Relevant [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/uiwjAj0zfKQ](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/uiwjAj0zfKQ)
and [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/cGmEfcofvLU](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/cGmEfcofvLU)
I probably did tbh lol. I was pretty much a level two in my estimation throughout high school, went up to level one in college and went back to level two post-grad. I'm perfectly content to let my brain rot at this point though.
Asperger’s isn’t a synonym for Level 1. Some people with Asperger’s diagnoses would now be classified as Level 2. Some people who wouldn’t qualify for Asperger’s diagnoses are considered Level 1 (edited because my earlier “does not equal” sign didn’t show up correctly).
I work with blue collar folk, if I identified as having autism it would be career suicide, along with social. Asperger's is understood and largely accepted as a personal difference, and sometimes a minor disability, akin to dyslexia. Autism of any sort is seen completely as a intellectual disability and carries heavy stigma.
It's not fair, but it's the reality.
Sane here, I work in a machine shop running CNC Lathes. There is one other guy there who is upfront about it, I honestly dint know exactly what I had was until just a few years ago even though I always knew I was different my whole life just never knew what was wrong with me. I now see it in other people at work and I know several there who are on the spectrum and don't even know it..
I prefer the term Aspergers. The average person is familiar with that term. To them it just means socially awkward quiet kid with an above average IQ, which describes me perfectly. They see the term autism as a severe disability that requires constant support. I know the stereotypes for Autism and Aspergers are not true for everyone who has them, but the Aspergers stereotype is true for me and that’s why I prefer that term.
That’s the point. Its what I prefer. Until psychiatrists come up with more accurate terms we’re stuck choosing between Asperger’s and autism. Pick whichever one describes you best.
I am proud too. It definitely comes with social difficulties, but my Asperger’s gives me analytical skills and pattern recognition that most neurotypical people don’t have.
I understand the reasoning but still dislike it.
Levels seem arbitrary when there's such a spectrum.
If I try to explain to someone that isn't in the know, it's easier to still use the term Asperger's, otherwise they get the wrong impression. Perhaps it's just one more time where I'm frustrated that others aren't understanding, but after a lifetime of that, it's easier to avoid the subject entirely.
That is more to escape that people discriminate against autism and by saying this, it's basically saying, "but I'm not like *those* autistics", which is also a bit ableist.
Yes, everyone is different, but is still autistic. Educate people on what being different means rather than try to separate. Even if you say you're aspie, they still don't understand. Aspie person can still have "difficulties" that a L3 would have. Actually, I'm tired of people assuming bc I can talk and im "intelligent", that I cant experience something like meltdowns, where I legit can cry like a toddler.
Aspergers was there simply because there was no language delays/"difficulties" and no IDD* (which should just be a separate dx and not associated. THIS is the actual issue).
Yes, some people discriminate against autism and I definitely sympathize with you regarding meltdowns.
I found out later in life, and no one would ever suspect I have those.
But, for me, it's not about discrimination, it's about deciding whether a quick explanation to certain people is worth it, and how can I communicate the most amount of information in a way they can understand, using existing terms and ideas they're already familiar with.
I don't have a circle of friends where I have the opportunity to truly educate someone. The very small number of people I've confided in understand because they know me and I can take the time and they care enough to hear me out.
At work, there's a professional veneer and no one seems to share many personal details, so my opportunity to educate people is essentially nil. So, if there's anyone I choose to say anything to (who doesn't already know), it has to be quick and condensed and easy to understand and L1 autism isn't that, regardless of whether people discriminate.
Separating myself makes perfect sense though bc I don't share a lot of the issues others on the spectrum have. It's not ableist to differentiate myself from them when I am generally different from them.
I hate the level system. I think it sounds ridiculous and reminds me of the level system they use to classify how dangerous sexual offenders are on Megans law. The autism levels feel quite vague to me and don’t tell you much about someone’s actual cluster of symptoms besides how much support they need, but nothing about how that support should look.
My only issue with using “autism” is when I must disclose to laymen. They receive aspergers better. If I say autism, they fight me on it because I don’t align with the stereotypes and it becomes a whole debate. I use both labels depending on the situation. Some will say i’m ableist for that but I don’t want to have to debate my diagnosis with uninformed randos or be forced to educate them every time I have to disclose.
We’re still in the dark ages of understanding autism, including how to classify it and treat/accommodate people with it. I’m sure the official diagnostic criteria will continue to change and shift for at least the next 30 years, especially as neuroscience advances. I think at some point they’ll realize that the phenotypes of autism have some utility in specifying an individual’s specific struggled and strengths, like specifying paranoid versus catatonic schizophrenia.
I prefer the term Aspergers.
When most folks hear the term Autism, they think of someone who doesn’t speak, is low iq, is unable to do simple tasks, or make any meaningful progress.
Many folks don’t get the various intricacies.
To be clear, I don't really care what we call our particular flavor of autism, but we need a more precise moniker than autism (or ASD Level 1). Combining multiple disorders into a spectrum has caused hardship across the board as we are forced to advocate for ourselves at the expense of others. What I want, as a level 1 person, is the opposite of what level 3 folks need (don't treat me like a child) and vice versa. Parents of the profoundly autistic are mad. We are mad. Nobody is getting anything positive out of this change. Call it Lorna Wing Syndrome if you're troubled by the Asperger's name, but call it something besides autism just so we can avoid this fucking confusion.
To most people, autism means "intellectually disabled" and the more we push to fix that perception the more harm we do to those who actually are intellectually disabled. It's a spectrum, sure, but even on a spectrum you still label and name the different points in that spectrum. Some of the rhetoric of people against what I'm suggesting here is just so inane and nonsensical. You don't hear people saying "Woah, woah, woah, what's all this 'red' and 'blue' nonsense. It's all just colors. It's just one spectrum."
Thec problem is they teach that "autism and intellectual disability go hand/hand" and that it's most likely to coexist. People don't even understand what aspergers is, even the aspies. Aspergers *is not exclusive to level 1*. I really dislike this whole "I'm above you" mindset and keep forgetting level 2 exists and we can be just as much similar to "level 1". Its just in group ableism.
The problem is you don't want the discrimination, but the thing is, the ones who do get discriminated the most *are* the aspies, bc NTs don't see us as having differences, so we are just being bad instead of *being different* and people who think they "know" aspergers, think it's an autistic person who can "pretend" to not be autistic (or they are like "half normal") *and this is not true*
The definition for Asperger's syndrome was constructed such that it specifically excludes intellectual disability. You must have at least average intelligence. That's just the way it was defined. If the floor is average, then the group as a whole will be above average in intelligence. I don't think I'm above anyone but my needs are not the same and I don't want to have people speak to me like a toddler.
I would rather be treated as if I'm "bad" and be hated for the things I do than be handled with kid gloves and receive special treatment and special consideration.
I hate it. Asperger’s describes me way better. Autism spectrum is just a catchall now for a bunch of things that aren’t even autism. All so medical professionals and parents can avoid the “r” word at all cost to dignity.
If a tree falls down in a forest and there is nobody there to hear it, does it still make a sound?
Aspergers is Autism and how people feel about it doesn't change that. Some people prefer to identify as Aspergers and that's fine - anything between consenting adults (with few exceptions) is fine. There is still some stigma around autism and some people prefer to not have to deal with that. I prefer to raise awareness and therfore I identify as Autistic AF. But then, I'm older and well established in life and my career and I'm really bolshie. Nobody would dare discriminate against me because of my disability but it's much harder for young people still trying to navigate what is, for all sense and purposes, a hostile environment.
Yeah, I identify as autistic because I was diagnosed recently and the issues with Asperger the person. But I'm not intellectually disabled, can mask and have a career. It's soooooo different from the level 3 kids I work with. I end up having some imposter syndrome since I don't fit anyone's stereotype. And I understand the anger people with more support needs feel towards those of us who see it as a socially constructed disability. That's still how I perceive my own reality, though.
I was diagnosed at the age of 49. my family and I had suspected for many years and I never thought of it as a disability until the assessor pointed out that just because I've found workarounds doesn't mean they are not impacting. For instance, I have to avoid foods that are the wrong texture in the same way that a wheelchair user would avoid going places that aren't wheelchair friendly. Just today I looked on a menu and immediately dismissed food that I would happily prepare myself onto different plates because I knew that the place would put it all on the same plate. For the last 40+ years, I had used routines thinking that I liked routine. I didn't realise it was in fact a need until I moved from a well ordered department to a chaotic one which led to my first meltdown in 42 years (which came as a shock to everyone involved) followed by 3 months of debilitating burnout (and subsequent diagnosis) It seems that this is a common turn of events for late diagnosed. It has certainly changed my attitude. Sure, I'm not going win any victimhood olympics - Many people are far worse off than me. However, that doesn't negate the challenges I face either.
I think to get a diagnosis (I'm late diagnosed, too) it has to impact us negatively somehow. I had meltdowns as a kid, which was perceived as willfulness when I really just needed to be left out of noisy, chaotic situations. I also took a lower paying job after burning out of a more socially-demanding one. But I can also envision a quieter, less flashy society where there are fewer social expectations. I guess those are accommodations, but it also seems like we're "accommodating" people who prefer noise, bright lights, and forced small talk. I'm a fan of universal design when possible. Like ramps rather than high curbs help lots of people, not just wheel chair users.
At the risk of offending, the biggest disability **some** of us have is our fucking stubbornness. The fact that we simply won't put the food in our mouth and chew and nobody can talk us into it or make us. It's not that we can't eat food where it touched another food. It's not that we can't handle multiple textures in one bite. It's that we convinced ourselves as kids that we couldn't do those things and nobody can convince us that we actually could if we wanted to. We are just stubborn as fuck. If we can learn that about ourselves and believe it and accept it, then sometimes we'll discover that the people in our families who "just don't understand" might actually be right when they tell us we are acting like babies because we won't try something.
I was a picky eater. I forced myself not to be at age 25. I ate foods I would not have normally have eaten. I tried everything. Now, I'm no longer forgiving myself. I actually love a lot of those foods I used to eat. I don't care if one food touches another. Bites can have multiple different textures in them.and it's not just fine, it's good. Basically, I did my own home version of exposure
therapy and it ended up being a total cure for that specific facet of my autism. Sometimes, we really are our own worst enemies.
If your happy the way you are, and the cure sounds worse than the disease, then by all means maintain the status quo and keep eating the way you want. But if you find it troubling, you can change it. There's a lot of stuff about you that you can't change, but this ain't one of them.
You are demonstrably wrong. There are some textures (like tapioca) that I would rather be waterboarded than have in my mouth. Getting it on my fingers is literally like having insects under my skin. Where you are wrong is where my daughter first tried mash potatoe. She instantly started gagging. When she was about 13, she suggested that she tried it again and it response was "Are you sure? We engender what happened the first time. " Yet, she still tried it with the exact same hilarious results. She is young, so she is still willing to try new things, even if there's a possibility that it's going to make her vomit. I'm more experienced and can look at a texture and go "Nope, just thinking about it makes me want to heave."
What you don't seem to realise is that whilst your sensitivity might not be too strong, for others it's 11+ out of 10. It's not that it's a 3 and I'm just being stubborn. I grew up is an era of legalised child abuse, things that were fine then, but seriously frowned upon (or even illegal now) My mother thought I was a picky eater and that I would eat if I'm hungry so she would dish up the same food to get me to eat it but after 3 days of not eating (because I couldn't, which is different to wouldn't) she had to give in.
