I sometimes joke that I have an Autism Spectrum Order. Whatever disadvantage I’ve had as a result of autism, I didn’t notice in real time — I only began to recognize the social disadvantages I’ve regularly experienced sometime in my mid 30s when doing a lot of reflection on my life.

To whatever extent I’ve been disadvantaged (and the disadvantages are certainly there upon reflection, and have been my whole life) I’ve been much more heavily advantaged in life, in ways that I associate with autism. I do consider it a superpower, personally.

But I have multiple relatives for whom the scales clearly balance heavily in the other direction. That I do not consider it a disorder in my own life is in no way a denial that many people have a different situation going on. To add to that, as I understand it, nobody really knows what autism is yet — it’s an umbrella term, and perhaps what’s going on in my brain will someday be classified separately from what’s going on in the brains of those who experience more disability than I do. But for now, and possibly forever, it’s all the same label, and I gotta respect that there are many folks who have a considerable amount to offer the world but who could use more help than I’ve needed in that regard.

>X-ray vision is clearly not a disability.

>Aspergers isn't either.

X-ray vision was never considered a developmental disorder, because it didn't put Clark Kent at any significant disadvantage during his development.

Asperger's, unfortunately, does.

(I don't count my wheelchair as a super-power because more often than not I have to push up-hill, not glide down. It's a net negative effect on my ableness to cope with normal life.)

>>X-ray vision was never considered a developmental disorder, because it didn't put Clark Kent at any significant disadvantage during his development.

Perhaps a better analogy is his super-hearing, which did make his early life on Earth very difficult until he learned to control it.

It is a disability.

Sure, Aspergers is usual beneficial to techies from a performance perspective, but it can be a massive disadvantage when dealing with people within an organisation.

I used to work for a local authority in an sysadmin position and it was very fortunate that HR understood Aspergers, or my lack of social awareness would have got me sacked a few times.

The upside of having Aspergers is only part of the story.

It is disadvantage in tech world too. Saying as someone who had collegues like that and seen then shoot themselves and also shoot others (which ended shooting them indirectly) without knowing or meaning to.

It's an advantage for some parts of software development, but I would be surprised if it wasn't a net negative for the vast majority of developer jobs.

I don’t know how it is in the US but in the UK The Autusim Society themselves describe it as a ‘disability’. And what’s wrong with disabilities anyway that makes you go ‘ugh’?

> And what’s wrong with disabilities anyway that makes you go ‘ugh’?

People officially regarded as disabled are often treated as 2nd class citizens, with all kinds of bizarre things done to them. Including sterilisation in some countries, which there are reports of still happening to this day. :(

If you're already going around forcefully sterilising people then I don't think you're going to be convinced to skip someone because they don't self-define as disabled.

> The Autusim Society themselves describe it as a ‘disability’.

Yeah, I've heard of "official" places doing that. To me, it seems quite unfortunate they'd take that approach.

You can officially get the document of having a "limited ability" with an Autism diagnosis in many countries.

Yeah, in Hungary if you are diagnosed with ASD you are automatically considered as mentally retarded.

It's the same in all of the ex Eastern Block countries I believe.

Interesting. It's pretty insulting (of those countries, and Microsoft in this instance).

Maybe that's just my viewpoint though. ;)

Only because you think disability is insulting in itself.

It only implies a reduced ability, beyond the person's control, to perform in certain circumstances, to a degree that warrants consideration (from society, from the law, whatever).

Autism and similar conditions are by that definition disabilities.

So how you call it, when I have the ability to perform social interaction as a neurotypical person, because I learned how to do it, but I choose not to do it in certain situations, because I don’t see any advantages?

Also, do you consider it a disability that my hearing is much more sensitive and I can hear the buzz from the old light panels and I need to wear noise cancelling headphones to be able to concentrate?

Yes. You had to learn social interactions which are innate behaviours in most people. The fact that you are able to compensate does not meen it is not a disability. And, consider that there are those with the same condition who cannot compensate.

Aren't you giving an interpretation that just isn't compatible with the literal meaning of disability? Doesn't it literally mean "unable"? That doesn't sound like a word you'd want to live up to. Maybe something like "challenged" would fit your definition better?

Nope, pretty much every official use of "disability" in an HR/official process is taken as the OP said.

Sure, but isn't that what offense is taken for? In the Netherlands there was a move to calling it "less abled" ("minder-valide") instead of "invalid" or "handicapped". It's just a softer way that seems more considerate of the non-binary effects of a condition.

I have ADHD. I think it's insulting not recognize neurodevelopment disorders as a disability.

Just curious, why exactly is it insulting? Would you not classify it as a disability? Why else would they have an autism hiring program if they weren't hindered in some way?

> Would you not classify it as a disability?

Why would you classify Aspergers as a disability?

It's like saying Superman's (yeah, fiction, but it's to highlight the point) x-ray vision is a disability, just because it's something most people don't have.

X-ray vision is clearly not a disability.

Aspergers isn't either.

X-ray vision doesn't prevent you from doing anything. If x-ray vision would prevent Superman from driving a car, because he couldn't see traffic signs it would qualify as a disability.

Actually it may be a better analogue than it first appears, and not understanding that might also help understand the situation as a whole.

Those without Xray vision shouldn't be expected to understand the downsides: imagine if you can always see what's inside a gift, or who is hiding behind a door?

Whilst it seems only positive, you lose out on something that's a fundamental part of ocular-typical upbringing.

Indeed babies learn, eg through "peekaboo" (a game in which an adult hides their face from a baby), about object permanence in part by not being able to see things and then to have them revealed. Peekabo also is the beginnings of parental detachment, learning to cope when you can't see your mother (or current favourite carer).

That sort of developmental difference could have untold social effects.

There are huge temptations to cope with, not just sexually. "I left the book in my locker" - well with Xray vision I don't have to accept the lie but can verify it for myself. "My sister's not home, sorry", well of course Supe-y can see she is, and [I think, with the Xray vision he has] see who she's texting "Superman can be a real jerk" to.

TL;DR -- One thing Superman may not see is the damage he's doing by not respecting personal boundaries, and by not playing along with people's white lies ...

Asperger is a developmental disorder that makes social interaction and nonverbal communication significantly harder. It's not a superpower.

This. Just to add, aspergers isn't something that can be turned on or off at will, unlike x-ray vision.

Tbh, I'd say, calling something insulting due to its association with a disability, might be insulting to those with visible disabilities.

come on man tell me a lifetime of loneliness is a happy thing that should make me proud of how diverse i am or something....

If not a disability, what would you call it?

You can call it disorder.

Why call it anything?

Blue eyes are... blue eyes. They're not a "disability" either.

What would you call having blue eyes?

Because there aren't any people so high on the blue eyes scale that they need gloves and a helmet or they'll cause self harm.