Autism As Metaphor & Insult · 2005-08-15 08:30

The July 31, 2005 New York Times Book Review featured an interesting article by Polly Morrice, Autism as Metaphor. Ms. Morrice, herself the mother of an autistic child, discusses autism in historic and contemporary fiction, contemplates the “impulse to unearth autism in the classics,” and the manner in which autistic characters are portrayed.

The day I read the article, I happened to receive an email from Paul Trehin of France, Vice-President of Autism Europe. Monsieur Trehin’s adult son, Gilles Trehin, is creator of the remarkable, meticulously conceived city of Urville. A delightful and engrossing imaginary vacation destination!

In his letter, M. Trehin expressed his and his son’s concern about a distressing new trend—that is, the use by political commentators of the word “autistic” to disparage their adversaries. I share M. Trehin’s concern about this—it is as disturbing to me as the recent resurgence of the use of the word “retard.” In fact, about nine months ago, I gathered numerous examples of this phenomenon, and featured them on resource pages at http://www.neurodiversity.com/metaphor.html and http://www.neurodiversity.com/offend.html.

The coincidence of reading Polly Morrice’s article and receiving M. Trehin’s email on the same day inspired me to write the following letter to the New York Times Book Review.

August 4, 2005

To the Book Review Editors:

In her thought-provoking article, Autism as Metaphor, Polly Morrice asks whether writers should

be held to account for putting a metaphorical spin on a disorder that affects so many real people… or for describing it inaccurately.

My concern is the potential of pejorative metaphors to increase misunderstanding of and stigma against disabled citizens.

Increasingly, political commentators deploy “autistic” to insult their ideological opponents. For instance, one who doesn’t bend to public opinion, or displays lack of interest in others’ problems, may be called “autistic.” Radovan Karadzic, Vladimir Spidla, Dominique de Villepin, Jacques Chirac, NATO, the U.S. government, and the Japanese Self-Defense Forces, have all been called “autistic” by their critics.

This occurs even though the label “autistic” already adheres to countless individuals experiencing a varied constellation of often-disabling cognitive, sensory and behavioral characteristics. Most are painfully familiar with the world’s disdain; they should not be subjected to further denigration by negative linguistic associations. “Solipsistic,” “insular,” “hermetic,” or “narcissistic” would be more appropriate descriptors for institutions and individuals who seem immune to external influences, or who wantonly disregard the perspective and welfare of others. Although autistic citizens do indeed tend toward an inner focus, and often have difficulty inferring others’ thoughts and emotions, they also tend to be honest, sincere, non-manipulative, conscientious, precise, thorough, law-abiding, and free of malice. Those who use “autistic” as an insult reveal their own lack of empathy for disabled individuals, by disparaging them in pursuit of a trendy put-down.

Sincerely,

Kathleen Seidel
neurodiversity.com | honoring the variety of human wiring

Comments


  1. eremetic

    :-)

    Autism Diva, always the pedant. — Autism Diva    2005-08-15 14:34    #

  2. eremitic,

    Clay, even more pedantic :-) — Clay    2005-08-16 01:30    #

  3. Oh, no!

    Autism Diva has been out pendanticked!

    the shame, the shame

    of course it would be eremitic!

    :-] — Autism Diva    2005-08-16 17:39    #

  4. As always, an awesome letter. I’m navigating all over your weblog, Kathleen. I’ve only just scratched the surface, however. An astonishing amount of information!! — Lisa Jean Collins    2005-08-30 17:55    #