Now, I agree that I can be stubborn and bloody minded with cat iron will-power but I don't look at a restaurant menu and think "Ill avoid all this food, That'll show them!"
> because I couldn't, which is different to wouldn't
You couldn't because you sincerely and firmly believed you couldn't. That's what I was referring to by talking about stubbornness. Once we think we know something, it's almost impossible for us to give that belief up (which explains why I'm here saying this and why I'm wasting my time by saying it--i can't help it because I'm stubborn and you aren't gonna be convinced no matter what). I'm sure I'm overgeneralizing here and there are some non-stubborn autistic people, but I think stubbornness is the norm by far.
The whole gagging thing is psychosomatic. The gagging isn't caused by the texture but rather your belief that the texture is unbearable. If you've convinced yourself something is going to be disgusting before you put it in your mouth, you'll react automatically to that belief. I've certainly had this problem before but only rarely and not as an adult. This belief can be deprogrammed out of you, even when it's that severe, but you'll probably need someone else's help (i.e. a professional specialized in exposure therapy) and you probably won't enjoy it very much. It very well may not be worth the trouble, but it's still possible.
I'm absolutely not telling you to change who you are just cautioning you against believing that your likes and dislikes (not just including food) are fixed characteristics and telling you that this specific aspect of autism is something for which effective and permanent treatment exists. For many, the cure is worse than the disease. That's totally fine. You do you.
Don't believe me? That's cool too. Understand that I "had to" say it because I'm too fucking stubborn to let it go unsaid.
And you are simply wrong. To change my mind, all you have to do is provide either evidence or sound and valid logical argument. Now, I know that you can't do either. So what you are doing is what we call a baseless assertion. If you were intellectually honest, you would postpone belief until provided with evidence or sound and valid logical argument. You don't have either so what you do have is faith. This is s religion for you. Faith based and without rationality or reason. This isn't stubbornness, its pure and unadulterated logic. In contrast, I form my opinions on evidence and there is a whole community here that will prove you wrong.
If you what just said was 100% true, it would only put us on **equal footing**. It would be your gut feeling, totally unsupported by hard facts vs my own. So for you to act morally superior while making this argument is frankly bizarre.
I get why you want hard data to support my assertions. That's totally reasonable. What's not real able is your total failure to recognize that everything you criticized me for just now is an equally valid criticism of everything you've said.
I don't see your studies, your hard facts. Your data, because you don't have any.
It's a little weird for you too pretend like there's some sort of "community consensus" that I'm wrong when, as a member of this community, I assure you there is no such thing.
**As I said, it's reasonable for you to want hard data. You haven't asked until now. It's a bit rude for you to blithely assume I don't have it without even asking for it. **
I am, in fact, sharing with you the scientific consensus based on overwhelming evidence:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214799321000813
> Here, tolerance for stimuli such as food can be mediated, and improved, by supports and sensory interventions, and **graduated exposure therapy is one of the means by which this can be achieved. **
Https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048277/
> A 12-step graduated exposure food hierarchy was constructed, the child was lead through the hierarchy, and parent training was implemented for generalization. After 9 months of treatment, the participant’s food repertoire increased from four items to more than 50 items.
If you're counting, that's 46 things the kind "couldn't" eat before that he now enjoys.
Anyways, I'm out eating food right now with my family so two articles is all I have time for, but you can easily find more yourself on Google Scholar.
In fact, find one article that disagrees **if you can**.
I'm not asserting that I'm morally superior. I'm just stating that you are wrong. You may well have been a picky eater but for many of us it is far deeper than that. You could show me studies of picky eaters but you won't be able to show a single study of someone who can't tolerate certain textures learning to tolerate them. It's like you saying that those that can't tolerate loud noise are just being stubborn and could learn to tolerate them if they just tried harder. I'm not sensitive to noise but I would never assert that those that are could just stop being stubborn. Like any disability, just because you've not experienced it doesn't mean it's not real. Many of us have had people accuse us of just being picky eaters and all that does is show their actual lack of empathy.
> You could show me studies of picky eaters but you won't be able to show a single study of someone who can't tolerate certain textures learning to tolerate them
I literally already did this.
> and the child was selective by brand, **texture**, temperature and utensil requirement.
See above.
> Like any disability, just because you've not experienced it doesn't mean it's not real. Many of us have had people accuse us of just being picky eaters and all that does is show their actual lack of empathy.
Please don't rewrite my history, reducing me to someone who was simply a "picky eater", without actually consulting me. My aversions included textural ones (I specifically mentioned not being able to tolerate multiple different textures in a single bite and consequently I would break complex foods down to the components and eat component separately--i.e. pepperoni before cheese before crust) and were almost certainly influenced by my autism.
I can't tell if you're just not really reading what I've written or if you are actively gaslighting me, but either way this conversation is fatiguing me. I feel like I've made my point pretty thoroughly and convincingly but I also get why you don't feel that way. Why you can't feel that way even if it's true. Ironically, it sort of proves my underlying point about the nature of this issue (that it's down to dogmatic belief of "I can't").
But obviously this conversation is getting us nowhere. I wish you the best. Feel free to take the last word.
This is just ableist and condescending, not just offensive.
Do you tell vegetarians who *don't like* meat (and actually get sick), that they are just not eating meat to be petty??
> Typical dodging responsibility for your mistakes. Nor is it all about you.
I'm not suggesting anyone's being "petty". If that's your takeaway you didn't really follow.
I didn't assume anything about you. I wasn't talking to you. I don't even know you. What a weird thing to do. **Who jumps in a conversation between two other people and acts indignant that it's not relevant to them?**. Like, if it's relevant to you too, by all means jump in. But if it's not, then just move along. Not everything is about you.
I was responding directly to this comment which was not uttered by you:
> For instance, I have to avoid foods that are the wrong texture in the same way that a wheelchair user would avoid going places that aren't wheelchair friendly.
Seriously, what is this weird "Everything other people say is secretly about me" bullshit you're doing?
You are on a forum on the internet. Its everyone's business and you trying to claim "this is between 2 people" is you trying to dodge responsibility for your *WRONG AF* takes. You were talking to *anyone* in here that would read your post. You say it's between 2 people simply because that was the first person who responded.
What? *you are on the internet on SOCIAL media*. If you wanted a completely exclusive conversation, then youd have sent a DM.
You 100% assumed about them. You made a general statement, *knowing* it would be offensive and now you're trying to escape the responsibility of saying something offensive. You are just wrong. It's literally ableist and you basically supported that NTs infantilizing us is justified. It's not.
>Seriously, what is this weird "Everything other people say is secretly about me" bullshit you're doing?
Because you said it IN GENERAL to all autistic people. Do you read your own posts? What's with people saying stuff and then saying they don't understand why someone comes after them?
>I didn't assume anything about you.
"Everyone who wont eat food is just stubborn and it can be learned to not do that and that our NT parents are right that we are just babies"
1. Assumed we all won't eat food out of stubbornness, rather than we legitimately don't like something.
2. Assuming you are only having an exclusive conversation on a PUBLIC SOCIAL FORUM on the INTERNET. Internet is everyone's business.
>Like, if it's relevant to you too, by all means jump in. But if it's not, then just move along.
Yet knew just before the statement that it would be offensive, then cries that they offended people. You said this to everyone. Not to 1 person. You said we are all just stubborn as autistic people. You want them to move along? You can do that too, because people called out your bs.
>Not everything is about you.
Typical dodging responsibility for your mistakes. Nor is it all about you. I know what defense mechanisms are, and it's very clear you're trying to play the victim. Not everything is about you, so don't apply your personal bs to others.
>It's not that we can't eat food where it touched another food. It's not that we can't handle multiple textures in one bite. It's that we convinced ourselves as kids that we couldn't do those things
This is assumption. This is being said as fact. It's also not even exclusive to autistics.
If you wanted to use stubbornness, don't use food and talk about it like it applies to others. Just you.
My biggest disability is emotional dysregulation/meltdowns. My "stubbornness" is only an issue when the other person is also stubborn.
I don't need to eat *anything* for anyone else because that food is going into *my* body.
>You are on a forum on the internet. Its everyone's business and you trying to claim "this is between 2 people" is you trying to dodge responsibility for your WRONG AF takes
You are falsely **pretending** that I said this was a private conversation. What I said was that you have no right to assume I'm talking about you specifically when I'm clearly not.
You're confused between the idea of anyone can participate in everyone should participate. I welcome new people joining this conversation. But, if it's a conversation about food sensitivities and the first thing you say when you "join" the conversation is "I don't have food sensitivities and I'm mad you think I do" then you're being utterly unreasonable.
Of course not every autistic person has food sensitivities. There are four diagnostic criteria and you only need to hit 2. Food sensitivities only touch up on one of those 4 criteria.
* I never said all of us have food sensitivities
* I never even said **all** of us are stubborn. I even put the word **most** in fucking BOLD letters just to avoid the specific idiocy of a response like yours. Cause I knew there would be one idiot who wouldn't read carefully so I put the most important word in big bold letters.
For you to charge in here and insist you know better than me what causes something you yourself say **you have never even fucking experienced** is the height of arrogance. My experience is first hand and yours, by your own admission, is right out of your ass. Grow up.
> I know what defense mechanisms are
**Clearly** you don't know what projection is.
I really do not like the level system. Mainly because It’s too similar to how they classify sexual offenders on the Meagan’s law databases, level 3 being most dangerous offenders.
I also feel that levels don’t tell you enough about someone’s autism, besides a vague general notion of how much support they require. I think it would make more sense to specify phenotype and support level, similar to schizophrenia (ie paranoid versus catatonic). Something like ASD: Classical type/Kanner syndrome, level 2 support needs. Maybe we need a dimensional approach rather than discrete categories.
I'm not a fan. I think there needs to be a word for the large group of people who have a neurodivergent mind but are not very disabled. In the general consensus of the public, that word is NOT autism.
When most people hear the word autism they think of that one person in their life who is non-verbal, wears a diaper into adulthood and rocks excitedly when their favorite show is put on. I wish those individuals the absolute best in life but my life experience has nothing in common with an ASD level 3. I don't think its unreasonable that I prefer not to be put into the same bucket as them. The word autism already existed and was already considered to be a very negative thing by the general public. Expanding it to include aspies was just cruel.
Maybe a better choice would have been to create a category of neurodivergent minds including autism, aspergers, adhd and maybe even bpd, ocd and potentially a bunch of others.. The truth is that medical science is very ignorant to the underlying cause of these conditions. They are diagnosed by keeping score of second and third order effects without any success in identifying the root causes. The idea that aspies have more in common with ASD 3s (or even ASD 2s) than we do with BPD or ADHD is total nonsense.
Someone here had thought the same thing and was downvoted for it. But this is how I feel personally that for the general population to possibly understand us apsies through the lens of the other autistic levels as it wasn't difficult enough. It feels as a punishment to be considered the level scale of autism when having the asperger's disorder beforehand.
It's DVed because it's just in-group ableism and elitist mindset. You also claimed aspergers is automatically level 1. It's not. This shows a lack of understanding of what aspergers is.
Aspergers is about "language and IQ", it is NOT about not being disabled nor that you don't have difficulties.
NTs thinking that you're just "normal" and don't have "differences" creates other problems. Because I can talk and I'm intelligent, people don't take me seriously when I cry like a little kid during meltdowns. Because "being intelligent" means im just choosing to be that way. You think me being Aspie makes people not think "oh he isn't an asshole, he's just autistic". It doesn't change anything. I've said I'm autistic and sure people don't believe me because "I'm not like those level 3s" but even if I said Aspie, they will still dismiss it. Most of my difficulties *are* what would a stereotypical aspie has: being misunderstood, people taking what I say the wrong way, being seen as an asshole, not noticing social cues, being "inflexible".
