Search for:
Oct 29 2023
The reason why explaining my neurodivergent experience will always be flawed

I have spoken widely about neurodivergent experiences. I have talked about my unique experience of addiction as an Autistic person, my psychosis as an AuDHD Schizophrenic. I have lamented over how society’s power structures have oppressed myself and people like me. I have spoken at length about how autism is a defining part of my core experience of reality.

One might think that on all of my years of writing, advocating, mentoring, training, and speaking, I have found somewhat of a recipe for communicating neurodivergent experiences. The truth of communicating those experiences, however, is more complex than that.

The Double Empathy Problem in Reverse

The double empathy problem has been effectively used to explain that communication differences between neurodivergent and neurotypical people essentially lay in a difference of cultural experience. We often think of this in terms of neurotypical people being unable to empathise with neurodivergent experience, but that same is true in reverse.

I can’t empathise fully with a neurotypical experience of the world.

How does this impact on the communication of neurodivergent experience

When communicating our neurodivergent experience, we have no point of reference within the neurotypical cultural world. It is a problem of solipsism, where one can only prove their own consciousness. One can only experience the world through our own mind.

Any part of that experience we communicate to others is filtered through their own subjective world. Their interpretation of our attempt to communicate our experiences is entirely dependent on a near infinite number of variables, the sum of which create a reality that may or may not be both identical or entirely different to our own.

Where one might communicate that they have a particular experience; that experience may have an entirely different meaning to another person. We are constructed by the infinite possible combinations of interactions within our environment, and therefore, we can not definitively communicate our experience of neurodivergence in an objective manner.

To put it another way, all objective truths become subjective when interpreted by human cognition.

Therefore, we must always be aware that when we communicate our neurodivergent experiences, no one other than ourselves can truly understand those experiences as felt by our own mind. We also can not explain neurodivergent experience to neurotypicals entirely accurately because we also lack that point of reference within their own reality.

This is why we need to embrace diversity of experience, even within our own neurodivergent communities. Others having a different experience to us actually increases the likelihood of a neurodivergent person successfully communicating our exact experiences.

Concluding with the infinite monkey theorem

The infinite monkey theorem states that if one gave an infinite number of monkeys, a type writer each, and allowed them to randomly hit keys for an infinite amount of time; eventually one of them would randomly type the entire collection of Shakespeare’s works.

With regards to the neurodivergent community at large, the more of us communicating our diverse experiences, the more likely that someone will eventually find a way of fully explaining neurodivergence to a neurotypical person. We need to embrace difference within individual experiences. Rather than ignore and exclude those ideas that don’t necessarily make sense to us, we need to integrate the knowledge they offer, and see if their augmentation can bridge the double empathy divide.

David Gray-Hammond 0 Comments
Oct 19 2023
Autistic people and the cultural suppression of Autism

Autistic people have long talked of a world that is not designed for them. There are countless tales of the way that society is set up to be actively hostile to anyone who can not meet the neuronormative standards of their surrounding culture. This has led to a growth in online spaces of a separate culture which is broadly recognised as Autistic culture. These cultural spaces offer a vital reprieve from the hostility of the world, and yet we still find ourselves being penalised for existing as ourselves.

A colonial model of the cultural suppression of Autistic people

When I consider the cultural differences between Autistic and neurotypical people, I imagine it like a linguistic difference. Autistic and neurotypical people speak a different language. When we enter each other’s spaces we are perceived more as the obnoxious tourist than the valuable diversity of a given society. The issue is that through the proliferation of colonial ideals and subsequent neuronormativity, neurotypicals have invaded many of the spaces we may not have historically shared with them. Once they have entered our space, they place the burden to assimilate into their culture on us, rather than allowing us to respect our own cultural practices. Autistic culture is effectively colonised by neurotypical society.

Cultural suppression through autistiphobia and ableism

Ableism and autistiphobia have been growing exponentially alongside the rise of capitalism and neoliberalism. Autistic people may not have always been a recognised cultural group, but we have been recognised for a long time as “the other” that burdens society with its presence. Much of the rhetoric surrounding Autistic people can be attribute to autistiphobia, or to go further, autistimisia. Difference is detested in this world; and there is a special place in a hateful world for those of us whose difference precludes us from engaging in neuronormativity.

“No, there is no renaissance for ableism. It’s here, and it’s always been here.”

