>I like the part where you have the gall to lecture people about what they themselves want to be called, using appeals to authority figures who are not themselv

>I like the part where you have the gall to lecture people about what they themselves want to be called, using appeals to authority figures who are not themselves Autistic. I was trying to come to the defense of those who dislike being called "an autistic person". People should absolutely be referred to as they please (just as you are saying). The last study I provided support of my use of "majority" (not in the abstract, unfortunately), though I am open. Your links are compelling and entirely worthy. This is a debate that is highly nuanced and I agree that my comment doesn't tell the whole story. My experience comes mostly from a clinical setting, so that's what I commented on. I was mostly upset with OP's use of "pretentious" and "SJW-inspired" to describe a preference to which a significant number of people on the spectrum subscribe. I tried to be particularly understanding with my "to be clear" addendum, but probably overstated my confidence with "majority". With that said, I think that you're making the same mistake with claiming the "majority".