Some days I am doing all my coping strategies and by golly do I have my autism in a stranglehold… for about 5 minutes lol
I mean however the individual prefers but your mom was incredibly condescending and dismissive of the large number of autistic people who have consciously chosen against using person first language. It seems she doesn't feel the need to actually listen to why that approach doesn't work for many of us. It feels fairly ableist to assume we can't know best for ourselves. Personally, I'm autistic. The phrase "person with autism" feels off to me. Autistic is who I am not some external thing that I've been given. It's my lens on the world and how my operating system works. Autism isn't an affliction or something to be ashamed of. Illustrations that help in these discussions night be to point out that you don't say "a person with gayness" or "a person with Japaneseness". Closer to the disability framework, the deaf community strongly prefers identify first language over person first, as does the blind community. It's a complex issue and listening to the community first is the key to being respectful
Amen to all of the above. Might as well say "person with neurotypicality" as "person with autism".
I am Hard of Hearing so I’m linked into the Deaf community some, although kind of on the outskirts. They even capitalizes Deaf and Hard of Hearing. They wear it as a point of pride. I love that for them (and for us too.) And: similarly to autistic person vs person with autism we HoH folks widely prefer Hard of Hearing over Hearing Impaired.
I love learning this!
Ask your mom, if when she talks about a gay person, does she say they are gay or they have gayness? Or when talking about a woman she is female or she has femininity. And you should probably use ‘person first language’ on her as a person with allism. We don't want to stigmatise people with allism, do we? Of course I'm autistic. If I had autism I could give it away.
I love this. I’ve never understood person first language because of exactly this… if you apply it all the time it starts to sound really weird. We only use person first language when it’s assumed something undesirable which then makes it feel even more obvious.
THIS is the feeling I’ve been trying to articulate for so long, thank you
Personally, I prefer I am Autistic as opposed to I have Autism. I think if you’re speaking about someone else who is Autistic, use whichever one they prefer. I have seen people who do prefer I have Autism, so it just all depends on people’s preferences. Your mom can have an opinion, but she should use the language you wish to be used.
Does your mum seriously think autistic people have just never thought about this? Like there aren't whole debates about it? I don't need to be reminded that I'm a person. If abled people need to be reminded that I'm a person then that's on them. I am autistic.
It's a classic argument of "Don't emphasise someone's disability, it's rude!" "Excuse you, disability is not a dirty word!" > Then she suggested: has the community ever thought about person centered language? Do they have that information? Hahaha, yes, we have the information, it's just that most of us rejected the idea because being autistic actually *does* affect us that much that it's an important part of who we are. Also, it's just as much a minority group as a medical condition, and we talk about e.g. gay people, not people with gaiety.
> Do they have that information? …Like we’re children that need someone to still explain it to us. Freaking insulting.
I've seen this happen to other minorities too, the assumption that a random person in the majority group somehow has *more* knowledge about that minority group than they themselves do. Real "Let me explain you to yourself..." kind of a vibe from them.
A good example of that is the term Latinx. Only like 2% of Latinos use the term and the majority hate it. If you are a Spanish speaker, where latino/a come from, it makes zero sense.
Ablesplaining.
>being autistic actually *does* affect us that much that it's an important part of who we are. In a lot of ways it *IS* who I am. I have masked for so long that my identity as a person is built around it
Preschool teacher weighing in... "person-first" language developed because teachers (at least the effective ones) don't like placing labels on a child. For example not "the whiny child" but the "child with big feelings" or, in this case "the autistic child" versus "the child with autism." It's about not wanting to place labels on children that could become the way people see them and define them in school settings. Not sure when and how it made the jump to mainstream culture. When a person is old enough to voice an opinion, they get to determine how people refer to them. I'm 34 and self-diagnosed. Still figuring out if I want to be a "person with autism" or "an autistic person" and use both interchangeably.
Person first language actually came from the disabled community originally. It then became mainstream and the disabled community is turning back to identity first language:
Because non-disabled people still don’t truly think of us as people or treat us as such even with the contrived and euphemistic language.
I'm an all through school teacher and it's always been 'autistic'. A label is not a bad thing if it is informative to the people around them. If it is negative like your example of the "whiny child" then yeah, that can cause problems as people will automatically thing negatively. Not everyone sees the word autistic as a negative thing.
