The proponents in autistic language politics always assert very deinitely, as obvious fact, that everyone must already know the right words to, and wrong words not to, use, or else is a villain. Here is an article that asserts in this way a line in total conflict, head-on opposite, to the line taken by our scene’s mountingly intolerant language militants in recent years.
www.oxfordstudent.com/2020/12/06/autism-on-screen-where-sia-went-wrong/ is an article in a student paper at Oxford, on the casting for a nonverbal autistic character in the new film Music. Sia is a pop star involved in inspiring and writing it.
Won’t filmmakers eventually run out of these blunt one-word film titles that are so fashionable lately?
The article says –
《 Her steadfast refusal to call autism a “disability” and preference for the euphemistic “neuro atypical” and “on the spectrum” is troubling. It demonstrates a refusal to engage with a community who has been reclaiming words like “disabled” and “autistic” as a part of their identity, and a denial of the difficulties autistic people can face in her daily life 》
THIS HAPPENS TO BE THE COMPLETE OPPOSITE OF WHAT THE GROWINGLY INTOLERANT MILITANT LANGUAGE POLITICS AROUND AUTISM HAS SAID IN RECENT YEARS. YET IS WRITTEN AS IF IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE CASE !!
Language politics has been militantly against any references to disability, “the disability model”. It has decreed the word “difference” instead. “On the spectrum” used to be a favoured expression a decade ago, when the language politicians felt that “autistic” was stigmatising. A position that has reversed thanks to folks who did not follow that line.
Thus a 20-20 hindsight. – Surely this shows there is no safe language anyone can use at all. All language offends a faction in the ridiculous, dangerous, treacherous, unnavigable, language politics jungle. Our safety and mutual support requires there not to be that jungle, requires a pluralism recognising that word preferences differ in great variety.