Gray-Hammond (2021)

Ableism and autistiphobia/autistimisia are not just the outcome of a society that does not understand. They are a weapon of those whose power relies on our cultural suppression. If those in power can suppress or even eliminate our culture they can then ignore our rights. The quickest way to do this is through the systematic dehumanisation of us. Culture is a uniquely human experience, and if Autistic people are disallowed from having a culture, part of our humanity can be denied.

The double empathy problem and cultural suppression of Autistic people

The double empathy problem explains the difficulty to empathise with people who have different cultural and life experiences us. For Autistic people, this represents a large portion of the world. The issue is that due to power imbalances between Autistic people and neurotypical society, we experience systemic oppression through the suppression of our culture. This leads to increased minority stress and the belief that Autistic people should meet neuronormative standards, rather than a give and take relationship where we meet somewhere in the middle.

Effective communication and co-existence is undermined by the forced assimilation of Autistic people into these neuronormative standards. While we may learn to operate within neurotypical culture, we have somewhat of a cultural accent that still declares us as different from the majority. To consider it another way, we are unable to win, no matter what we do.

Neurocosmopolitanism as the pinnacle of cultural thriving

Image Source Here

Such neurocultures as the Autistic community need a level playing field. While society continues to privilege one group over another, we will continue to see cultural suppression. We need to work towards building a world within which our culture has a place, rather than it’s current counter-cultural existence. We need our cultural spaces to be respected and protected rather than invaded and restructured into something that is antithetical to Autistic experience. We have a right to our existence, and it is time that the world caught up with that fact.

David Gray-Hammond 0 Comments
Sep 29 2023
Autism and the double empathy problem: The barriers to effective support

Autism is spoken of in various ways by wider society, however there exists a pervasive theme to most discussion on this topic. Society treats autism as though it were a separate entity inhabiting the bodymind of an otherwise neurotypical person. It is approached as something that obscures the true Self rather than the defining factor in our human experience that it is. Autistic people are the only part of autism that actually exists, so why are they denied the opportunity to communicate their experiences and lead the way on knowledge creation about autism? How can we use the double empathy problem to understand our exclusion from knowledge creation?

What is the double empathy problem and what does it mean for Autistic people?

The double empathy problem was first spoken of by Damian Milton in 2012. It positions Autistic people as a minority cultural group. The essential basis of the double empathy problem can be understood as thus;

“Milton’s theory of ‘double empathy’ proposes that Autistic people do not lack empathy.

Milton argues that Autistic people experience the world and express emotions differently to non-autistic people. We communicate, experience and display emotions, interact with others, form relationships, and sense the world around us, differently to non-autistics. That doesn’t mean that we don’t have emotions or feel empathy.

But it makes it difficult for non-autistic people to understand and to empathise with us. And us with them.”

Reframing Autism (2020)

This then allows us to consider the cultural differences between Autistic populations and non-Autistic populations. Much as a white person may fail to understand the lived experience of racism, non-Autistic people fail to understand Autistic experience and vice versa. This absence of context presents an issue for the Autistic person when trying to communicate within power structures that favour non-Autistic ways of embodiment and existence. We are labelled as being in deficit because of a pervasive neuronormativity within non-Autistic populations.

How does neuronormativity unbalance power dynamics for Autistic people?

Neuronormativity draws it’s position largely from western colonialism (although cultural standards of normativity do differ from group to group) and the belief that one must assimilate into the majority population, becoming a “productive citizen” within ones socioeconomic system. It creates a strangely reductive notion of one either being helpful or a burden. The existence of neuronormativity can be view as logically fallacious in it’s origins; specifically, it is situated within a fallacy known as “argumentum ad populum”. This means that the argument to support neuronormativity uses it’s acceptance by the majority as it’s evidence base.

This is of significant concern for minority groups. Normative values are often used to suggest that one’s humanity is based within a contained and isolated set of values and styles of embodiment. If one need only make an appeal to the masses for something to be true, then almost any dissent from minority groups becomes “inaccurate” or “without evidence”. Thus, the power structures of society favour a predominant neurocognitive style over anything that diverges from it.

How does the double empathy problem obstruct Autistic people from communicating their experiences?

The power imbalances that exist have created a world within which Autistic people can not be correct about their own experience. If one asserts that natural Autistic communication is valid, then the majority can simply view that knowledge as inaccurate by virtue of it coming from a minority group rather than the majority. The double empathy problem means that not only does neuronormativity exist, but the dominant group can’t ever fully empathise with how harmful it is.