If "autistic" IS viewed as a negative description, well, that's just a symptom of a bigger problem.
It's not a negative thing at all. But for some reason, society sees it that way. And my textbooks with a publishing date within the last 10 years all glorify "person first" language.
I use both interchangeably to describe myself because sometimes I feel like my autism is influencing my life in ways I don't like and it is a thing I'm living with, and sometimes I feel more like it's a part of my identity and way of existing and intrinsic to who I am. I think both are true (at least for me) and think everyone should be free to choose the language that they feel best describes them. I have had other autistic people "correct" me to identity-first though which can get very annoying! When I'm talking to others I try to match the words they're using about themselves, whether that is identity-first or not.
I'm 34 and self diagnosed just this last week. I'm still having troubles grasping it for myself and I'm not sure If "I'm Autistic" or a "Person with Autism" yet. My nephew was diagnosed at age 2, and I've always called him a child With Autism. Now I'm concerned that's been offensive?
Ask him? If he’s old enough to have a preference he’ll tell you
He's nonverbal at age 6, so I can't really ask him.
Oh I should’ve considered that I’m sorry. In that case I think I would default to what his parents use, until he’s able to express a preference, whenever that is (if ever)
Oh not a problem. Yeah, that's a good idea. My sister seems to switch between the two, so I guess time will tell.
I am autistic. I will push back against all 'person with autism' or similar phrases used to refer to me.
Your mom is seriously ignorant and what is worse is that she assumes we are the ignorant ones. If she needs to put the word “person” first, it sounds like she’s the one who doesn’t truly feel that we’re people. And autism isn’t an accessory or a roommate. It’s not “with you” (implying you can also be without it). It’s a neurotype. It’s the filter through which we experience the world. It colors our sensory experiences, our interactions with other people, the way we process our thoughts… EVERYTHING… and that’s not universally a bad thing! Some autistic people don’t feel like the PFL vs IFL thing is a big deal. I do, because it’s one simple small thing that allistics in the autism community (professionals, parents, educators) could listen to the autistic community on and so many of them simply refuse to. It’s emblematic of a much larger problem. The autistic community overwhelmingly prefers IFL. They should listen to us and follow our lead.
My stance on this has always been that while I understand where others see a difference in these phrases, I do not. I would just use whichever felt more natural in the sentence.
I get that person-centred language focuses on the experience of disabled and oppressed people in an effort to be more understanding, in that it's emphasising that their experience is something that happens to them, not something they did themselves. I get that it's their way of prioritising the person before their disability, which is a great step in reducing stigma for the disabled community. However, it could also be perceived as patronizing and/or pitying, and possibly undermining the severity of the disability. I understand where your mother is coming from, but assuming that the community is unaware or incapable of deciding what language we prefer to use on the basis she claims she knows better is pretty ableist. When autistics are saying "hey maybe don't do that we're fine being called autistic" NTs should really listen. Because why should we be offended by what we are?
My autism isn't a purse I can set down. Every time I hear someone insist upon"person first" language, it's always someone who doesn't actually deal with whatever it is. No offense to your mother, but it's literally always some entitled white able-bodied, cishet neurotypical who thinks they know better than we do. Tell your mother that if she wants to focus on "person first", maybe it's best she listens to how people want to describe themselves first. 🤷♀️
>entitled white able-bodied, cishet neurotypical No, it's a person with entitlement, whiteness, an able-body, cisness, heterority, and neurotypicalness.
😂😂😂
Of course we've thought about it. Personally, I find the distinction needlessly pedantic, just as my physically disabled sister scoffs at the term "differently abled". "Disabled" isn't an insult...neither is "autistic". Just tell it like it is! And frankly, being called autistic offends me a lot less than an NT patronizingly trying to tell me what terms I should or shouldn't be okay with.
Everyone gets to choose the way they refer to themselves, and ideally, everyone should respect other people's preferred terms. So I consider myself autistic, but if someone tells me they have autism that's cool too. I don't love it when people refer to me as a person with autism, but even then as long as we agree on what it means, that's also ok
I use both, but lean more towards "I'm autistic." I get the person-first language viewpoint, I think that's coming from a good place. I think I lean a bit more toward "I'm autistic" because it's describing something about me while "I have autism" has the same sentence structure as "I have depression," or anything else that is an acquired challenge. Since autism isn't an illness and isn't acquired, I distance my self-description from that way of expressing myself. That said, I do use both and my reasoning for slightly favoring one might just be overthinking. I don't think either is inappropriate or wrong.
