I do appreciate that they say "autistic people" a few times, but leading with phrasing that makes autism look like some sort of disease or mental illness certainly makes me cringe a bit.
So what's the point of engaging in tone policing or the euphemism treadmill when there the language isn't denigrating anyone, just describing them? For context I have ADHD, I am not "an ADHD" or "ADHDistic". What about autism is so different?
I said nothing about avoiding any facts. Here is specifically what I said:
1. I don't like that the article includes phrases like "who has autism" and "people with autism", because those carry an implication that autism is "something you have" rather than "something you are". I'm very strongly in the "something you are" camp; I firmly believe that "something you have" has never told the full picture, and probably never will.
2. For the same reason, I don't like that the article opens with "For people living with autism, [...]". Even though technically, (say) I could be said to be "living with autism" if "autism" were in the same sense as (say) "style", I wouldn't appreciate if "autism" were in the same sense as (say) "a disability", and that's how the article seems to treat it.
Nowhere do I contest that autism is classified as a developmental neurological disorder. What bothers me is how autism is addressed in the article.
> That isn't an insult, it isn't dehumanizing, after all it's people who have this disorder and autism doesn't make them any less a person.
I think it's important to point out that there are a couple different things that "autism" can refer to:
1. Autism, the neurological difference itself.
2. Autism Spectrum Disorder, social and personal difficulties typically consequent of autism.
Autism Spectrum Disorder has long been the primary way for autism to be diagnosed because diagnosis is typically performed in the context of treatment. However, that does not mean that autism and Autism Spectrum Disorder are necessarily one and the same thing. They are often confused for one another and that is my issue.
> [...] For context I have ADHD, I am not "an ADHD" or "ADHDistic".
Autism and ADHD aren't directly translatable in that way. It's actually ASD that you'd be looking to substitute, and which would make the article okay:
1. "who has ASD" and "people with ASD" are essentially fine because ASD refers to the diagnosis for the relevant disordered symptoms.
2. For the same reason, "For people living with ASD, [...]" is (still not the most ideal in my opinion, but) also fine.
> What about autism is so different?
That autism doesn't refer to symptoms but ADHD refers to symptoms. To refer to autistic symptoms one should use ASD, in my opinion.