Not only can dominant groups not understand our experience, neuronormativity tells them that neurocognitive styles outside of their understanding are something that need to be corrected. This allows for the mass administration of harmful interventions such as ABA, PBS, and quack cures like MMS. We are effectively dehumanised by the majorities refusal to step outside the comfort zone of their own worldview, leading to potentially life threatening consequences.

What does the double empathy problem mean for Autistic people in practice?

This gulf between cultural experiences couples with neuronormative attitudes allows professionals in various multi-disciplinary fields to ignore our voices when we advocate for ourselves. In practice, professionals will try to enforce their own opinion of what is needed by the Autistic person rather than allow the Autistic person to speak their own truth. It is the effective oppression of Autistic people contributing to the minority stress that we experience as a minority cultural group.

  • Healthcare professionals don’t listen to us
  • Social care professionals don’t listen to us
  • Education professionals don’t listen to us

It is a list that I could add to in perpetuity. We are talking about weaponised testimonial injustice that keeps us in a disadvantaged position.

What can Autistic people do to combat the fallout of the double empathy problem and neuronormativity?

At this point I might direct your attention back towards the aforementioned minority stress that we experience. This can be understood as the cumulative effect of multiple sources of hostility and oppression with out society. The effects of the double empathy problem and neuronormativity have long allowed this minority stress to run wild. Interestingly, Botha (2020) found that community-connectedness acts as a buffer against this.

“The minority stress model is a social research and public health model designed to help us better understand the lived experiences of people of oppressed communities. The model posits that within the social structure of a particular culture or society, certain (oppressed) groups experience greater incidents of minority stress (based on race, sexuality, gender, disability, etc.) in the form of prejudice and discrimination. As a result of those experiences, members of oppressed communities experience greater negative health outcomes than majority group communities. This leads to large health disparities.”

Caraballo (2019)

Botha (2020) found in their doctoral research that where Autistic people were connected with Autistic communities, there was an improvement in wellbeing in nearly every domain explored. It stands to reason then that perhaps the increased confidence in self-advocacy that comes from connection with other Autistic people allows us to mitigate the effects of minority stress. For this reason I strongly believe that one of the most effective things that can be done for newly discovered Autistic people is signposting to their community.

You can now purchase access to pre-recorded presentations on this website! Check it our here.

David Gray-Hammond 0 Comments
Sep 1 2023
What is the double empathy problem and how does it relate to autism?

Within the Autistic community, there is theory that we speak about as though it is commonplace in human lives. In part, this is the double empathy problem in practice. However, not all theory that we speak of is known by wider society. Thus, it is my intention to demystify a small part of that theoretical knowledge in this article.

What is the double empathy problem?

The double empathy problem is a theoretical basis to explain why people with vastly different experiences of the world find it difficult to empathise with each other. It states that individuals and groups with differing cultural and life experiences struggle to understand the experience of the other due to having no point of reference within that opposing worldview.

How does the double empathy problem relate to autism?

Autism is broadly viewed by the wider world as a diagnostic category. It has been framed as a disorder affecting social communication that is pervasive and lifelong in nature. Autistic people, however, see autism differently. Autistic people view autism as an abstract concept with the only tangible aspect of it being the existence of Autistic people. That is to say, autism does not exist, only Autistic people exist.

Within this worldview, being Autistic has been conceptualised as an identity bound within the remit of the neurodiversity paradigm. As opposed to being a disorder, being Autistic is a natural variation of the human mind that prevents Autistic people from performing neurotypically, i.e. we can not assimilate yo neuronormative standards.

Consequently, perceived deficits in social reciprocity and communication are, in fact, the double empathy problem in practice. Because we are a minority group, our ability to communicate and empathise with others is viewed as deficient as opposed to just “different”.

Why is the double empathy problem important to Autistic people?

The double empathy problem allows us to demonstrate the fundamental power imbalance between Autistic and neurotypical individuals and groups. Autistic people’s position as a minority group results in our existence being pathologised and medicalised, while neurotypical embodiment is seen as something to be desired.