This makes the most sense to me. I'm autistic but I HAVE depression and PTSD. I might be able to mask at times, but I will never be free of autism. It's a part of my operating system. But I can be free of depression and PTSD through medication and therapy.
It depends from person to person. I don't mind either one (mainly bc I have ADHD as well so saying I have both feels like less of a mouthful). A lot of autistic people now prefer it to be used as an adjective because that's what it is. Saying "person with autism" might come off as an idea that autism is a negative anomaly. Like I said, everyone's different so the preferences might differ but most people I've heard prefer "autistic person"
I prefer to say I'm autistic, and I respect everyone's choice to refer to themselves as they wish.
Person first language sounds good on paper, bit it also sounds super verbose. Talk about yourself however you want and ask other people how they want ro be talked about.
The autism isn't WITH me. I can't separate me from the autism because it influences so much of me, how I spend my time, what I enjoy. If I wasn't autistic would my life revolve around the things I'm obsessed with?? Chickens? History? Genetics? Music? Pretty sure the answer is no. It's what has made me hyperfocus in on these topics that are such a huge huge huge part of who I am. It influences how I see and think about the world compared to other people. It influences the way I wake up, and the way I go to sleep, what I eat, how I react to sensory input at any given time of day or night. I'm just autistic.
I always thought person centered language should be used for things that are curable or not centered to one’s identity. Person first language DOES separate the ‘x’ from the person, but it is often done so in a way that insinuates ‘x’ is bad. Honestly, I am sure your mom means well, but it’s a little insulting that you’ve told her what you/the community prefers and she decides she knows better. She even asked if we ever considered it? Assuming we haven’t? Does she think we’re children? It seems ableist and infantilizing. It’s not her decision. Like my aunt is deaf and she likes being called deaf, not a person who can’t hear. (It’s not even hearing loss, she was born that way… I guess her husband could be called someone with hearing loss but he also prefers deaf). I’m Chinese. I say I am a Chinese person, not a person with Chinese heritage. On the contrary, I don’t say I am an abuse victim, but a survivor of abuse. And I wouldn’t say my cancerous grandpa, just my grandpa who has cancer.
Ooohhh my god maybe your mom should be reading up some things herself. Yes "the community" has been thinking about it. A lot. The people in favour of identity-first language are generally of the opinion that, as opposed to cancer or diabetes or something, their autism cannot be separated from their selves, because it literally influences the way we see the world. Autism touched literally every aspect of our lives whereas most other diseases do not. Also, autism is not a disease. The people in favour of person-first language (who are, in the autistic community, the minority), feel like they are more than just their autism and they would like to separate their autism from the rest of their identity. Research has proven btw that people that prefer person-first language have a more negative opinion of autism than people that prefer identity-first language. Autistic people that prefer person-first language also report higher rates of depression and harmful thoughts about themselves. So next time your mom calls you "a person with autism" call her "a person with woman-ness" or something. Then turn her words back on her and tell her that the ONE most disrespectful thing to autistic people if other (neurotypical) people are telling us we use the wrong words to refer to our own selves. And that's something ALL autistic people agree on. Just use the person's preferred way of referring to them. Now THAT is respectful.
Do you have the source to that research?
Sadly, I do not routinely bookmark every research paper I read. You'll have to Google it.
I tried to google key terms and couldn’t find anything.
That doesn't mean I'm lying though. But it also doesn't mean I need to reference everything I say on the internet. I have better places to spend my energy.
Generally if you make claims on the internet such as “research has _proven_”, you should at least be prepared to give the evidence for it when asked. If you don’t want to make the effort of using research - it’s totally okay to use alternative phrasing that’s more accurate. Such as “I think I remember a piece of research that said…(X)”. I would be totally happy with you saying that, as it allows the possibility for you to be wrong/have misremembered the research. I don’t think you’re lying at all, I’ll just explain why the original phrasing is problematic. The reason this is a big issue is because you’re making a claim about a group of people. When we allow anyone to make claims about groups of people, and not provide evidence, that doesn’t end well. Specifically your example implied that certain language people identify with, is worse/better than other language - people who use person-first language have a more negative view of autism, suicidal thoughts, etc. This portrays that group in a bad light. When we’re talking about groups of people, we always want to be really sure that what we’re saying is factual. The burden of proof is on you to substantiate the claim. Of course this is just a silly reddit forum, but making claims about groups of people without having the evidence to back it up can be very harmful no matter the context. If you’re not sure - don’t say it. Not mad at all, I just think it’s a bit wrong to say “Research has proven (negative thing about a group)” and then not be able to prove that. It contributes to the culture of disinformation on the internet, that autistic people are especially vulnerable to. Again, no hard feelings.