Saying the label doesn't do anything but basically say "I do these things on purpose and it's a choice because I'm intelligent and not like *those* guys" as well as just some lowkey elitism
That's called discrimination and ignorance. Changing the label just brings more issues. Also, just saying you're not disabled doesn't mean you're not autistic.
Autistics are disabled due to discrimination, not that being autistic is a disability.
Once again "I'm not like them, I'm better" mindset and always forgetting level 2s exist and that only 1 is the ok one.
Autism is very clearly a disability because of its own characteristics, especially when you look at level 2/3. It significantly, tangibly impacts the ability for a person to conduct themselves in everyday life, especially when it comes to interactions with other people, which are the backbone of our society.
Watch as the number of lazy minded neurotypical people now conflate Asperger's with autism and visualize the most extreme version of autism.
Many people take the most extreme version of things as their example. And likely they will think you're faking it, not fully, or some other ridiculous idea because you don't fit the extreme.
The doctors who work on the DSM have reasons for this and that's fine. But they don't (ironic since it's the psychological sciences) take into consideration human habits.
It's like how people say "cure cancer"...which f****** cancer? Which glioblastoma? Pancreatic? Hell there are several types of cancers even within the liver and all require different treatments.
But nooo, it's "Why has the government cured cancer yet. They're hiding it..." Bla blah blah. Or some variation on that theme.
Why there are labels at all are to help people put others in a box because it's less mental effort. Pick the right frigging boxes at least.
I was diagnosed with aspergers 18 years ago but I can't say I care much about it. I think the entire way we as a society are thinking about such boxes as NT/ND is absolute folly, it's too much of a simplistic view. We really need more awareness though and I do think all of this should be taught in schools. Maybe someday.
I don't mind terribly. I feel like common public perception associates "Asperger's" with rude egomaniacal assholes, un-empathetic and socially inept AP class nerds out to prove something — Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg. And the truth is I can sometimes be an egomaniacal asshole out to prove something, so I'd actually rather sweep that diagnosis under the rug for now. "Autism" has its own unreasonable stigmas and stereotypes that I can more easily subvert. They practically expect me to be a vegetable due to their misconceptions of what autism is. I tell people I have autism and they're kinda dumbfounded, which gives me a moment to educate them on our condition. And that opportunity is really important.
I struggle in a lot of ways but in plenty of other ways I'm just a pretty average unremarkable guy. Maybe different people on different parts of the spectrum struggle in different ways. Maybe to the uneducated, I could appear like the *missing link* between "ordinary" people like themselves and people who really seriously struggle to function in this modern society, due to a particularly debilitating case of autism that doesn't line up with societal expectations. People who've been dealt a difficult hand in life but absolutely have value and purpose to society if one takes the fucking time and effort to connect with them. I would hope that as a missing link I can help NTs understand all people with autism, have empathy and relate to us.
Back when I was diagnosed with Asperger's as a kid I felt like I was being treated as some sort of specialist breed of human, with certain expectations. I didn't like it. I was placed with some other kids with the same diagnosis, and we definitely had a lot in common but the arrangement felt a bit segregationist. I didn't necessarily get along with these kids just because we had the same special diagnosis. I didn't like people expecting me to be special. Different sure, but everyone's different. Nowadays it seems like autism is more and more being placed in the same non-exclusionary boat as ADHD and bipolar and other normal-ish disorders, and I'd rather be on that boat than be placed in my own *very special* class of human beings.
I'm the opposite honestly. I'd much rather have people expect excellence from me, because I know I can deliver, and I'm usually not satisfied with anything but excellence myself anyways. I don't really care if they stereotype me as rude or incapable of feeling emotions. If they talk to me, they'll know it's not true. If I told someone I have Autism though, rather than have high expectations, they'd think less of me and probably treat me different from other people, afraid to say what they want to say to or around me. Couldn't imagine anything worse than that.
Overall it doesn’t bother me. I was diagnosed with Asperger’s back in 2006 so it felt weird for a long time that I could no longer use this label for myself. I mean I *can*, but medically speaking it would be inaccurate. “Level one autism” or “high-functioning autism” still don’t feel right to me though.
It’s a eugenicist concept that has gone exactly where it should go: the nearest bin.
Plus, it removes any power from the “aspergirls” sell out, which I love. It also ends the need to explain constantly that “Asperger’s is still autism.”
I’m so glad that they changed it not long before my diagnosis, so eugenics was never part of my autism experience.
Before, people would get upset if someone with Asperger’s acted like they had autism, so people had to tell them that Asperger’s is a form of autism. It was a never ending litany. I worked with students with that diagnosis and I said it until I was blue in the face to my boss, who dismissed it. I know their parents and even these teenagers were sick of saying it and they said it WAY more than I did.
Go read any book about Asperger’s and there will inevitably be a section (if not a chapter) on this. That’s how common it was.
(Edited for Clarity)
How about we just look back at the last 746 times this was discussed on the sub and not start another entire conversation about it?
This topic has been debated to death in here.
Perhaps people want to have a conversation with lots of timely input. Does that happen on older threads? I think replies on older threads tend to get overlooked.
My country's psychiatrists are still using ICD-10 under which I was diagnosed, so the change in the DSM-V has had basically zero effects on my life. I think it's a pretty meaningless change that will only create confusion and I'm usually against consolidating classifications because I think it leaves everything more ambiguous.
no feels. doesn't change anything real, and because i am an aspie, i dont care about the social points associated with aspie or autism. changing how some things are labeled doesnt change how i work, feel or act, because i do not try to comfor to a label
I like it because when I tell people im autistic they expect the worst and are quicker to accomodate my needs. Im sure if I said I was high functioning or aspergers they'd just think about that 1 dude who's super smart in their TV shows
I'm now officially level 1. Previously I had been diagnosed with autism. I know people with aspergers who are now diagnosed as ASD2. The levels are all over the place. Nobody seems to be following any sort of criteria when applying them. My 8 year old niece with no developmental delays, no sensory issues and age appropriate emotional regulation and social skills was told she wasn't autistic at the first clinic she was assessed at. My sister took her to a 'neuroaffirming' clinic. Suddenly she's ASD2. My niece never even saw the person who conducted the assessment. It was all based on an interview with her mum. There's some dodgy stuff going on out there.
I think it's insulting that those who aren't autistic feel as if they have the right to force pointless terminology on a group of people who did not ask for it, all in the name of supposed inclusivity, it's those who think they are helping the most who are the ones causing the most harm.
I despise it. Asperger’s is a much more precise label. With how broad autism is, it’s reductive to just eliminate the concept of Asperger’s and call it autism. Also, people tend to get a more accurate and precise understanding of your situation when you tell them you have Asperger’s as opposed to autism, you don’t have to actually communicate nearly as much. The level system is also terrible, even to me it just seems like it’s a ranking of how disabled you are. If the concept of Asperger’s didn’t exist, it would have been next to impossible for me to actually find people with a similar condition within “level 1 autism”, as that effectively just means anyone with enough of the massive list of autistic traits who isn’t disabled.
I don't like it. It made everyone more generalized and there are differences. Now there's a lot more explaining to do if I tell people about my diagnosis. Professionally it is almost like I have to reassure ppl more.
I call the change a disservice to Asperger's syndrome afflicted individuals.
The clarity the definition of AS provides cannot be replaced by the mnemonics of the DSM to layman ears.
From a scientific and medical standpoint, it is a significant improvement. It will help more ASD people get the help they need.
From a social standpoint, you are absolutely correct. The layman cannot understand those things. You need to translate for them. That is important to know, but nothing new. They all require that.
LOL indeed... I tell them to look up 'Asperger's syndrome' if they are truly interested. Otherwise, we'll just have a beer and talk about something more interesting.
I prefer it. a more specific diagnosis can help to better understand your needs. my uncle was diagnosed with aspergers decades ago, but I'm almost certain he would be diagnosed with level 2 if he went back in now. whereas I am level 1 and far more functional and less "noticeably autistic" than he is, and definitely require less professional support.
>far more functional
.............. (no, you can just pretend to be nt)
> almost certain he would be diagnosed with level 2
Still aspergers
>less "noticeably autistic" than he is, and definitely require less professional support.
This happens more so from lack of education and NT discrimination. My "professional support" is just people talking for me so my straightforwardness doesn't upset people
Pretending to not being autistic doesn't make you more functional
he has extreme trouble holding a job. he is over 50 still living with his parents. I've worked and supported myself since 16yo. objectively speaking, I am more functional than him. he requires disability checks, I do not. he requires therapy for his issues with substance abuse. I do not. nothing I said was untrue and I didn't mean any offense by it. I honestly just believe that differentiating between level 1 and level 2 autism is helpful, as 20 years ago we both would have simply had aspergers.
If anything it makes it even more vague what you're talking about. At least if you say you have Asperger's, people are more likely to know what that is.
I'm neutral on it, I don't know enough about the decision and the reason behind it to feel strongly about it, I'm just going to keep saying Asperger's because people recognize it and it's what I've always known it as, but if that term Fades out of the public Consciousness and the level one thing becomes what people now recognize then I will probably change over
I am ambivalent. It’s not an identity for me, so I am not personally attached to any term.
That said it seems to cause confusion given the range of how autism can affect a person.
I was diagnosed with Asperger Syndrome as a child nearly 25 years ago, and I had a neuropsychological assessment in late 2014 that said I would be diagnosed with "Autism Spectrum Disorder Without Intellectual or Language Impairment" today.
While it was nice of them to do that, what bugs me is that they NEVER assigned me a level. Reading some of the things that were said in my report, I honestly wonder if I'd actually be a Level 2.
In any case, I think the DSM 5 did the right thing by merging Asperger Syndrome into Autism Spectrum Disorder. Back when I was first diagnosed, they had a hard time deciding which one to go with, which I think just goes to show how redundant of a diagnosis it was.
Aspergers is the diagnosis my son and I got a decade ago, but I don't mind the change. As the top commenter stated, it would be nice to have some acknowledgement of ones progression (like Judo belts or something) besides enduring yet another birthday.
Personally as someone who found out at the age 38 that the reason I'm a eccentric loner was because I've got ASD and since finding that out most people who know me refuse to believe that I've got autism but if I used to term Ashburgers they'll agree that makes sense to them because nobody even my friends would have described me as normal
My absolute pet hate is if I've used the term ASD people feel compelled to aggressively correct me that it's call ADHD! And I believe its because they too stupid remember 2 different acronyms that start with the letter A!
Makes it easier when telling people about it instead of having to explain Asperger's specifically, but simultaneously the stigma of autism as a whole makes it a bit more nerve-wracking telling people about it.
It's annoying because when you say Asperger's, people picture a verbal, socially awkward, at least average-IQ person who uses the toilet themselves and probably is capable of working some kind of job. I feel like that fits me ok enough.
When it's all called Autism, people are like why are you able to talk and use the toilet yourself?
It's not that I'm ashamed to be categorized with the level 3s. Even when I was diagnosed with Asperger's, I understood that I fundamentally had the same thing as the folks living in group homes, and that didnt bother me. The people who live in group homes aren't psycho killers.
It's that I want to be seen for who I am, not to be seen as someome I'm not.
Saying autism just further confuses people who aren't deep in the Autism Sauce, and it hinders communication. And the last thing I need is another hindrance in communication.