The double empathy problem highlights the exclusionary and oppressive nature of neuronormative thinking while highlighting the issues with cross-cultural and cross-neurotype communication and social reciprocity. Thus, rather than view Autistic people as anti-social, and deficient in communication and empathy, it would be more accurate to say that we have differences in these areas.

Why are Autistic people different?

Due to differences in brain functioning, Autistic people experience and process information differently. As a result, Autistic people utilise and understand language differently, resulting in the evolution of an Autistic culture and sociality (AuSociality). These fundamental differences in our use and understanding of language, sociality, and processing of information constitute a cultural divide that prevents neurotypical society from truly empathising with our experience.

Further Reading

Milton’s ‘double Empathy Problem’: A Summary for Non-academics

Dr. Damian Milton- The Double Empathy Problem Ten Years On

David Gray-Hammond 0 Comments
Aug 16 2023
AuSocial: Towards an understanding of Autistic social culture

In my book The New Normal: Autistic musings on the threat of a broken society I have a chapter about Autistic social nature. Autistic people have widely been represented as being asocial, which is patently absurd. Autistic people have a rich and diverse social culture that has been ignored for a long time.

“One of the prevailing misconceptions is that as Autistic people we are overtly asocial beings. It is taken as common knowledge that we are the friendless weirdos who don’t understand social cues but can recite every train we’ve ever seen.”

Quote from The New Normal

A brief look at the research

Upon perusing the existing literature surrounding Autistic sociality, there is limited research into the social nature of our community. I might first start by situating us within the remit of The Double Empathy problem.

“It is also vital to remember how the double empathy problem as initially conceived was heavily influenced by sociological theory and that such social interactions happen within a continually negotiated and mutually constructed context”

Milton et al (2022)

The double empathy problem within the context of Autistic communication essentially positions us as having a different way of communicating and relating to language rather than a deficit. This difference arises from cultural differences and the relationships we have with the world power structures.

Due to structural oppression, our style of communication is often centred as an issue to be fixed.

“The notion that autistic people lack sociality is problematised, with the suggestion that autistic people are not well described by notions such as the ‘social brain’, or as possessing ‘zero degrees of cognitive empathy’. I then argue, however, that there is a qualitative difference in autistic sociality, and question to what extent such differences are of a biological or cultural nature, and to what extent interactional expertise can be gained by both parties in interactions between autistic and non-autistic people.”

Milton (2014)

So we now have a position whereby Autistic people do not lack sociality but instead experience a different form of sociality. This is what I refer to as AuSocialility or being AuSocial.

Despite indications to the contrary, the emphasis is often directed towards teaching Autistic people to learn non-Autistic social culture, despite this being uncomfortable or even harmful for us. Some research has argued that this should be the other way round.

“We recommend teaching not autistic people but rather non-autistic individuals about autistic sociality, in order to lower the burden on autistic interlocutors in cross-neurotype interactions and socialization”

Keates, Waldock & Dewar (2022)

What does being AuSocial mean?

Autistic sociality or the AuSocial presence of Autistic people can be conceptualised by the growing cultural practices of Autistic people. We have our own customs, use of language, moral values, and even recognise what would be the cultural equivalent of public holidays in the existence of things such as Autistic pride day and the reclamation of Autistic acceptance month.

Such cultural practices as body-doubling (a firm favourite for AuDHD people) where we use video platforms such as zoom to be present and parallel with others while working on separate tasks are a key feature of Autistic professional culture and sociality. One might also look towards our differences in the way we understand and process language as the formation of a dialect.

A key feature of AuSociality is the cultural practice of moral defence of minority groups. While the Autistic community is far from devoid of bigotry, there is a general atmosphere of protectiveness towards the multiply marginalised that isn’t experienced within the non-Autistic cultural space.

In summary, AuSocial culture is a complex and highly developed set of communication, language, and socialisation skills that can only be witnessed between Autistic people. Rather than being deficient in our social exchanges, we often achieve a great deal and naturally fight to try and improve the world for our neurokin.

Conclusion

Autistic people, like most humans, are inherently social beings. Despite testimony to the contrary (usually by non-Autistic professionals and researchers) we have developed our own AuSocial culture that stands diametrically opposed to those who would label us as asocial. Such cultural practices as those within the Autistic community serve to diminish the burden of existing with in a systemically violent society and serve an important protective function for our wellbeing.

I invite people to add their own examples of AuSocial culture .

David Gray-Hammond 0 Comments
Verified by MonsterInsights