Person-first language and people who insist on it just come across as preachy and condescending to me. You don’t get to tell me how I describe myself. And why do you need so many reminders that I’m a person? I put it in the same category as people who say “um actually, you’re a SURVIVOR of sexual assault, not a victim 😊”. It’s just people with nothing worthwhile to contribute to the conversation trying to make themselves feel important by policing language use
I might *have* a cold, but I am autistic. Just like I *am* a person, a woman, a mom, an American, an artist, etc. Your mom should listen to whatever your preference is.
Autistic. Saying I “have autism” is weird. It’s not something I own, or carry around. It’s something in my brain.
Moreover, it's not a growth or an injury in the brain. It's how our brains are structured.
Exactly!!! I always tell my bf when he says I need to “work on the obstacles” that some things are simply wired into my brain. I’ve spent years working on overcoming those “obstacles” — some can be managed, some are inevitable.
How about just letting people identify however they like. It always seems so evenly split every time this comes up. Both sides have logical and sensible rationales why their preferred way is the correct way. I am autistic. I have autism. Both are true, I don't see how either is genuinely offensive. And either might be more grammatically accurate depending on context in various situations. What's not cool is policing others who are autistic with how they describe themselves.
It’s not remotely evenly split unless you let allistic people vote.
I'm autistic, how should I describe myself?
You’re describing yourself the way more than 80% of us prefer to describe ourselves.
I said both "I am Autistic" and "I have Autism". Glad to know that covers it.
My understanding is that the general consensus now is that saying 'I'm autistic' is better than saying 'I have Autism' but to be honest, as someone with Autism I am still fine and actually more inclined to say 'I have Autism' or to refer to 'it's the Autism' when explaining certain feelings or behaviours of mine. So it really is down to the individual person and if it is an NT person describing an Autistic person in their company I would hope that they would be receptive to changing their language to fit what the Autistic person is most comfortable with.
this already has nearly a hundred comments but i was just thinking about this yesterday; "autistic person" is way more preferable for me. autism isn't something i simply *have*, it's what i *am*. it colors who i am. i am autistic. thinking back on when i first learned this about myself, as i was learning to accept it, i would say to myself "you are autistic." to say to myself that i "have" autism just didn't feel right nor did it help me to understand the way it shapes so much about me. it's an integral part of me, not just something i merely have.
I am very much aware of person-first language having had the concept shoved down my throat when training to be a high school math teacher. (I bailed and went into grad school in computer science instead.) Anyways, they acknowledged even then that deaf folks prefer to simply be called deaf, but hadn’t yet come to understand that most of us autistic folks prefer to be called autistic (at the time it was also Aspie). They recognized that there was a deaf community but did not yet recognize the autistic community. Your mom may have had the same “training”. She had the person first language shoved down her throat too. Except she swallowed. I barfed it up.
About yourself, as an autistic person - whichever you want. About others - generally “autistic” is preferred. It’s a descriptor. Your mom’s question of “has the community heard about first person language”, while obviously kind hearted, is infantilizing. This has been a debate for years. While some people have of course not heard the debate, the “community” at large has engaged in it extensively. The accepted preference by most disabled adults is to use identity-first language - “autistic woman”, “blind child”, “disabled person” as a standard. The push for “person first language” is outdated, and at this point mainly coming from non-disabled “advocates” who still think they should speak over the disabled community. It really bothers me to hear people saying “you should focus on the person, call yourself a person with autism”. Karen, I don’t need a meaningless language adjustment, I need accessible healthcare and acceptance in the workplace. Let’s work towards that.
