i do not believe these words should be abandoned!
my intent is to point out and critique society’s weaponization of words, not the words themselves.
also! this is a descriptive post, not perscriptive
what that means is just that i want ppl to be aware that this pattern has happened in the past and of course the forces behind those happenings haven’t just disappeared. i think pride in being ND and the fact that “neurodiverse” is a word that is created by its own community are powerful reasons to doubt that the word will have the same fate. perhaps i would call this a “call to awareness” post rather than a call to action.
(making this disclaimer because a couple people are violently adamant that i am just trying to make an argument saying all these words are the same and predicting the future, which, sorry you got that impression it’s not true. but now you know!)
"Neurodivergent" is a bit different though. The r-word says something normative about people's mental development. It's saying that the person has been prevented from being normal; that something is wrong with them. "Special needs" indicates that someone requires different resources than what is typical. Much like IQ when it was developed, it's a way to sort people's needs on an economic basis, which isn't poorly intentioned. However, it still labels people by how we need certain things within our socioeconomic system.
Disorder classification systems like the DSM or ICD seek to normalize people, making sure we "function" in society. It measures us by a set of standards to ensure that we can live independently with our environment. It is very much defined by how society is structured; the environment of industrial capitalism. It doesn't matter how fulfilling your life is, only that you are a functional cog.
"Neurodivergence" seeks to avoid the pathology based approach. It says nothing about us having disorders. It instead focuses on us as different and divergent from the norm, but not inherently ill because of who we are. It's invariant to economic systems or cultural norms, only saying that we are different.
Absolutely. All of the terms in the post are a bit different from one another. All came from varying origins and backgrounds and have different histories of how they came to be in my post.
What they share is a pattern of similarities. They all are originally polite descriptive words that became demeaning.
The first four terms became associated with disabilities through the medical field. The first two terms were categories on the IQ-Scale (idiot is the one that comes before imbecile in that scale, btb). The third is a shortening of a medical term conflated with another (spasticity and clonus) and the fourth is another psychological term referring to similar things as the first two.
Those were originally meant to be clinical but have been abused by those people, they also were created from outside the community (special needs most likely too, as it is a euphemism). I am unsure about "Acoustic", that might be embracing of a meme, unless it was used as a euphemism for autism by non-autistic people.
Neurodivergent is different, this is a term coined by a part of the community. I am not sure whether the term endonym is accurate here but it is similar in nature.
Absolutely, no lie detected.
My concern is that I am seeing even neurodivergent beginning to being used against the community that created it. Following the same old patterns. My hope is that by calling it out, that damage and appropriation can be mitigated.