• alucard (they/them)@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    5 days ago

    Didn’t read the article, but answering your question in the title:

    > autistic people exist, but no real word to describe them adequately

    > someone bothers doing research

    > more and more people get the diagnosis based on scientific criteria and understanding, which is fluid as time and learning go on

    > total number changes if autistic people are born or die, not just willy-nilly as so many people seem to suggest

    > some person does not understand that growing number of autism diagnoses != growing number of autistic people

    > “Are there more autistic people now?”

    Not your fault OP, I’m just really bothered to read something like that. That’s if our eyes got an upgrade and we were able to suddenly distinguish one more colour. No, nothing turned the new colour, it was always there. It just wasn’t perceivable to us prior to the upgrade.

    • Taleya@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      5 days ago

      NTs are hilariously bad at spotting us. My niece just got her AuDHD diagnosis…years after i mentioned her parents might want to check some things. Her parents didn’t care until the disregulation started becoming an issue for them.

    • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      5 days ago

      Also:

      • People first only use the label “autism” on individuals who also have intellectual disability, which created the stigma of autism = intellectual disability but worse.
    • vzqq@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      The article is much better than I feared. It mostly highlights expanded diagnostic criteria and a more accepting cultural environment. Crucially, it does not mention the V word.