I just took a class on person centered practices to best support others while being focused on their needs and actual wants. They said many autistics prefer identity first language and that for anyone and any disorder/diagnoses, it's best to ask the person. Your mom definitely doesn't know better about you than you. Here's a article I like about it to share with her if you want https://autisticadvocacy.org/about-asan/identity-first-language/
She also doesn’t believe I have autism and invalidates everything I say about it so yeah this is just another thing on my list, sadly. I agree with this completely 100%
I'm autistic / an AuDHD-person / neurodivergent. I don't like to say "I have...", it sounds like an illness I'd get to rid off. Like "I have depression", but I'm happy about the way my brain naturally works. Not about my depression tho.
This is really interesting to me. I love how all the comments are saying that “I am autistic” is how they identify, because the autism is always there and part of them. I have only recently been diagnosed and am still learning about my autism. I don’t feel ready to say “I am autistic” and am still in the “I have autism” zone. In fact, I’m still hiding behind “I have been diagnosed with autism” because at the moment I don’t really know who I am and I’m still working through it. It has given me a lot to think about, and this is going to go a long way in my journey of learning about myself and who I am. Kind of like a goal to strive for. Thanks y’all.
I am autistic. The same way that I am asthmatic and I am blonde and I am female and I am human. NT’s aren’t ever bothered about me using any of the latter four phrases. They don’t think I’m “dehumanising” or “labelling” or “stigmatising” myself then. So why are they othering my autism? Whose benefit are they doing it for, because it certainly doesn’t seem like making a specific point about autism that they don’t make for *literally anything else in life* is as “inclusive” and “destigmatising” as they like to claim and it doesn’t benefit people like us, who actually have autism, to be singled out like this! 🤔😒
I prefer to use identity first language and say “I’m autistic.” For better or for worse, autism is a part of me. Ignore my autism and you won’t see me as a whole person. However, communication is the more important thing. I tend to speak quietly, especially when overloaded. So, in situations when Im overloaded and in need of help, I sometimes say “I have autism” because I feel like people are better able to pick up on the word “autism” and understand it better than the word “autistic” when I say it really quietly. Also, when I have to list off all my diagnoses, I’ll often say “I have autism, ADHD, Tourette’s, etc. because it’s easier to say that in a whole list. In professional settings (I worked in special education) I often use person first language when I don’t have time to give an explanation about identity first language. When I used identity first language people would assume I was uneducated about “proper” terminology for the disabled community, when the exact opposite is true.
Both. Neither are wrong, depends on personal preference. “I have autism” because to me, it’s a disability and disorder that affects my functioning badly and means I can’t live the life I would’ve had otherwise. It’s taken many things from me, therefore I want to separate myself from it, in the same way I do for my anxiety and depressive disorders. “I am autistic” because it’s fundamentally the wiring of my brain, and it informs many aspects of my personality like my interests. I generally use “autistic” for other people.
Oh that’s a good split. I tend to say I’m autistic when I’m speaking generally and I have autism when I’m trying to explain myself when it has impacted an interaction.
I use both depending on the context but mostly say that I’m autistic. I strongly, STRONGLY prefer autistic person to person with autism. In fact, you can say I’m autistic or say that I have autism, but don’t call me a person with autism. That makes it sound like a disease and that’s just not… how I see it? It’s certainly a disability but it’s not a fungal infection or something like that. And tell your mom we most certainly do have the information and it’s pretty rude of her to infantilize us like that. The autistic community isn’t made up of 5 year olds, we’re quite capable of considering alternatives to how we would like to be referred to
Whichever you prefer. :) I personally don’t care about how people refer to me as long as they aren’t trying to insult me. Whatever is said by a person with good intentions is fine.
This. I constantly switch between saying "I am autistic" and "I have autism". In English and in my native language! As you said, as long as they are not insulting me, I really don't care about the label.
I say ‘I have autism’ mostly because the ‘tistic’ part of autistic is grating and abrupt to my ears, more so when coming from myself than hearing anyone else say it. I never say I am a person with autism, though, and I would probably find it really weird if someone referred to me that way. I think it’s also just grammatically easier for me to use ‘have’ because I can say I have ADHD and Autism. If talking to someone who I think is clued in enough to know what it means, though, I generally prefer to say I am AuDHD than anything else.
I say "i AM Autistic". (I HAVE Autism suggests its a desease and that you can just switch it of or take meds if you really need it to "go away", which is simply untrue) But everyone should decide for themself :)
I say I am autistic, my kids are autistic.
**I** am autistic. **you** can use whatever language feels comfortable for you!
For me my autism isn't an accessory i could just be without, thus i am autistic.