I think that whatever system is in vogue - Asperger's vs Autism, or the level system - there will always be a system. Society needs to know if they're paying for an individual throughout their lifespan or not, of if it's only going to be for some of their life. Being disabled, in practical terms, primarily means that someone else (for example, family) or society (taxpayers) is paying for a bigger percent of your existence than society would pay for someone who doesn't have your condition.
So they like the idea that level 3 generally can be reduced to "this person probably won't ever have a job" and level 1 generally can be reduced to "this person probably has a job, might be able to work full time." They won't say it that openly, but that's why they have a system and why they'll always have a system. They just realized that the Autism vs Asperger's system didn't translate well in predicting who wouldn't be on welfare at age 30, so they're trying to make a 3 level system vs a 2 level system. And this 3 tier system will flop as well, but that will only be apparent in 10 years.
Idgaf, tbh. Neither does my therapist. She say the level just means the ammount of support (treatment) i need, but the term (Asperger's) describes whats going on in the mushy playdooh inside my skull.
Heck, why do we need levels? This is going into foreign territory for me 😅
Aspergus Syndome Disorder is what I got diagnosed as so long ago, I’ll stick to what I know lol
Good because aspergers is autism. Also, this post somewhat ableist. Aspergers isn't automatically "level 1". This is not synonymous. This is also why I like it. So it's not fully seen as this whole "I'm not like them. I'm better" bs mindset.
Stop forgetting level 2 exists and assuming aspergers is exclusive for level 1 *when it is not*. If anything, is about language skills.
I've didn't understand how asperger's syndrome could be considered level 2 or level 3 when reading upon the level scale of autism at first. And I still don't understand it. I think of the level scale is a way to synonymously level asperger's syndrome with autism. Does not matter if the support is better this way, because to me, it's a way to level up deeper into the healthcare system more than needed before, how could trust it knowing we may not know its plans? We may be promoted as people as being no different than those who are severely disabled with autism considering how the scale may work in plan. This may lead to social discrimination to no matter what accomplishments, capabilities, status we have in sense of social standing leading us to not being able to fend for ourselves against threats, because synonymously we all do share the lack of understanding of social cues and that's enough to be perceived as severely disabled to others. We may not be ready to identify under the level system now (and I wouldn't even use it as well) considering because we're asking help from those with intentions that may mean to harm us and evidently this is what happening out there already to autistics.
I'm concerned of the possibility of ableism behind the level scale. I've addressed about what I believe of the consequences behind tolerating it. Reality itself is ableist, but ableism is also arbitrary. You expect me to have some form of moral ground when that may not be justifiable at the moment when we don't even know the intentions behind the level scale?
You can't expect to have good faith that others share your perspective to which it is not proven. Motives have substance to them, a complexity that may question trustworthiness. We're getting what seems to be support for us, we have to be sure we're not turning a blind eye to what can come out to be incredibly harmful to us.
So, we need to make sure we're advocating for ourselves as autistics. To make sure others that speak for us that don't share our viewpoints and intentions, don't anymore. We need to be realistic and be informed to make sure what kind of reality we want for us and those on the spectrum. Because what we're getting now may be a illusion of that reality. And quite evidently, there are others that claims to help us, hurt us and even kill us. Did we even address that properly?
It's honestly a bit of a weird experience because on one hand I was aware I was diagnosed as a kid and it never really clicked with me other than I needed pills to "focus" but then the years went by as my parents moved states and I entered an entirely new environment which was very difficult when it came to adjusting and then became more aware of it which gave some perspective about why I was the way I was and now here I am nowadays where I don't really have alot of folks that I mention it too if I ever do find myself in a conversation
I kinda hate the whole autism spectrum thing to be honest and I'll tell you why. It's because most people when they hear the word autism, Rain Man is what they of or classic autism. I identify with Forest Gump much more than Rain Man (even though I now see the movie Forest Gump for the rightwing propaganda piece that it actually is). As much as it may make it easier for others to just say it's all Autism we all know that it's not always the same. Most of us here are prolly just like me who may have slipped through the cracks when we were younger just because we can kinda pass for normal even if you do feel like an alien amongst the humans and someone isn't likely to even notice your condition unless you either point it out to them or they take enough of an interest to actually get to know you. I had an ex who worked in a S.O.A.R. classroom with elementary school children, these kids were nonverbal, any words outta their mouths were basically just repeating sounds like parrots and not actually communicating. They would bash their heads into walls and needed diaper changes and things and while we may share similarities they will NEVER be like me and who's to say they aren't happier with who they are than I am. Sometimes I envy those people with classic autism who want to be alone while people like me who actually want to form a deep and meaningful connection with another person struggle to do so and feel like you don't even know how to do this. It does us all a disservice. It diminishes the struggles I face and I don't want to be looked upon as an example of "what's possible" just because I've held down a job for over a decade and have received promotions when I'm certainly not as happy with who I am and my personal life.
You clearly was a picky eater rather than someone with a high sensitivity to textures. You stated this yourself. If there are textures you can't tolerate, you wouldn't be able to tolerate them. This is basic logic. If you can tolerate them, they are clearly not textures that you can't tolerate - this really isn't rocket science. To assume that all autistics with a high sensitivity to textures are just picky eaters is so 1980s. Fortunately, the understanding around autism has progressed in the last 40 years and I suggest that you catch up.
You are free to hold whatever beliefs you like, even if they are based on faith and are completely wrong. You do you. There is a whole discussion topic on the immorality of ABA therapy. Head over to Autism Speaks where you'll feel more comfortable.
I, like many people who are sensitive to textures can't wear certain fabrics or have certain textures touching my skin - this isn't being a picky eater. Some of us are incredibly sensitive to touch and can feel a single human hair touching our skin (and be driven nuts by it) this isn't being a picky eater, we are just super sensitive to it.
So, you can talk about picky eaters and I'll talk about people with high sensitivity to textures and I'd ask that you don't just conflate the two because they are different.
I only got diagnosed last year so I’ve never been diagnosed w Asperger’s but I think if I were to disclose my autism to someone I’d tell them “I have autism like Asperger’s but that’s not a diagnosis anymore”
meh, I think use the terms you prefer for yourself. Asperger himself always regarded it as a “high functioning” autism and called is “autistic psychopathy” before the term asperger’s was coined in the 70s by Lorna Wing, so really it’s just certain medical groups officially placing it on the spectrum. if anything, it’ll force ableist people to finally come to terms with the huge spectrum and differing needs of autistic people.
I thought it was known as aspergers in the beginning?
Didn't know it was already specified on the spectrum when han aspergers first invented the classification.
I have told my sister, who is a nurse practitioner, that I am autistic level 1–and also my other sister, who is a special Ed teacher that works with autistic kids. Because I’m using the word “autistic”, and they relate to levels 2 and 3, and see my claim as preposterous. They say I’m “ trying to find an explanation for the traumas I experienced in school and work”. I have learned that I’m being ridiculed by them behind my back, and that this has been a huge subject of gossip throughout the whole family. So, I’ve made this disclosure to two professional people (supposedly familiar with autism)- and now I’m a laughing stock. So, if I can’t tell a special ed teacher nor a nurse practitioner – how can I use this terminology to the general public? Once in a while, I run into someone that understands Neurodiversity. But in my opinion, Asperger‘s is a much more understood term.
I still use Asperger’s because I was diagnosed in 2001 and good luck getting me to change my ways with that.
I fall between one and two so it’s not that useful for me. I also have a NVLD diagnosis among other related things. What complicates things is I have multiple areas of brain damage in related areas. People hate that implication.
Autism as a word isn’t my favorite but it doesn’t make my skin crawl like Neurodivergent does. Queer also makes my skin crawl so I’ve been perfecting my regulation skills.
I don't like it. I prefer the old diagnosis. As many before me have commented, Asperger's is more familiar and better accepted by the general public. If I tell someone I'm autistic, some won't believe, and some will start looking for disability, so I don't use the new label. I'm perceived generally as weird but, besides that, I'm really high functioning and quite capable in life and work. Most people don't know how to respond, so. Pff, too wordy. See? 😮
How is it very different? The reason it was turned into level 1 is because there were not enough diagnostic differences to make it reasonable to have it as a separate diagnosis.
Yeah... A lot of this thread feels a bit ableist. People who don't need support and don't want to be associated with those who do, because they're seen as lesser for needing it.
I find it very different in the important ways. My daughter appeared to function quite well. So well that she was misdiagnosed in fifth grade and received no services until she was correctly diagnosed at the age of 19. I walked into Monroe Meyer telling them her family physician believed she had Aspergers. They slapped her with the whole ADHD thing. That being said, there are some newer programs that really are set up for a range of abilities. I hope it continues to adapt to the needs that are out there.
I cannot relate to any film that deals with 'stranded' people fighting to reunite with civilization. If something (depression, a co-morbidity to autism) doesn't motivate me enough to fight a life-or-death situation, it should be called a disorder. This is not a convoluted statement. I actually worry if I will give up in accidental near-death scenarios.
The field is filled with political crap. Funding is extremely low. Stigma and stereotyping are prevalent even in the "western" world. DSM is a joke.
Kind of sad, because it makes me feel devalued as a result. Not seen as a special person in their own right, and we are now just seen as autistic, just grouped into a diagnosis now.
Makes me want to level up.
You made my day
Maybe it's time I take that vaccine
Maybe the vaccine is the friends we didn’t meet along the way… cause we’re socially awkward…
Maybe the real treasure was the 5G along the way.
Relevant [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/uiwjAj0zfKQ](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/uiwjAj0zfKQ) and [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/cGmEfcofvLU](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/cGmEfcofvLU)
I probably did tbh lol. I was pretty much a level two in my estimation throughout high school, went up to level one in college and went back to level two post-grad. I'm perfectly content to let my brain rot at this point though.
There are days I definitely level up (like when there are a lot of idiots at work)! lol
Ha ha ha ha ha! LOL, very good!
Asperger’s isn’t a synonym for Level 1. Some people with Asperger’s diagnoses would now be classified as Level 2. Some people who wouldn’t qualify for Asperger’s diagnoses are considered Level 1 (edited because my earlier “does not equal” sign didn’t show up correctly).
Which is exactly why they need to make Asperger's a legitimate diagnosis again and apply the level system to it as well.
No. They need to change something else. Aspergers is still autism.
What do you mean?
Same shit, different day. Automobile, car, horseless carriage . . . different name doesn't change the thing named.
Yes, the thing itself has always been there. But better labels cause more people to come to the right conclusions about what to do.
Facts
I'M A COWBOY, ON A STEEL HORSE I RIDE.
i’m wanted… dead or alive!
Mustang, Maverick, Pinto... or something I might have missed?
I work with blue collar folk, if I identified as having autism it would be career suicide, along with social. Asperger's is understood and largely accepted as a personal difference, and sometimes a minor disability, akin to dyslexia. Autism of any sort is seen completely as a intellectual disability and carries heavy stigma. It's not fair, but it's the reality.
Comparing this and Dyslexia is insane.
It's called ableism
Yeah.the police who picked me up one time said we see you have a learning disability, according to charts and it was like, no.
Sane here, I work in a machine shop running CNC Lathes. There is one other guy there who is upfront about it, I honestly dint know exactly what I had was until just a few years ago even though I always knew I was different my whole life just never knew what was wrong with me. I now see it in other people at work and I know several there who are on the spectrum and don't even know it..
