The news contains a lot of information on the subject of neurotypical, neurodivergence and anything else which can be called norms. Check out the link for a quick view of everything that’s wrong with the definitions. It’s pretty obscene. Neuro-Fascism is one possible description; it’s yet another polarizing issue from the self-proclaimed intelligentsia.
Like so many polarizing issues, it wasn’t an issue until someone said it was and sold it to media. People are different; there’s not much you can do about it. Unless, that is, you make it a hot topic and proceed with the usual dripping-tap form of analysis.
The overweening image is that neurotypical is good, therefore anything else is bad. It’s an extremely negative perspective on the whole idea of neurodivergence.
Even in balanced descriptions of neurotypical, the contrast is pretty absurd. In Very Well’s description of the two types, the neurotypical person is at their ease in any social environment. The neurotypical person is a group member, and, well, not to be too polite about it, well within the social bandwidth.
The neurodivergent person is far more mentally active, maybe “precisionist”, and includes dyslexics, ADHD, and autism. Note the unavoidable associations with medical conditions for neurodivergence.
(This description isn’t entirely fair to Very Well’s rather even-handed description of the two types. The issue here is the general issue – Neurodivergence is seen as atypical, not the obvious alternative to neurotypical. Lumping it in with a very broad range of medical conditions doesn’t help at all; it’s a major hindrance.)
There are a lot of very good, very apt memes on the subject of being neurotypical. It may well be that at least some people are hard to convince of their normality.
The other inevitable problem is that people hate their own stereotypes. Why wouldn’t you? Ethnic stereotypes are inevitably totally misleading, out of date, and often quite absurd. Why wouldn’t personal stereotypes be the same?
The “neurodivergent” spectrum is very like a subject close to my heart, autism. The autism spectrum has become so huge, so vague, so maniacally over-used, and so much the instant answer to any kid’s developmental issues that it’s utterly useless. Worse, it’s now the instant diagnostic option, apparently, however lousy the definitions may be. Autism is extremely complex, and individual. Why would neurodivergence be any different?
Yet, we are now “blessed” with guidance for “autism masking” and simpering justifications for the autistic person’s “role” in a group. Meanwhile, real autistic people are trying to explain their issues. Read that link. It’s to a Buzzfeed article and there are some quite surprising responses to basic human issues.
The Buzzfeed article is interesting, but trips over itself with an innocent part-sentence saying “most neurotypical people don’t fully understand it”. Ah, um… In practice, they don’t get it at all.
That’s another problem with this us/them environment created by two hopelessly broad terms. Writers really should know better. Well-meaning these articles may be, but you’re connecting the dots very haphazardly.
Older expressions, like introvert/extrovert, were also way too general and horrendously under-qualified. Nobody is 100% hermit or 100% life of the party. Why create yet another useless dichotomy?
It’s also drivel. What’s a “normal” human being? How can you be normal and remain in context with individuality? If two people both have broken legs, that doesn’t make them normal. It means they share an experience, not a mindset.
Can we, for a nice change, get these irresponsible, negative definitions in order? If you don’t have the right to be yourself, what rights do you have? Why should you fit any behavioral norm but your own? Answers, please, because you do need those answers.
_________________________________________________
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in this Op-Ed are those of the author. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the Digital Journal or its members.