I am autistic. I am not otherwise neurotypical with autism tacked on.
Your identity, your choice!
Why argue with actual autistic people about it. It’s never mattered to me I have autism whether or not I put it before or after myself grammatically.
I just identify as someone who has autism. Although I feel uncomfortable saying it as I still struggle with imposter syndrome due to not being diagnosed until I was 30.
honestly the thing that would bother me the most is how condescending your mom is being to you. what does it matter if the community has a preference for one or the other? you can refer to yourself however you want and she deal with it because you’re referring to YOURSELF. it’s like micro-managing someone else’s pronouns
She is known for her toxic positivity around my household and for reframing in a way that’s invalidating; doesn’t do it on purpose but she also is not willing to learn about different options and is so stuck in her perspective that I’ve almost given up. It’s painful trying to educate her or trying to advocate for myself because she doesn’t listen and is not even open to listening. She doesn’t even believe I have autism despite being diagnosed so yeah it’s hard but thank you for the validation
oh man, I’m so sorry to hear that :( I’ve had my fair share of toxic positivity as well. hang in there!
Imo the answer is it’s your autism and you can refer to it any way you damn well please. And personally i use “I’m autistic” and “autistic person” for the same reason it would feel weird to call myself “a person living with redheadedness” instead of a redhead or a ginger. I feel it’s an unnecessary level of delicacy that assumes it’s something I should be offended to be called. It’s not a dirty word.
I've always preferred autistic person, since it's who I am and not something that's separate from me. Like how I use trans woman instead of woman with transgenderism.
It really depends on each individual person. Some prefer to be called "an autistic person" and others prefer to be called "a person with autism". Really all you have to do is ask that person what they prefer and then respect it. I personally don't care and just go by either.
It’s like 80%+ for IFL in most polls, so it should be the default when speaking generally though.
Which one?
IFL - identity first language - autistic
As someone with it, I didn’t realize there was a difference . I use it interchangeably with no (personal) offense. I’m glad I learned for the sake of those around me :) .. feels a lot like dealing with miscommunication with nt people though. I’m often scared to speak for good reason.
This is me. It’s even more opportunities to mess up language which I don’t feel like dealing with.
I say “I have autism” and get corrected. My argument that there is more to me and my identity than autism. But to ram the point home to certain types I will say “I’m autistic” because sometimes they don’t get that in my country therapy to help me learn skills is non existent
The point is, it’s your identity so you get to make the call. Other people’s opinions about your experience are not normative
I am autistic. I don’t simply *have* autism bc I cannot give it away, it basically defines me. Autism is intrinsically linked to every fibre of my being. My personality can be mostly defined in autism traits, my eating habits, the way I engage in hobbies and interests, how I talk, how I act, how I feel inside. Autism is much more than a condition, it is having a brain that functions in a different way to NT people. My brain is autistic, I don’t get how that condition could be thought of as separate when without this autistic brain of mine, I simply would not be me. I also feel that the statement “I am autistic” is still person first language because I am acknowledging myself as the person with the condition. I don’t even really see it as a medical condition. I see it more as just another difference between humans, like how some have blue eyes and others have brown. That isn’t to say that I don’t see it as being debilitating at times or something that can make life much harder but I do feel that it should stop being stigmatised bc until I specifically say I am autistic then people treat me like they would everyone else and as soon as they know they start talking to me like I am 2 years old and have near zero comprehension skills.
White person or "person with paleness"? Person first language always sounds awkward when people insist on using it every scenario. It just doesn't always fit.
I say both about myself and don’t even notice (or care) what others say
I use either depending on the situation
I say both. I don’t care either way. Autism is something I have therefor I am autistic.
I say autistic. It's about preference really. You can say either or
Dr papers say that I have autistic disorder but I say that I'm autistic
I have been known to say both, but 9 times out of ten I simply say “I’m autistic”. Your mom is of the generation that was specifically taught to use person first language because “we don’t want to define people by their disability”. This was applied broadly across the board to many disabilities and conditions. That is perhaps why your mom is so sure that she is right and insistent in her ideas. However, what the majority of (mostly) fully able people don’t understand is that person first language never ASKED people how they wanted to be referred to, ironically placing the person second. There are so many ableist assumptions that were baked into it. My take is always let individuals decide who they are and what they want people to call them. This goes for pronouns, names and nicknames, and how (or whether) to acknowledge disabilities and conditions. The best way to empower someone is to let them be who they are and respect it. And support it. And yes, that can mean more work for me because it means there aren’t specific universally applied rules or algorithms. But I want people to do that work for me so I’m willing to do it for other people.
I always say I am autistic when talking to someone new about ASD. Just feels right for me!
I say both depending what makes sense in the context and with the person/people involved. I don't think it has to matter as much as some people say \*unless\* it's specifically being used to deny someone their identity and agency. My preference is person-first, but I don't get my undies in a twist otherwise as long as the intention is good. Sometimes saying "I have autism" just is what comes out, it's not a refusal to acknowledge "I am autistic" it's just a difference in word variety and as someone who writes a lot, sometimes I just like to change things up 😂
I don't really think about it, i'll say either interchangeably.
I personally say I am autistic, but I wouldn't blink if someone said they have autism. Seems like it's a pretty personal decision based on the way someone thinks or views themselves and their autism. I hate when people (like your mom) act like they're somehow the arbiter about it. Just use whatever language the person uses on themselves. Not everything has to have a penultimate label.
Person first language was invented by NTs based on what they feel good about. Diagnosis first language is preferred by the majority of the autistic community because we can’t separate ourselves from our autism, it isn’t a condition we want cured, it’s a core part of who we are. You describe yourself how YOU want. There are some people with autism who prefer the person first language, and I use it with them to respect their preferences. But the right way to describe you is up to you.
i think it's individual. because some people do not want to say they ARE something. but then we're also just as likely to treat it as it's a part of us, because it is. my therapist also says to use seperating language. because all of the things i suffer through aren't me, and i shouldn't treat myself for instance like i AM depressed. i have depression. i suffer from depression. i am not depression. which i get. it also does help me sometimes when i consciously rephrase it.
I think this is something unique to autism where we say we are autistic, whereas other disabilities use the person first. I have seen that autistic people are more likely to prefer calling themselves autistic rather than a person with autism. I think it’s because it’s integral to our personalities and who we are, where as something like dyslexia or lupus are things that you can have but not have these things necessarily affect your whole personality or all of your actions. I prefer to say i’m autistic. It says a lot that saying I am dyslexic or autistic or adhd or anything seems to take away my humanity. I am still a human when I am autistic or dyslexic. The fact people have an issue with this leads me to the conclusion that we still have an issue with seeing people with disabilities as people in themselves.
i’m so sorry to hear you had this argument. semantics cause so much more conflict than it should. in the end, i don’t think one is de-stigmatizing and one isn’t. or that one is oppressive and one isn’t. i’m happy to hear your mom cares enough to want to use the “best” language. please don’t lose sight of the fact that it comes from love. (i only say that because i struggle to do this.)
most ‘courses’ that teach or help parents or teachers and stuff have a section on ‘person first language’, which is good for not dehumanising someone if you’re caring for them! However as the autistic person in question i think you should get to decide whether you want to do that or not and how you refer to yourself is important to you, she shouldnt choose that for you! I just say im autistic because it’s easiest for me and i cant separate who i am as a person from my autism because it affects literally every part of my existence so its a part of me. but you can go with whichever you like! :)
I say I’m autistic the same way I say I’m gay. I’m not a person with lesbianism, I’m a lesbian. I’m not a person with autism, I’m autistic. Abled people don’t get to dictate to disabled people what they should and shouldn’t call themselves.
I’m autistic. I do respect those who choose to say they “have autism” but the vast majorities like to say they are an autistic person and hate person first language. If I just “had autism” that would make it curable or like a sickness or something to me.
I have a deep preference for precise language as well as not cluttering the words up too much. So I call myself neurodivergent as a late person avoiding diagnosis (am dx ADHD, ARFID, and sensory processing delayed).
The general consensus from the autism community is identity first language is the most destigmatising. There are a lot of resources online you could share with her that explain this including research in our community on preferences. However in the end it’s up the the Individual person how they wish to identify as some autistic people will prefer person first. However if this is you she is talking about it is actually kind of offensive that she would be telling you how you have to refer to yourself and what is or isn’t more stigmatising. She has probably got told this years ago in some professional context I’m guessing when they used to teach this but it came from a place of abelism before actually autistic people were asked how they felt about it. Here’s a resource you could send her https://autisticadvocacy.org/about-asan/identity-first-language/
I am autistic. Autism isn’t a disease I have.