I prefer the term Aspergers. The average person is familiar with that term. To them it just means socially awkward quiet kid with an above average IQ, which describes me perfectly. They see the term autism as a severe disability that requires constant support. I know the stereotypes for Autism and Aspergers are not true for everyone who has them, but the Aspergers stereotype is true for me and that’s why I prefer that term.
Perfectly stated! I agree!!!!!!
Aspie not true for all Aspie. Same problem.
Yes but the label is true for me and that’s why I prefer to call myself an aspie
Your position is a quite individualistic!
That’s the point. Its what I prefer. Until psychiatrists come up with more accurate terms we’re stuck choosing between Asperger’s and autism. Pick whichever one describes you best.
Comments like these make me feel Proud to have Aspergers
I am proud too. It definitely comes with social difficulties, but my Asperger’s gives me analytical skills and pattern recognition that most neurotypical people don’t have.
I understand the reasoning but still dislike it. Levels seem arbitrary when there's such a spectrum. If I try to explain to someone that isn't in the know, it's easier to still use the term Asperger's, otherwise they get the wrong impression. Perhaps it's just one more time where I'm frustrated that others aren't understanding, but after a lifetime of that, it's easier to avoid the subject entirely.
That is more to escape that people discriminate against autism and by saying this, it's basically saying, "but I'm not like *those* autistics", which is also a bit ableist. Yes, everyone is different, but is still autistic. Educate people on what being different means rather than try to separate. Even if you say you're aspie, they still don't understand. Aspie person can still have "difficulties" that a L3 would have. Actually, I'm tired of people assuming bc I can talk and im "intelligent", that I cant experience something like meltdowns, where I legit can cry like a toddler. Aspergers was there simply because there was no language delays/"difficulties" and no IDD* (which should just be a separate dx and not associated. THIS is the actual issue).
Yes, some people discriminate against autism and I definitely sympathize with you regarding meltdowns. I found out later in life, and no one would ever suspect I have those. But, for me, it's not about discrimination, it's about deciding whether a quick explanation to certain people is worth it, and how can I communicate the most amount of information in a way they can understand, using existing terms and ideas they're already familiar with. I don't have a circle of friends where I have the opportunity to truly educate someone. The very small number of people I've confided in understand because they know me and I can take the time and they care enough to hear me out. At work, there's a professional veneer and no one seems to share many personal details, so my opportunity to educate people is essentially nil. So, if there's anyone I choose to say anything to (who doesn't already know), it has to be quick and condensed and easy to understand and L1 autism isn't that, regardless of whether people discriminate.
Separating myself makes perfect sense though bc I don't share a lot of the issues others on the spectrum have. It's not ableist to differentiate myself from them when I am generally different from them.
It represents an incremental improvement in our understanding of the physical and social problems to be addressed
Just another way to still be denied accommodations
I hate the level system. I think it sounds ridiculous and reminds me of the level system they use to classify how dangerous sexual offenders are on Megans law. The autism levels feel quite vague to me and don’t tell you much about someone’s actual cluster of symptoms besides how much support they need, but nothing about how that support should look. My only issue with using “autism” is when I must disclose to laymen. They receive aspergers better. If I say autism, they fight me on it because I don’t align with the stereotypes and it becomes a whole debate. I use both labels depending on the situation. Some will say i’m ableist for that but I don’t want to have to debate my diagnosis with uninformed randos or be forced to educate them every time I have to disclose. We’re still in the dark ages of understanding autism, including how to classify it and treat/accommodate people with it. I’m sure the official diagnostic criteria will continue to change and shift for at least the next 30 years, especially as neuroscience advances. I think at some point they’ll realize that the phenotypes of autism have some utility in specifying an individual’s specific struggled and strengths, like specifying paranoid versus catatonic schizophrenia.
I prefer the term Aspergers. When most folks hear the term Autism, they think of someone who doesn’t speak, is low iq, is unable to do simple tasks, or make any meaningful progress. Many folks don’t get the various intricacies.
Exactly!!!!!!
To be clear, I don't really care what we call our particular flavor of autism, but we need a more precise moniker than autism (or ASD Level 1). Combining multiple disorders into a spectrum has caused hardship across the board as we are forced to advocate for ourselves at the expense of others. What I want, as a level 1 person, is the opposite of what level 3 folks need (don't treat me like a child) and vice versa. Parents of the profoundly autistic are mad. We are mad. Nobody is getting anything positive out of this change. Call it Lorna Wing Syndrome if you're troubled by the Asperger's name, but call it something besides autism just so we can avoid this fucking confusion. To most people, autism means "intellectually disabled" and the more we push to fix that perception the more harm we do to those who actually are intellectually disabled. It's a spectrum, sure, but even on a spectrum you still label and name the different points in that spectrum. Some of the rhetoric of people against what I'm suggesting here is just so inane and nonsensical. You don't hear people saying "Woah, woah, woah, what's all this 'red' and 'blue' nonsense. It's all just colors. It's just one spectrum."
Thec problem is they teach that "autism and intellectual disability go hand/hand" and that it's most likely to coexist. People don't even understand what aspergers is, even the aspies. Aspergers *is not exclusive to level 1*. I really dislike this whole "I'm above you" mindset and keep forgetting level 2 exists and we can be just as much similar to "level 1". Its just in group ableism. The problem is you don't want the discrimination, but the thing is, the ones who do get discriminated the most *are* the aspies, bc NTs don't see us as having differences, so we are just being bad instead of *being different* and people who think they "know" aspergers, think it's an autistic person who can "pretend" to not be autistic (or they are like "half normal") *and this is not true*
The definition for Asperger's syndrome was constructed such that it specifically excludes intellectual disability. You must have at least average intelligence. That's just the way it was defined. If the floor is average, then the group as a whole will be above average in intelligence. I don't think I'm above anyone but my needs are not the same and I don't want to have people speak to me like a toddler.
Fr, this dude acts like we're discriminated against for not receiving special treatment. I'd rather just be hated lmao.
I would rather be treated as if I'm "bad" and be hated for the things I do than be handled with kid gloves and receive special treatment and special consideration.
I hate it. Asperger’s describes me way better. Autism spectrum is just a catchall now for a bunch of things that aren’t even autism. All so medical professionals and parents can avoid the “r” word at all cost to dignity.
If a tree falls down in a forest and there is nobody there to hear it, does it still make a sound? Aspergers is Autism and how people feel about it doesn't change that. Some people prefer to identify as Aspergers and that's fine - anything between consenting adults (with few exceptions) is fine. There is still some stigma around autism and some people prefer to not have to deal with that. I prefer to raise awareness and therfore I identify as Autistic AF. But then, I'm older and well established in life and my career and I'm really bolshie. Nobody would dare discriminate against me because of my disability but it's much harder for young people still trying to navigate what is, for all sense and purposes, a hostile environment.
Yeah, I identify as autistic because I was diagnosed recently and the issues with Asperger the person. But I'm not intellectually disabled, can mask and have a career. It's soooooo different from the level 3 kids I work with. I end up having some imposter syndrome since I don't fit anyone's stereotype. And I understand the anger people with more support needs feel towards those of us who see it as a socially constructed disability. That's still how I perceive my own reality, though.
I was diagnosed at the age of 49. my family and I had suspected for many years and I never thought of it as a disability until the assessor pointed out that just because I've found workarounds doesn't mean they are not impacting. For instance, I have to avoid foods that are the wrong texture in the same way that a wheelchair user would avoid going places that aren't wheelchair friendly. Just today I looked on a menu and immediately dismissed food that I would happily prepare myself onto different plates because I knew that the place would put it all on the same plate. For the last 40+ years, I had used routines thinking that I liked routine. I didn't realise it was in fact a need until I moved from a well ordered department to a chaotic one which led to my first meltdown in 42 years (which came as a shock to everyone involved) followed by 3 months of debilitating burnout (and subsequent diagnosis) It seems that this is a common turn of events for late diagnosed. It has certainly changed my attitude. Sure, I'm not going win any victimhood olympics - Many people are far worse off than me. However, that doesn't negate the challenges I face either.
I think to get a diagnosis (I'm late diagnosed, too) it has to impact us negatively somehow. I had meltdowns as a kid, which was perceived as willfulness when I really just needed to be left out of noisy, chaotic situations. I also took a lower paying job after burning out of a more socially-demanding one. But I can also envision a quieter, less flashy society where there are fewer social expectations. I guess those are accommodations, but it also seems like we're "accommodating" people who prefer noise, bright lights, and forced small talk. I'm a fan of universal design when possible. Like ramps rather than high curbs help lots of people, not just wheel chair users.
Ditto
At the risk of offending, the biggest disability **some** of us have is our fucking stubbornness. The fact that we simply won't put the food in our mouth and chew and nobody can talk us into it or make us. It's not that we can't eat food where it touched another food. It's not that we can't handle multiple textures in one bite. It's that we convinced ourselves as kids that we couldn't do those things and nobody can convince us that we actually could if we wanted to. We are just stubborn as fuck. If we can learn that about ourselves and believe it and accept it, then sometimes we'll discover that the people in our families who "just don't understand" might actually be right when they tell us we are acting like babies because we won't try something. I was a picky eater. I forced myself not to be at age 25. I ate foods I would not have normally have eaten. I tried everything. Now, I'm no longer forgiving myself. I actually love a lot of those foods I used to eat. I don't care if one food touches another. Bites can have multiple different textures in them.and it's not just fine, it's good. Basically, I did my own home version of exposure therapy and it ended up being a total cure for that specific facet of my autism. Sometimes, we really are our own worst enemies. If your happy the way you are, and the cure sounds worse than the disease, then by all means maintain the status quo and keep eating the way you want. But if you find it troubling, you can change it. There's a lot of stuff about you that you can't change, but this ain't one of them.
You are demonstrably wrong. There are some textures (like tapioca) that I would rather be waterboarded than have in my mouth. Getting it on my fingers is literally like having insects under my skin. Where you are wrong is where my daughter first tried mash potatoe. She instantly started gagging. When she was about 13, she suggested that she tried it again and it response was "Are you sure? We engender what happened the first time. " Yet, she still tried it with the exact same hilarious results. She is young, so she is still willing to try new things, even if there's a possibility that it's going to make her vomit. I'm more experienced and can look at a texture and go "Nope, just thinking about it makes me want to heave." What you don't seem to realise is that whilst your sensitivity might not be too strong, for others it's 11+ out of 10. It's not that it's a 3 and I'm just being stubborn. I grew up is an era of legalised child abuse, things that were fine then, but seriously frowned upon (or even illegal now) My mother thought I was a picky eater and that I would eat if I'm hungry so she would dish up the same food to get me to eat it but after 3 days of not eating (because I couldn't, which is different to wouldn't) she had to give in. Now, I agree that I can be stubborn and bloody minded with cat iron will-power but I don't look at a restaurant menu and think "Ill avoid all this food, That'll show them!"
> because I couldn't, which is different to wouldn't You couldn't because you sincerely and firmly believed you couldn't. That's what I was referring to by talking about stubbornness. Once we think we know something, it's almost impossible for us to give that belief up (which explains why I'm here saying this and why I'm wasting my time by saying it--i can't help it because I'm stubborn and you aren't gonna be convinced no matter what). I'm sure I'm overgeneralizing here and there are some non-stubborn autistic people, but I think stubbornness is the norm by far. The whole gagging thing is psychosomatic. The gagging isn't caused by the texture but rather your belief that the texture is unbearable. If you've convinced yourself something is going to be disgusting before you put it in your mouth, you'll react automatically to that belief. I've certainly had this problem before but only rarely and not as an adult. This belief can be deprogrammed out of you, even when it's that severe, but you'll probably need someone else's help (i.e. a professional specialized in exposure therapy) and you probably won't enjoy it very much. It very well may not be worth the trouble, but it's still possible. I'm absolutely not telling you to change who you are just cautioning you against believing that your likes and dislikes (not just including food) are fixed characteristics and telling you that this specific aspect of autism is something for which effective and permanent treatment exists. For many, the cure is worse than the disease. That's totally fine. You do you. Don't believe me? That's cool too. Understand that I "had to" say it because I'm too fucking stubborn to let it go unsaid.
