❁
[N]o matter what you do in the disability community, you will ruffle feathers just because it’s such a huge community, and it’s heterogeneous. It’s full of very different opinions and backgrounds because disability affects everyone and anyone in any culture. So there’s gonna be, of course, dissent and disagreement.
❁
[O]ne of the biggest dangers that the culture of the autistic community faces is the allure of a single story told from within.
❁
To be an autistic in a minority culture is to realise that we are not all standing on the same ground when it comes to our experiences as autistics.
❁
But autism researchers are not geologists, to paraphrase @aneeman. We’re not rocks. We talk back. If autism researchers don’t want to work with people, they should study something else.
❁
Both [the personal experience and the scientific literature] provide insights. But these insights are qualitatively different, and no universal standard sets one above the other.
❁
The four kingdoms [Illness, Identity, Injury, Insight] may not capture the entire universe of the autism spectrum, but they describe largely non-overlapping perspectives that now divide the world of autism.
❁
No one autism story takes every single perspective into account. […]
Many of the perspectives conflict […] and there are just so many that it’s nearly impossible to remember to include them all.
❁
[T]here are, I think, many versions of disability pride
❁
We don’t all agree. You don’t have to agree with all of us. You can’t possibly agree with all of us anyway. A lot of times people embroiled in identity politics get really wrapped up in the idea that the oppressed person is always right about their oppression. That’s bullshit. We can be as wrong as anyone.
However, we have on average thought more deeply and for longer about our oppression than other people have, so you can benefit from our experience when dealing with the way your own oppression takes the same shape as ours.
You can learn a lot more about ableism by looking into what disabled people have already figured out about it
✧
…the erroneous presupposition that observation of human performance is an exact science, that performance is evidence of ability, or simply is ability.
Idea and keywords by C.F. Goodey
❁
[A]utism research […] a mix of insights and insults.
❁
In non-autism areas, poor quality research and its harms – its waste of resources, its misleading findings – are vigorously condemned. There is recognition that even the best existing research standards are flawed and need always to be improved.
But when it comes to autism, standards have instead been lowered or discarded to accommodate the extremely poor autism intervention literature.
Poor standards in intervention research are seen not as harmful and wasteful, which they are, but as what autistics need and deserve. Resources have poured not into improving these abysmal standards, but into making the very poor quality autism intervention literature more powerful and influential.
In the same series: