Neurodiversity ♾ Think Different

Very true. It’s quite clear that people who are on the spectrum face serious discrimination, still today. But there is so much more understanding and real attempts to change our society to be more accepting of this kind of diversity… I have a friend whose son is on the spectrum, and guess what - he was able to get into a public school that was designed to support kids on the spectrum! That’s not something that would have been a thing even a few years ago.

So yeah, neurotypical people can be cruel… yea, we fucking know that. But lots of us are trying and are interested in shaping a society that is more inclusive of any number of ways of being. Because we know it’s better for ALL of us…


I have been thinking about this since you posted it. And in the end, I am glad that where you are, and in your experience, the world is that way. I often have the exact opposite impression, and I suspect that’s my own fault for consuming media inappropriate to my head’s wiring. I should move further away from the mainstream, I guess; whatever omega point the neurotypical noosphere is chasing isn’t suitable for me.


The problem with The Algorithm is not just that it pushes us into a bubble, but that it doesn’t even let us see how small the bubble really is.

You’re implicitly contrasting The NT Noosphere against The ND Noosphere, but there is no “The” NT Noosphere, nor “The” ND Noosphere. In NT space, there are the people pushing Autism Speaks and ABA and trying to divide us into “Profoundly Autistic” and what I can only presume, from their statements and known biases, “Not really actually autistic LOL”.

But there are also the people who are building Sensory Safe Spaces, and helping us with Executive Dysfunction run things, and showing our bewildered newly diagnosed where to get help, and generally being menschen.

In the Neurodiverse space, there are those who are advocating and fighting for inclusion and understanding, and there are those who want to just lay down and give up, who think being autistic is nothing more than the Universe’s cruel joke, who hate themselves and by extension anyone like them, and there are those who see autists as the next stage of human evolution, who must take our place as the rightful rulers of the planet so we can remake it in our image. (I mean, there aren’t many autistic supremacists, but they exist.)

But the Algorithm will not only just show you the bubble it thinks you belong in, it is hiding how small it is, that there are all these other voices and opinions all tucked away in their own bubbles.

Napkin’s experience is valid and real. Your experience is valid and real. It’s just that the bubble won’t show you each others experience.

That’s why liminal places like BB must exist, so we can step outside our bubble, whether it’s comfortable or torturous, and meet each other and see how big the world is. That some people really have it harder, and to see that it’s not always that bad: there’s hope, and there’s a need for hope.

We’re all mutants here.


Seth Meyers Idk GIF by Late Night with Seth Meyers


Because we self-select, and the Algorithm reinforces our choices. It didn’t choose our bubbles, we did; the Algorithm merely keeps us there.


Yeah for me it’s because I’ve been very vulnerable in real life and even the people who don’t get it seem to have a better understanding somewhat. Where i live isn’t known for kindness either really, rather it’s more known for acts of violence and harsh discipline. But the thing is the difference in the past was the cruelty happened more but no one talked about it because they didn’t see it as a problem at all. Now it’s at least a problem and people talk about it. Of course that means we hear about it more though. Change moves through people slowly and mostly from exposure I guess.

Same thing with like gaming oddly enough. Online I hear nothing but how gamers are nazi boys who worship Andrew Tate. They exist for sure. I’ve been playing games with millennials and zoomers now for a while though and I swear while it isn’t perfect the shift has generally been in a more hopeful direction. A lot of the millennials have matured and have kids of their own now and a lot of the zoomers just genuinely dislike toxicity and are quick to shut it down.

I feel like people’s social consciousness/awareness and also the therapeutic and medical options available etc. have actually improved since I was a kid, even if it isn’t as much as might be ideal.


I dunno. A lot of that isn’t too good for neurotypical people either.

And shoves us into ever more emotionally engaging content. But the algorithm doesn’t care if it’s negative emotional engagement. My spouse likes vids dissecting masculinity, particularly toxic masculinity. And the algorithm keeps pushing him towards fan reposts of Andrew Tate. Whom he hates

The fact places like this exist, and are becoming more prevalent, is good for everyone I think. Though not necessary for neurotypicals.

Happy Go On GIF by Molang


… I’ve never been diagnosed, but if I ever am, nobody will be surprised :confused:


My daughter claims she’s the only non-autistic one in the family.

1 Like




“ABA is a therapy,” they say. “ABA isn’t like the horror stories,” they say. “ABA is about positive reinforcement,” they say. “ABA has changed,” they say. “ABA isn’t about torturing children,” they say.

BRB burning shit down.

1 Like

Need a hand? :face_with_symbols_over_mouth:


I’ve said before, ABA is coercive by nature. It is about making others more comfortable. Akin to “treating” pain by making kids afraid to cry. And yet, it is officially sanctioned. I had a fascinating discussion with two of my sisters-in-law, both with experience in ABA, who had polar opposite impressions. It would be more impactful if you knew them, but the one who is gentle, empathic and just impossibly kind had a very positive opinion of how it was used in her facility. The other is an aggressive, take-no-shit woman who absolutely hated it. Both are professional, educated, doctorates in their fields (speech therapy and education, respectively) and the only way i could respond was to tell SIL#1, “I want your ABAin my area.” Where i am, ABA sucks. But maybe not always true?


The foundational philosophy of ABA is that the people to whom it is applied aren’t capable of agency, and if they aren’t capable of agency, then there can be no such thing as consent.
The goal of ABA is to negate any agency which might exist by explicitly training its subject to do what they’re told, without even as much delay or question as you’d get in boot camp. No matter how painful or stressful that may be.
The whole idea of ABA is that there are aversives as well as rewards, and that these aversives can (and should) include stress, hunger, sensory distress, and pain. These aversives, in order to work, must be even more stressful or painful than the behaviour you’re trying to enforce.

I would argue, as I have in the past and most definitely will again, that ABA which involves even the slightest bit of empathy or human consideration towards its subjects isn’t ABA. And a major reason why it’s called ABA is because the Insurance companies won’t pay for it unless that’s what they think it is.

Even where Lovaas pulled back on the worst of his prescribed treatments, it wasn’t because it was harmful to the children he was doing it to, but because it was harmful to the non-psychopathic people he was getting to do it.


Hadn’t considered the insurance end of it. That would explain a lot. Thank you.


I just watched Girl, interrupted for the first time. It hurt.

What also hurt is reading excerpts from reviews on Wikipedia, RT and the likes. Some of them might be dismissed as products of their time, but I am convinced that much of it is more easily explained as timeless, vile and willfull ignorance.

ETA: I wasn’t able to find a non-PDF version, and the publication is in German, but this is on my reading list right now. Psychiatrie und verrückte Welt im Spielfilm: diskursanalytische Untersuchung des Spielfilms "Girl Interrupted"

ETA 2: the paper I linked concludes that the film negates it’s own intention of being critical towards the normative societal perception of external reality as ‘sane’ (and internal struggle of the individual with that objectively insane external reality as a psychiatric disorder) by aesthetic and narrative means. Susanna’s resolution of adapting to a perceived normality, of ‘growing up’, is shown as a decision to perform an individual healing metamorphosis by the means of the psychiatric institution. The act of healing is shown as a moral decision. The acceptance of the objectively insane as societal normality is staged as a moment of constructive, liberating change of the psyche.

I can however follow the arguments brought forth in that paper. I liked the film better before I read it, but I still do like it. Even if the resolution is conservative.

1 Like