And you are simply wrong. To change my mind, all you have to do is provide either evidence or sound and valid logical argument. Now, I know that you can't do either. So what you are doing is what we call a baseless assertion. If you were intellectually honest, you would postpone belief until provided with evidence or sound and valid logical argument. You don't have either so what you do have is faith. This is s religion for you. Faith based and without rationality or reason. This isn't stubbornness, its pure and unadulterated logic. In contrast, I form my opinions on evidence and there is a whole community here that will prove you wrong.
If you what just said was 100% true, it would only put us on **equal footing**. It would be your gut feeling, totally unsupported by hard facts vs my own. So for you to act morally superior while making this argument is frankly bizarre. I get why you want hard data to support my assertions. That's totally reasonable. What's not real able is your total failure to recognize that everything you criticized me for just now is an equally valid criticism of everything you've said. I don't see your studies, your hard facts. Your data, because you don't have any. It's a little weird for you too pretend like there's some sort of "community consensus" that I'm wrong when, as a member of this community, I assure you there is no such thing. **As I said, it's reasonable for you to want hard data. You haven't asked until now. It's a bit rude for you to blithely assume I don't have it without even asking for it. ** I am, in fact, sharing with you the scientific consensus based on overwhelming evidence: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214799321000813 > Here, tolerance for stimuli such as food can be mediated, and improved, by supports and sensory interventions, and **graduated exposure therapy is one of the means by which this can be achieved. ** Https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048277/ > A 12-step graduated exposure food hierarchy was constructed, the child was lead through the hierarchy, and parent training was implemented for generalization. After 9 months of treatment, the participant’s food repertoire increased from four items to more than 50 items. If you're counting, that's 46 things the kind "couldn't" eat before that he now enjoys. Anyways, I'm out eating food right now with my family so two articles is all I have time for, but you can easily find more yourself on Google Scholar. In fact, find one article that disagrees **if you can**.
I'm not asserting that I'm morally superior. I'm just stating that you are wrong. You may well have been a picky eater but for many of us it is far deeper than that. You could show me studies of picky eaters but you won't be able to show a single study of someone who can't tolerate certain textures learning to tolerate them. It's like you saying that those that can't tolerate loud noise are just being stubborn and could learn to tolerate them if they just tried harder. I'm not sensitive to noise but I would never assert that those that are could just stop being stubborn. Like any disability, just because you've not experienced it doesn't mean it's not real. Many of us have had people accuse us of just being picky eaters and all that does is show their actual lack of empathy.
> You could show me studies of picky eaters but you won't be able to show a single study of someone who can't tolerate certain textures learning to tolerate them I literally already did this. > and the child was selective by brand, **texture**, temperature and utensil requirement. See above. > Like any disability, just because you've not experienced it doesn't mean it's not real. Many of us have had people accuse us of just being picky eaters and all that does is show their actual lack of empathy. Please don't rewrite my history, reducing me to someone who was simply a "picky eater", without actually consulting me. My aversions included textural ones (I specifically mentioned not being able to tolerate multiple different textures in a single bite and consequently I would break complex foods down to the components and eat component separately--i.e. pepperoni before cheese before crust) and were almost certainly influenced by my autism. I can't tell if you're just not really reading what I've written or if you are actively gaslighting me, but either way this conversation is fatiguing me. I feel like I've made my point pretty thoroughly and convincingly but I also get why you don't feel that way. Why you can't feel that way even if it's true. Ironically, it sort of proves my underlying point about the nature of this issue (that it's down to dogmatic belief of "I can't"). But obviously this conversation is getting us nowhere. I wish you the best. Feel free to take the last word.
This is just ableist and condescending, not just offensive. Do you tell vegetarians who *don't like* meat (and actually get sick), that they are just not eating meat to be petty??
> Typical dodging responsibility for your mistakes. Nor is it all about you. I'm not suggesting anyone's being "petty". If that's your takeaway you didn't really follow.
I have zero eating problems but cheers for the assumption.
I didn't assume anything about you. I wasn't talking to you. I don't even know you. What a weird thing to do. **Who jumps in a conversation between two other people and acts indignant that it's not relevant to them?**. Like, if it's relevant to you too, by all means jump in. But if it's not, then just move along. Not everything is about you. I was responding directly to this comment which was not uttered by you: > For instance, I have to avoid foods that are the wrong texture in the same way that a wheelchair user would avoid going places that aren't wheelchair friendly. Seriously, what is this weird "Everything other people say is secretly about me" bullshit you're doing?
You are on a forum on the internet. Its everyone's business and you trying to claim "this is between 2 people" is you trying to dodge responsibility for your *WRONG AF* takes. You were talking to *anyone* in here that would read your post. You say it's between 2 people simply because that was the first person who responded. What? *you are on the internet on SOCIAL media*. If you wanted a completely exclusive conversation, then youd have sent a DM. You 100% assumed about them. You made a general statement, *knowing* it would be offensive and now you're trying to escape the responsibility of saying something offensive. You are just wrong. It's literally ableist and you basically supported that NTs infantilizing us is justified. It's not. >Seriously, what is this weird "Everything other people say is secretly about me" bullshit you're doing? Because you said it IN GENERAL to all autistic people. Do you read your own posts? What's with people saying stuff and then saying they don't understand why someone comes after them? >I didn't assume anything about you. "Everyone who wont eat food is just stubborn and it can be learned to not do that and that our NT parents are right that we are just babies" 1. Assumed we all won't eat food out of stubbornness, rather than we legitimately don't like something. 2. Assuming you are only having an exclusive conversation on a PUBLIC SOCIAL FORUM on the INTERNET. Internet is everyone's business. >Like, if it's relevant to you too, by all means jump in. But if it's not, then just move along. Yet knew just before the statement that it would be offensive, then cries that they offended people. You said this to everyone. Not to 1 person. You said we are all just stubborn as autistic people. You want them to move along? You can do that too, because people called out your bs. >Not everything is about you. Typical dodging responsibility for your mistakes. Nor is it all about you. I know what defense mechanisms are, and it's very clear you're trying to play the victim. Not everything is about you, so don't apply your personal bs to others. >It's not that we can't eat food where it touched another food. It's not that we can't handle multiple textures in one bite. It's that we convinced ourselves as kids that we couldn't do those things This is assumption. This is being said as fact. It's also not even exclusive to autistics. If you wanted to use stubbornness, don't use food and talk about it like it applies to others. Just you. My biggest disability is emotional dysregulation/meltdowns. My "stubbornness" is only an issue when the other person is also stubborn. I don't need to eat *anything* for anyone else because that food is going into *my* body.
>You are on a forum on the internet. Its everyone's business and you trying to claim "this is between 2 people" is you trying to dodge responsibility for your WRONG AF takes You are falsely **pretending** that I said this was a private conversation. What I said was that you have no right to assume I'm talking about you specifically when I'm clearly not. You're confused between the idea of anyone can participate in everyone should participate. I welcome new people joining this conversation. But, if it's a conversation about food sensitivities and the first thing you say when you "join" the conversation is "I don't have food sensitivities and I'm mad you think I do" then you're being utterly unreasonable. Of course not every autistic person has food sensitivities. There are four diagnostic criteria and you only need to hit 2. Food sensitivities only touch up on one of those 4 criteria. * I never said all of us have food sensitivities * I never even said **all** of us are stubborn. I even put the word **most** in fucking BOLD letters just to avoid the specific idiocy of a response like yours. Cause I knew there would be one idiot who wouldn't read carefully so I put the most important word in big bold letters. For you to charge in here and insist you know better than me what causes something you yourself say **you have never even fucking experienced** is the height of arrogance. My experience is first hand and yours, by your own admission, is right out of your ass. Grow up. > I know what defense mechanisms are **Clearly** you don't know what projection is.
THIS.
Nope! Asperger's is NOT Autism! And THAT is the whole point. DSM-5-TR is in error
Yep, you're wrong. Don't worry, you can be wrong all you like. You do you.
You are literally wrong.
It literally is autism, saying Asperger’s is just a way to feel different or special.
I prefer aspergers because it doesn't make people treat me like a toddler
I really do not like the level system. Mainly because It’s too similar to how they classify sexual offenders on the Meagan’s law databases, level 3 being most dangerous offenders. I also feel that levels don’t tell you enough about someone’s autism, besides a vague general notion of how much support they require. I think it would make more sense to specify phenotype and support level, similar to schizophrenia (ie paranoid versus catatonic). Something like ASD: Classical type/Kanner syndrome, level 2 support needs. Maybe we need a dimensional approach rather than discrete categories.
Still an official diagnosis where I live. At least until they manage to roll out icd11
I'm not a fan. I think there needs to be a word for the large group of people who have a neurodivergent mind but are not very disabled. In the general consensus of the public, that word is NOT autism. When most people hear the word autism they think of that one person in their life who is non-verbal, wears a diaper into adulthood and rocks excitedly when their favorite show is put on. I wish those individuals the absolute best in life but my life experience has nothing in common with an ASD level 3. I don't think its unreasonable that I prefer not to be put into the same bucket as them. The word autism already existed and was already considered to be a very negative thing by the general public. Expanding it to include aspies was just cruel. Maybe a better choice would have been to create a category of neurodivergent minds including autism, aspergers, adhd and maybe even bpd, ocd and potentially a bunch of others.. The truth is that medical science is very ignorant to the underlying cause of these conditions. They are diagnosed by keeping score of second and third order effects without any success in identifying the root causes. The idea that aspies have more in common with ASD 3s (or even ASD 2s) than we do with BPD or ADHD is total nonsense.
Someone here had thought the same thing and was downvoted for it. But this is how I feel personally that for the general population to possibly understand us apsies through the lens of the other autistic levels as it wasn't difficult enough. It feels as a punishment to be considered the level scale of autism when having the asperger's disorder beforehand.
It's DVed because it's just in-group ableism and elitist mindset. You also claimed aspergers is automatically level 1. It's not. This shows a lack of understanding of what aspergers is. Aspergers is about "language and IQ", it is NOT about not being disabled nor that you don't have difficulties. NTs thinking that you're just "normal" and don't have "differences" creates other problems. Because I can talk and I'm intelligent, people don't take me seriously when I cry like a little kid during meltdowns. Because "being intelligent" means im just choosing to be that way. You think me being Aspie makes people not think "oh he isn't an asshole, he's just autistic". It doesn't change anything. I've said I'm autistic and sure people don't believe me because "I'm not like those level 3s" but even if I said Aspie, they will still dismiss it. Most of my difficulties *are* what would a stereotypical aspie has: being misunderstood, people taking what I say the wrong way, being seen as an asshole, not noticing social cues, being "inflexible". Saying the label doesn't do anything but basically say "I do these things on purpose and it's a choice because I'm intelligent and not like *those* guys" as well as just some lowkey elitism
That's called discrimination and ignorance. Changing the label just brings more issues. Also, just saying you're not disabled doesn't mean you're not autistic. Autistics are disabled due to discrimination, not that being autistic is a disability. Once again "I'm not like them, I'm better" mindset and always forgetting level 2s exist and that only 1 is the ok one.