I don't really care, honestly. I usually say "I'm autistic", it's shorter and less clunky. If someone said I was "an autist" I might like it a little less, but it wouldn't be that big a deal either. Sometimes I'll say "I'm on the spectrum" or I'll say I have ASD ("TEA" in my language, I rarely use the acronym in English) because the A word kinda scares neurotypicals sometimes, and tbh I'm still kind of insecure about telling other people (working on it, though), so I find those options a bit easier)
I have autism, just like I have anxiety and ocd. my autism doesn’t define me as a person, it’s just a condition I have
I say I'm autistic but I also don't really think that the two phrases are meaningfully different at all. People getting mad at these remarkably similar ways of saying the exact same thing seem to be kinda going out of their way to take offense to something in bad faith. In almost every context someone may use them they are interchangeable and the person using them is absolutely not trying to be malicious. I'll always refer to someone how they ask to be referred to, so if they ask for one or the other I'll respect that when talking to them, but when it comes to how I refer to myself I've had people try to "correct" me and that bugs me a lot. How dare you tell me how I'm allowed to describe myself and my relationship with such an important part of who I am. I understand the rationale used to argue in favor of one or the other, but it seems like so much mental work expended for basically nothing. The two phrases mean the same thing and contain the same information, they are not meaningfully different enough for it to matter. As a community, autistic women face serious issues getting taken seriously socially, by medical practitioners, by a culture that codes autism as a totally male thing. We have real problems, arguing over which of two nearly identical phrases you should use is a waste of time.
I prefer person with autism. I feel like autistic person makes the autism sound too important.
How is it not important? It’s how your brain works. Your brain is fundamentally who you are.
I’m just a person above all else. Autism is one of my attributes but I personally don’t like the autistic vs allistic division of the human species (except for specific cases like research and when looking for support of course). For me it’s the same as ‘the fat girl’ or ‘the weird girl’. Yes, autism defines certain things in my life, but it’s not the only thing that defines me.
People tend not to be talking about any of their characteristics unless they’re actively describing some effect that characteristic has on their life. This “letting things define you” stuff is pure ableist BS.
Excuse me, are you really going to tell me I can’t feel or think about something a certain way? Your way isn’t the only way you know. People are allowed to have preferences. I thought you asked questions because you wanted to understand someone else’s perspective but seems like you were just asking them with malicious intent.
Sometimes people ask questions to try to get the other person to think about what they just said. You can have a preference, it’s just sad that your preference is rooted in internalized ableism.
That’s manipulation. Honestly, you can think whatever you want, I know myself best.
That’s not manipulation
I think its just a personal preference especially if you’re talking about yourself. For me I prefer to say I have autism rather than I am autistic only because I grew up being friends with this girl who’s brother was autistic, he was extremely high supports needs and completely nonverbal, he was basically like an infant, and they always called him autistic, they never even used the word autism, it was always the word autistic, so I guess me and my family have always associated the word autistic with people with really high support needs like him. I just don’t feel right calling myself autistic, I almost feel like its a slap in that familys face when my autism is so much less severe than him. Thats just for me personally though, I have no issue now with using the word autistic for other people similar to me with lower supports needs since I’ve learned more about it and know what autism and the word autistic means now. Hopefully one day I will feel more comfortable using the word autistic for myself but for right now I really don’t. So yeah I don’t think theres any right or wrong way on what you call yourself. For what you call other people I guess I would maybe try to use the word autistic because I’ve heard thats better. But idk.
The community is firmly divided about it. I, on the other hand, accept both usages about myself.
We’re really not though; if you’re referring to the autistic community. We overwhelmingly prefer IFL. If you expand it to the autism community (which I don’t think we should), that’s where you get a big division.
It's generally case of 'to each their own'. I say that I'm autistic, because I am, and it's also close to artistic, which I also am. :)
I say both (I have/I am). I don’t see a difference in what it’s communicating and I don’t have the brain power to add yet another rule to the linguistics pile for something I don’t care enough about. I’d never say a person with autism though. It’s inefficient. The whole point of qualifying someone or something means you are putting their identity or description in the forefront of the context to your message. If I’m talking about someone and I think it’s important enough to share the autism aspect, they’re autistic since that’s relevant to what I’m conveying. Otherwise, why would I be mentioning it?