4 ms·

Did you read the article? The author uses "autistic" to refer to people with autism (and additionally rejects the term "people with autism")

• Liesmith 12y ago
  Yeah I read the article, and his rejection of 'people with autism' is akin to 'deaf culture' nonsense. Autism is a tragic, often crippling disorder and this guy wants it to be a culture. That's fine, he can feel however he wants and construct his identity however he feels best about himself. Calling a person 'it' is considerably worse, though, and that's what I was objecting to above.
• mamcx 12y ago
  That is a weird distinction, probably is a cultural thing? How can be better to say one of the other?. I have more than 30 years with my twin brother. My aunt is a professional trainer for people with disabilitues (a sport, gold-winner kind of trainer), I have learn a bit of sign language and so on. But I never heard that kind of argument (ie: here in colombia none of both will sound more or less respectfull, are equivalent)
  • RaptorJ 12y ago
    There is some contention [weasel words] about what is the better way to refer to people with disabilities/diabled persons. Here are two perspectives: People-first: http://www.asha.org/publications/journals/submissions/person_first.htm http://www.asha.org/publications/journals/submissions/person... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People-first_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People-first_language Identity-first: http://www.xojane.com/issues/i-am-not-a-person-with-a-disability-i-am-a-disabled-person http://www.xojane.com/issues/i-am-not-a-person-with-a-disabi... and http://cheshirekit.wordpress.com/2014/01/23/the-social-model-of-disability-and-person-first-vs-identity-first-language-2/ http://cheshirekit.wordpress.com/2014/01/23/the-social-model...