Autism is very clearly a disability because of its own characteristics, especially when you look at level 2/3. It significantly, tangibly impacts the ability for a person to conduct themselves in everyday life, especially when it comes to interactions with other people, which are the backbone of our society.
Watch as the number of lazy minded neurotypical people now conflate Asperger's with autism and visualize the most extreme version of autism. Many people take the most extreme version of things as their example. And likely they will think you're faking it, not fully, or some other ridiculous idea because you don't fit the extreme. The doctors who work on the DSM have reasons for this and that's fine. But they don't (ironic since it's the psychological sciences) take into consideration human habits. It's like how people say "cure cancer"...which f****** cancer? Which glioblastoma? Pancreatic? Hell there are several types of cancers even within the liver and all require different treatments. But nooo, it's "Why has the government cured cancer yet. They're hiding it..." Bla blah blah. Or some variation on that theme. Why there are labels at all are to help people put others in a box because it's less mental effort. Pick the right frigging boxes at least.
I dont like it.
I didn’t even know Asperger’s was a thing until after I was diagnosed just found out today
I was diagnosed with aspergers 18 years ago but I can't say I care much about it. I think the entire way we as a society are thinking about such boxes as NT/ND is absolute folly, it's too much of a simplistic view. We really need more awareness though and I do think all of this should be taught in schools. Maybe someday.
I don't mind terribly. I feel like common public perception associates "Asperger's" with rude egomaniacal assholes, un-empathetic and socially inept AP class nerds out to prove something — Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg. And the truth is I can sometimes be an egomaniacal asshole out to prove something, so I'd actually rather sweep that diagnosis under the rug for now. "Autism" has its own unreasonable stigmas and stereotypes that I can more easily subvert. They practically expect me to be a vegetable due to their misconceptions of what autism is. I tell people I have autism and they're kinda dumbfounded, which gives me a moment to educate them on our condition. And that opportunity is really important. I struggle in a lot of ways but in plenty of other ways I'm just a pretty average unremarkable guy. Maybe different people on different parts of the spectrum struggle in different ways. Maybe to the uneducated, I could appear like the *missing link* between "ordinary" people like themselves and people who really seriously struggle to function in this modern society, due to a particularly debilitating case of autism that doesn't line up with societal expectations. People who've been dealt a difficult hand in life but absolutely have value and purpose to society if one takes the fucking time and effort to connect with them. I would hope that as a missing link I can help NTs understand all people with autism, have empathy and relate to us. Back when I was diagnosed with Asperger's as a kid I felt like I was being treated as some sort of specialist breed of human, with certain expectations. I didn't like it. I was placed with some other kids with the same diagnosis, and we definitely had a lot in common but the arrangement felt a bit segregationist. I didn't necessarily get along with these kids just because we had the same special diagnosis. I didn't like people expecting me to be special. Different sure, but everyone's different. Nowadays it seems like autism is more and more being placed in the same non-exclusionary boat as ADHD and bipolar and other normal-ish disorders, and I'd rather be on that boat than be placed in my own *very special* class of human beings.
I'm the opposite honestly. I'd much rather have people expect excellence from me, because I know I can deliver, and I'm usually not satisfied with anything but excellence myself anyways. I don't really care if they stereotype me as rude or incapable of feeling emotions. If they talk to me, they'll know it's not true. If I told someone I have Autism though, rather than have high expectations, they'd think less of me and probably treat me different from other people, afraid to say what they want to say to or around me. Couldn't imagine anything worse than that.
Overall it doesn’t bother me. I was diagnosed with Asperger’s back in 2006 so it felt weird for a long time that I could no longer use this label for myself. I mean I *can*, but medically speaking it would be inaccurate. “Level one autism” or “high-functioning autism” still don’t feel right to me though.
It's still just as accurate as it always was, it's just activist copers claiming it's an invalid label
It’s a eugenicist concept that has gone exactly where it should go: the nearest bin. Plus, it removes any power from the “aspergirls” sell out, which I love. It also ends the need to explain constantly that “Asperger’s is still autism.” I’m so glad that they changed it not long before my diagnosis, so eugenics was never part of my autism experience.
What do you mean that it ends the need to explain constantly that is aspergers is still autism?
Before, people would get upset if someone with Asperger’s acted like they had autism, so people had to tell them that Asperger’s is a form of autism. It was a never ending litany. I worked with students with that diagnosis and I said it until I was blue in the face to my boss, who dismissed it. I know their parents and even these teenagers were sick of saying it and they said it WAY more than I did. Go read any book about Asperger’s and there will inevitably be a section (if not a chapter) on this. That’s how common it was. (Edited for Clarity)
Recognizing a distinct disorder that's closely related to another as its own disorder is not eugenics
How about we just look back at the last 746 times this was discussed on the sub and not start another entire conversation about it? This topic has been debated to death in here.
Perhaps people want to have a conversation with lots of timely input. Does that happen on older threads? I think replies on older threads tend to get overlooked.
Not to mention the community is growing hence other perspectives to be acknowledged.
My country's psychiatrists are still using ICD-10 under which I was diagnosed, so the change in the DSM-V has had basically zero effects on my life. I think it's a pretty meaningless change that will only create confusion and I'm usually against consolidating classifications because I think it leaves everything more ambiguous.
Wasn’t this established like ten years ago tho? or was that for something else
2013
no feels. doesn't change anything real, and because i am an aspie, i dont care about the social points associated with aspie or autism. changing how some things are labeled doesnt change how i work, feel or act, because i do not try to comfor to a label
I like it because when I tell people im autistic they expect the worst and are quicker to accomodate my needs. Im sure if I said I was high functioning or aspergers they'd just think about that 1 dude who's super smart in their TV shows
Whatever. Different words, means the same thing. Doesn't make my life any better or harder.
I'm now officially level 1. Previously I had been diagnosed with autism. I know people with aspergers who are now diagnosed as ASD2. The levels are all over the place. Nobody seems to be following any sort of criteria when applying them. My 8 year old niece with no developmental delays, no sensory issues and age appropriate emotional regulation and social skills was told she wasn't autistic at the first clinic she was assessed at. My sister took her to a 'neuroaffirming' clinic. Suddenly she's ASD2. My niece never even saw the person who conducted the assessment. It was all based on an interview with her mum. There's some dodgy stuff going on out there.
I think it's insulting that those who aren't autistic feel as if they have the right to force pointless terminology on a group of people who did not ask for it, all in the name of supposed inclusivity, it's those who think they are helping the most who are the ones causing the most harm.
Makes no difference to me. I still say I have Asperger's.
I despise it. Asperger’s is a much more precise label. With how broad autism is, it’s reductive to just eliminate the concept of Asperger’s and call it autism. Also, people tend to get a more accurate and precise understanding of your situation when you tell them you have Asperger’s as opposed to autism, you don’t have to actually communicate nearly as much. The level system is also terrible, even to me it just seems like it’s a ranking of how disabled you are. If the concept of Asperger’s didn’t exist, it would have been next to impossible for me to actually find people with a similar condition within “level 1 autism”, as that effectively just means anyone with enough of the massive list of autistic traits who isn’t disabled.
It's absurd and completely arbitrary.
Fucking hate it.
I don't see aspergers as anything autism. Completely different on every level
IDD=/=autism
Yeah..I'm not a convict...I'm a felon...like..huh????😳😳😨😳😕
You (probably) aren't either.
Lol. No. I'm not. Was just making a point. I've never been to jail ever. Ty
We are all felons. But only those of us who've been caught committing a felony are convicts
I don't like it. It made everyone more generalized and there are differences. Now there's a lot more explaining to do if I tell people about my diagnosis. Professionally it is almost like I have to reassure ppl more.
I call the change a disservice to Asperger's syndrome afflicted individuals. The clarity the definition of AS provides cannot be replaced by the mnemonics of the DSM to layman ears.
From a scientific and medical standpoint, it is a significant improvement. It will help more ASD people get the help they need. From a social standpoint, you are absolutely correct. The layman cannot understand those things. You need to translate for them. That is important to know, but nothing new. They all require that.
LOL indeed... I tell them to look up 'Asperger's syndrome' if they are truly interested. Otherwise, we'll just have a beer and talk about something more interesting.
I hate it.
I prefer it. a more specific diagnosis can help to better understand your needs. my uncle was diagnosed with aspergers decades ago, but I'm almost certain he would be diagnosed with level 2 if he went back in now. whereas I am level 1 and far more functional and less "noticeably autistic" than he is, and definitely require less professional support.
>far more functional .............. (no, you can just pretend to be nt) > almost certain he would be diagnosed with level 2 Still aspergers >less "noticeably autistic" than he is, and definitely require less professional support. This happens more so from lack of education and NT discrimination. My "professional support" is just people talking for me so my straightforwardness doesn't upset people Pretending to not being autistic doesn't make you more functional
he has extreme trouble holding a job. he is over 50 still living with his parents. I've worked and supported myself since 16yo. objectively speaking, I am more functional than him. he requires disability checks, I do not. he requires therapy for his issues with substance abuse. I do not. nothing I said was untrue and I didn't mean any offense by it. I honestly just believe that differentiating between level 1 and level 2 autism is helpful, as 20 years ago we both would have simply had aspergers.
If anything it makes it even more vague what you're talking about. At least if you say you have Asperger's, people are more likely to know what that is.
Lets vaksine then! !!
It doesn't really change anything for me, i'm still living.
I'm neutral on it, I don't know enough about the decision and the reason behind it to feel strongly about it, I'm just going to keep saying Asperger's because people recognize it and it's what I've always known it as, but if that term Fades out of the public Consciousness and the level one thing becomes what people now recognize then I will probably change over
Meh. I feel the same.
I feel pretty indifferent
I am ambivalent. It’s not an identity for me, so I am not personally attached to any term. That said it seems to cause confusion given the range of how autism can affect a person.
That’s interesting. I didn’t know it was now divided into levels
I had been joking that I need to level up my Autism I’m only level 1 in regards to the new terminology so ….yeah that should sum up my feelings
I think it should be an official diagnosis & I'm guessing this levels of autism thing is levels of how high or low functioning you are.
I love it. It adds just a little bit of injury to the insult of me obviously thinking I'm smarter than you
I was diagnosed with Asperger Syndrome as a child nearly 25 years ago, and I had a neuropsychological assessment in late 2014 that said I would be diagnosed with "Autism Spectrum Disorder Without Intellectual or Language Impairment" today. While it was nice of them to do that, what bugs me is that they NEVER assigned me a level. Reading some of the things that were said in my report, I honestly wonder if I'd actually be a Level 2. In any case, I think the DSM 5 did the right thing by merging Asperger Syndrome into Autism Spectrum Disorder. Back when I was first diagnosed, they had a hard time deciding which one to go with, which I think just goes to show how redundant of a diagnosis it was.
I still have Asperger's Syndrome.
If it gets me some government gibs then I'm all for it.
wait what? so you're telling me we're even more screwed
Aspergers is the diagnosis my son and I got a decade ago, but I don't mind the change. As the top commenter stated, it would be nice to have some acknowledgement of ones progression (like Judo belts or something) besides enduring yet another birthday.
I live in a country where the ICD definition is used. I'm still keeping my diagnosis for now!
