Thanks for that, Colin, I found it very interesting.
But I'm a bit confused. It seems to be cut and pasted, but you don't say
where from. It doesn't sound like your regular voice, but you don't tell us
who's speaking.
It's been posted twice before. Is there a reason you're posting it again
now?
It would really be helpful if you could give us information of that sort
when you post things here.
Best wishes
Allan Sutherland
----- Original Message -----
From: "Colin REvell" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 12:34 PM
Subject: NT OR NOT NT
> Tuesday, February 21, 2006
> NT, Or Not NT
> Originally posted December 2005
>
> I don't use "neurotypical" or "NT" when discussing the non-autistic
> majority population. That is by design. Yes, it's a convenient shorthand
> term for non-autistic folks, and it's not as cringe-inducing as "normal,"
> but it suffers from a number of very unfortunate linguistic woes.
>
> The chief problem with the word "neurotypical" is that it abjectly
> concedes what ought to be a huge point of contention-that there is such a
> thing as a typical human brain. Let's do a thought-exercise here: Imagine
> what it would be like if other minorities used such terminology to
> describe the majority group. Can you picture Muslims referring to
> Christians as religion-typical?
> Black activists calling whites color-typical? Feminists speaking of men as
> gender-typical? Hispanics describing Anglos as language-typical?
>
> The absurdity is obvious in all of these contexts. In today's
> multicultural society, the concept of diversity means that there is no
> standard human template against which all other groups are measured.
> Society regularly exhorts us to celebrate our diversity and to respect
> others' differences.
> Most of us wouldn't dream of asserting that our particular group, whether
> racial, religious, or whatever, ought to be described as the "typical"
> human.
>
> Unless we're talking about the configuration of our brains. Then everybody
> gets a free pass from obeying the usual rules of respect for diversity.
>
> Spouting stereotypes about neurological minorities is lauded as a
> charitable act of raising awareness. We are taught to accept, as if it
> were scientific fact, the social value judgment that there is only one
> "normal" type of brain. Edicts determining how many of us qualify as
> members of the exalted
> "normal" caste are regularly handed down by society's high voodoo priests,
> the psychologists, after they ritually slaughter a white bull and examine
> the stinking entrails for portents of doom. (Okay, I made that up, but can
> you think of a better explanation of where all the bullshit in the DSM-IV
> came from?)
>
> This brings me back to what else is wrong with the word "neurotypical."
> Notonly does it assume the existence of a typical brain, it also fails to
> challenge the authority of the psychologists to define a typical brain in
> any way they wish. Because "neurotypical" is generally used to refer to a
> person who has no psychological diagnoses, it necessarily accepts as
> legitimate the psychologists' use of iagnostic classifications as tools of
> social segregation.
>
> Moreover, because "NT" is also used as the opposite of autistic, it
> necessarily implies that whatever a typical human being may be, if you
> happen to be autistic, then you ain't it! Apparently, in this scheme of
> things, a typical human being can be of any race, gender, ethnicity,
> religion, height, weight, age, national origin, or thousands of other
> natural differences that we take for granted-but we'll all be playing a
> jolly game of ice hockey in hell before an autistic person ever gets shown
> the same tolerance. In short, autistics who use the terms "neurotypical"
> and "NT" are meekly surrendering to second-class citizenship forevermore.
>
> A particularly ominous development in recent months has been the
> perversion of the word
> "neurodiversity" into "ND," which has been variously defined to mean
> neurodiverse, neurodivergent, neurodifferent-in other words, a person who
> does not have a typical brain, as classified by the psychologists.
>
> One of the worst offenders in twisting the word to fit the status quo is
> DANDA, but others are to blame as well. They have completely missed the
> point of neurodiversity and are using the word as just another politically
> correct entry in the long and infamous list that begins with "idiot" and
> ends with terms like "mentally challenged."
>
> Let's take a look at what the word "neurodiversity" really means. (This
> definition comes from Word Spy.)
>
> "The neurodiversity movement is based on the belief that there is no such
> thing as normal when it comes to the human mental landscape. The
> neurotypical person simply does not exist. Together we display a wide
> variety of neurological behaviors and abilities..."
>
> Now go back and read that quote again.
>
> Neurodiversity is a powerful and radical concept that is capable of
> transforming our world.
>
> Don't piss it away.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Got a favourite clothes shop, bar or restaurant? Share your local
> knowledge http://www.backofmyhand.com
>
> ________________End of message______________________
> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for
> Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies). Enquiries about the list
> administratione should be sent to [log in to unmask]
> Archives and tools are located at:
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database:
> 269.12.0/957 - Release Date: 16/08/2007 13:46
>
>
________________End of message______________________
This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies). Enquiries about the list administratione should be sent to [log in to unmask]
Archives and tools are located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
|