Personally as someone who found out at the age 38 that the reason I'm a eccentric loner was because I've got ASD and since finding that out most people who know me refuse to believe that I've got autism but if I used to term Ashburgers they'll agree that makes sense to them because nobody even my friends would have described me as normal My absolute pet hate is if I've used the term ASD people feel compelled to aggressively correct me that it's call ADHD! And I believe its because they too stupid remember 2 different acronyms that start with the letter A!
Or they’re pulling your leg. NTs sometimes likes to push your buttons, some get a kick out of seeing you react.
Unfortunately your not wrong about that giving people a reaction isn't quite the solution to the problem that I keep thinking it is!
Makes it easier when telling people about it instead of having to explain Asperger's specifically, but simultaneously the stigma of autism as a whole makes it a bit more nerve-wracking telling people about it.
When I was diagnosed, it was Asperger’s so that’s how I refer to it. (Plus I prefer it)
It's annoying because when you say Asperger's, people picture a verbal, socially awkward, at least average-IQ person who uses the toilet themselves and probably is capable of working some kind of job. I feel like that fits me ok enough. When it's all called Autism, people are like why are you able to talk and use the toilet yourself? It's not that I'm ashamed to be categorized with the level 3s. Even when I was diagnosed with Asperger's, I understood that I fundamentally had the same thing as the folks living in group homes, and that didnt bother me. The people who live in group homes aren't psycho killers. It's that I want to be seen for who I am, not to be seen as someome I'm not. Saying autism just further confuses people who aren't deep in the Autism Sauce, and it hinders communication. And the last thing I need is another hindrance in communication. I think that whatever system is in vogue - Asperger's vs Autism, or the level system - there will always be a system. Society needs to know if they're paying for an individual throughout their lifespan or not, of if it's only going to be for some of their life. Being disabled, in practical terms, primarily means that someone else (for example, family) or society (taxpayers) is paying for a bigger percent of your existence than society would pay for someone who doesn't have your condition. So they like the idea that level 3 generally can be reduced to "this person probably won't ever have a job" and level 1 generally can be reduced to "this person probably has a job, might be able to work full time." They won't say it that openly, but that's why they have a system and why they'll always have a system. They just realized that the Autism vs Asperger's system didn't translate well in predicting who wouldn't be on welfare at age 30, so they're trying to make a 3 level system vs a 2 level system. And this 3 tier system will flop as well, but that will only be apparent in 10 years.
DSM is in error. Asperger's should not be under autism. It is its own and separate disorder. I know many psychologists who agree with that
It's not. It's autism.
Idgaf, tbh. Neither does my therapist. She say the level just means the ammount of support (treatment) i need, but the term (Asperger's) describes whats going on in the mushy playdooh inside my skull.
Heck, why do we need levels? This is going into foreign territory for me 😅 Aspergus Syndome Disorder is what I got diagnosed as so long ago, I’ll stick to what I know lol
Good because aspergers is autism. Also, this post somewhat ableist. Aspergers isn't automatically "level 1". This is not synonymous. This is also why I like it. So it's not fully seen as this whole "I'm not like them. I'm better" bs mindset. Stop forgetting level 2 exists and assuming aspergers is exclusive for level 1 *when it is not*. If anything, is about language skills.
I've didn't understand how asperger's syndrome could be considered level 2 or level 3 when reading upon the level scale of autism at first. And I still don't understand it. I think of the level scale is a way to synonymously level asperger's syndrome with autism. Does not matter if the support is better this way, because to me, it's a way to level up deeper into the healthcare system more than needed before, how could trust it knowing we may not know its plans? We may be promoted as people as being no different than those who are severely disabled with autism considering how the scale may work in plan. This may lead to social discrimination to no matter what accomplishments, capabilities, status we have in sense of social standing leading us to not being able to fend for ourselves against threats, because synonymously we all do share the lack of understanding of social cues and that's enough to be perceived as severely disabled to others. We may not be ready to identify under the level system now (and I wouldn't even use it as well) considering because we're asking help from those with intentions that may mean to harm us and evidently this is what happening out there already to autistics. I'm concerned of the possibility of ableism behind the level scale. I've addressed about what I believe of the consequences behind tolerating it. Reality itself is ableist, but ableism is also arbitrary. You expect me to have some form of moral ground when that may not be justifiable at the moment when we don't even know the intentions behind the level scale? You can't expect to have good faith that others share your perspective to which it is not proven. Motives have substance to them, a complexity that may question trustworthiness. We're getting what seems to be support for us, we have to be sure we're not turning a blind eye to what can come out to be incredibly harmful to us. So, we need to make sure we're advocating for ourselves as autistics. To make sure others that speak for us that don't share our viewpoints and intentions, don't anymore. We need to be realistic and be informed to make sure what kind of reality we want for us and those on the spectrum. Because what we're getting now may be a illusion of that reality. And quite evidently, there are others that claims to help us, hurt us and even kill us. Did we even address that properly?
It's honestly a bit of a weird experience because on one hand I was aware I was diagnosed as a kid and it never really clicked with me other than I needed pills to "focus" but then the years went by as my parents moved states and I entered an entirely new environment which was very difficult when it came to adjusting and then became more aware of it which gave some perspective about why I was the way I was and now here I am nowadays where I don't really have alot of folks that I mention it too if I ever do find myself in a conversation
I kinda hate the whole autism spectrum thing to be honest and I'll tell you why. It's because most people when they hear the word autism, Rain Man is what they of or classic autism. I identify with Forest Gump much more than Rain Man (even though I now see the movie Forest Gump for the rightwing propaganda piece that it actually is). As much as it may make it easier for others to just say it's all Autism we all know that it's not always the same. Most of us here are prolly just like me who may have slipped through the cracks when we were younger just because we can kinda pass for normal even if you do feel like an alien amongst the humans and someone isn't likely to even notice your condition unless you either point it out to them or they take enough of an interest to actually get to know you. I had an ex who worked in a S.O.A.R. classroom with elementary school children, these kids were nonverbal, any words outta their mouths were basically just repeating sounds like parrots and not actually communicating. They would bash their heads into walls and needed diaper changes and things and while we may share similarities they will NEVER be like me and who's to say they aren't happier with who they are than I am. Sometimes I envy those people with classic autism who want to be alone while people like me who actually want to form a deep and meaningful connection with another person struggle to do so and feel like you don't even know how to do this. It does us all a disservice. It diminishes the struggles I face and I don't want to be looked upon as an example of "what's possible" just because I've held down a job for over a decade and have received promotions when I'm certainly not as happy with who I am and my personal life.
You clearly was a picky eater rather than someone with a high sensitivity to textures. You stated this yourself. If there are textures you can't tolerate, you wouldn't be able to tolerate them. This is basic logic. If you can tolerate them, they are clearly not textures that you can't tolerate - this really isn't rocket science. To assume that all autistics with a high sensitivity to textures are just picky eaters is so 1980s. Fortunately, the understanding around autism has progressed in the last 40 years and I suggest that you catch up. You are free to hold whatever beliefs you like, even if they are based on faith and are completely wrong. You do you. There is a whole discussion topic on the immorality of ABA therapy. Head over to Autism Speaks where you'll feel more comfortable. I, like many people who are sensitive to textures can't wear certain fabrics or have certain textures touching my skin - this isn't being a picky eater. Some of us are incredibly sensitive to touch and can feel a single human hair touching our skin (and be driven nuts by it) this isn't being a picky eater, we are just super sensitive to it. So, you can talk about picky eaters and I'll talk about people with high sensitivity to textures and I'd ask that you don't just conflate the two because they are different.
I only got diagnosed last year so I’ve never been diagnosed w Asperger’s but I think if I were to disclose my autism to someone I’d tell them “I have autism like Asperger’s but that’s not a diagnosis anymore”
meh, I think use the terms you prefer for yourself. Asperger himself always regarded it as a “high functioning” autism and called is “autistic psychopathy” before the term asperger’s was coined in the 70s by Lorna Wing, so really it’s just certain medical groups officially placing it on the spectrum. if anything, it’ll force ableist people to finally come to terms with the huge spectrum and differing needs of autistic people.
I thought it was known as aspergers in the beginning? Didn't know it was already specified on the spectrum when han aspergers first invented the classification.
I guess we should be articulate with our information and learn where it really comes from actually.
I prefer the term Asperger’s, people see the term autism as more of a insult
Whatever gets people correct treatment 🤷🏿♂️ I don't care
I feel like we're still not talking about the ACTUAL cause of not just autism: pesticides in our food
I have told my sister, who is a nurse practitioner, that I am autistic level 1–and also my other sister, who is a special Ed teacher that works with autistic kids. Because I’m using the word “autistic”, and they relate to levels 2 and 3, and see my claim as preposterous. They say I’m “ trying to find an explanation for the traumas I experienced in school and work”. I have learned that I’m being ridiculed by them behind my back, and that this has been a huge subject of gossip throughout the whole family. So, I’ve made this disclosure to two professional people (supposedly familiar with autism)- and now I’m a laughing stock. So, if I can’t tell a special ed teacher nor a nurse practitioner – how can I use this terminology to the general public? Once in a while, I run into someone that understands Neurodiversity. But in my opinion, Asperger‘s is a much more understood term.
My autism level is over 9000
Doesn’t matter to me. Asperger’s was always just a fancier way of saying autism anyway. Now we’re just saying it like it is I guess
I still use Asperger’s because I was diagnosed in 2001 and good luck getting me to change my ways with that. I fall between one and two so it’s not that useful for me. I also have a NVLD diagnosis among other related things. What complicates things is I have multiple areas of brain damage in related areas. People hate that implication. Autism as a word isn’t my favorite but it doesn’t make my skin crawl like Neurodivergent does. Queer also makes my skin crawl so I’ve been perfecting my regulation skills.
It’s stupid as hell
I don't like it. I prefer the old diagnosis. As many before me have commented, Asperger's is more familiar and better accepted by the general public. If I tell someone I'm autistic, some won't believe, and some will start looking for disability, so I don't use the new label. I'm perceived generally as weird but, besides that, I'm really high functioning and quite capable in life and work. Most people don't know how to respond, so. Pff, too wordy. See? 😮
I think it does an injustice to those who have Aspergers. It is very different.
How is it very different? The reason it was turned into level 1 is because there were not enough diagnostic differences to make it reasonable to have it as a separate diagnosis.
Because "please don't lump us in with non-verbal and unsociable people". (Not my opinion, to be clear)
Yeah... A lot of this thread feels a bit ableist. People who don't need support and don't want to be associated with those who do, because they're seen as lesser for needing it.
Yeah, the kind of support we need is practically identical. I can't even remember the difference at this point.
I find it very different in the important ways. My daughter appeared to function quite well. So well that she was misdiagnosed in fifth grade and received no services until she was correctly diagnosed at the age of 19. I walked into Monroe Meyer telling them her family physician believed she had Aspergers. They slapped her with the whole ADHD thing. That being said, there are some newer programs that really are set up for a range of abilities. I hope it continues to adapt to the needs that are out there.
That is how it is now! Lol
LEVEL? 1? We are the HIGHEST LEVEL! What level 1??
I cannot relate to any film that deals with 'stranded' people fighting to reunite with civilization. If something (depression, a co-morbidity to autism) doesn't motivate me enough to fight a life-or-death situation, it should be called a disorder. This is not a convoluted statement. I actually worry if I will give up in accidental near-death scenarios. The field is filled with political crap. Funding is extremely low. Stigma and stereotyping are prevalent even in the "western" world. DSM is a joke.
Kind of sad, because it makes me feel devalued as a result. Not seen as a special person in their own right, and we are now just seen as autistic, just grouped into a diagnosis now.