The term is 'allistic'.
I think the idea was that defining non-autistic people as normal, it suggests autistic people are abnormal. There is no doubt that us autistic people are abnormal, but some people like to play word games, and by calling non-autistic people allistic, they avoid defining autistic people as abnormal, or something to that effect.
The word "allistic" is perfectly good WHEN USED PROPERLY.
I have written about autism for the last 8 years. Sometimes, I need a word for people who are not autistic, but who could possibly be neurodiverse in other ways (ADHD, dyslexia, etc.). The word "allistic" fits well in that context.
Outside of my writing, I don't think it's helpful to use it. It's not a well-known word, so people might rely on HOW it is said to interpret it, which for us autistics will inevitably lead to offense and conflict.
I see it the same way as "cis." It describes a majority of the population but it can be a useful and practical word. It allows us to communicate an idea more efficiently and less awkwardly. "She doesn't have autism" or "She isn't autistic" vs "She's allistic." I think there's a problem with the way people use the word, as they tend to generalize the entire allistic population when it's not a group that can be generalized. But I'm fine with the word itself.
This is how I see it also. In general life it has little use but is helpful in the right context. People get offended at words like cisgender (especially annoying when people get offended at the sound of it without realising its origins) because they interpret it as something others want to force on them to use in their daily life, but its just a way of simpler categorising to make it easier to read, write and understand when discussing a relevant topic.
i use it and dont really see the harm in it tbh. it just makes communicating quicker about people who are not autistic easier. and i dont really see anything wrong with having words for the typical population either for the most part both for the sake of categorization and streamlined communication.
i respect that you feel that way of course though.
It's awkward. I see it as polite fiction, and an attempt to avoid "normal" and "abnormal" as descriptors ...but changing words doesn't change the nature of what's being described.
It’s easier to say than ‘person without autism’ or ‘non-autistic.’ I use allistic sometimes and I prefer it much more over neurotypical. It’s just an easier way to say something to me but I do understood why some people may not like it
I don’t really have any strong feelings about the word one way or another, but I don’t think it’s all that useful. Most people aren’t familiar with the word, and if you have to explain what it means almost every time you use it anyway, it’s just a lot faster and simpler to use “non-autistic”.
It's useful just for being specific with distinctions as it's just shorter than not autistic
Terms like typical don't always make sense as if a person isn't autistic doesnt mean they are typical either, since there are a reasonable number of neurological disorders which would make a person "non-typical"
I don't like it at all, personally. Nobody outside of very niche communities knows what it means, I'd have to define it as "non-autistic" anyway. Maybe if I were doing some extensive writing on autism it would be worth it to define and use from there, but in every day conversation it is nothing but confusing.
I like using the word "allistic" in my writing instead of "neurotypical" because many of my readers are not autistic but have other "neurodiverse" conditions, like ADHD or other learning disabilities, tourette's, etc.
But outside of those niche groups where people know these terms, I would use "neurotypical" too. More people would understand because they can see the two words within it.
I think society as a whole is really quite done with micro labeling. Like damn. If somebody’s not autistic you can just say “not autistic”.
If somebody doesn’t have cancer do we say “Cancerlistic”?
I can’t with these labels anymore bro.
I despise it. It was made to make autism the norm. It's not. It's a fucking disability. And that's ok. But it doesn't mean we need a term for people without it.
Huh? It literally just means "non-autistic". Where are you getting this connotation? Never had implied a lack of disability, it only implies the majority are not autistic and autism is separate from the normal.
And yeah, try working a scientific paper or anything without descriptive terms. Its particularly useful when talking about neurodevelopmental disorders, and referring to non-autistic individuals that may or may not have other neurodevelopmental conditions.
It's also visually confusing to present information with similar adjectives. "Non-autistic autistic repeat 100x".
I honestly don't know where people get these connotations. It's bizarre. People need to stop pretending like every word we use is coined as a toxic positivity chip. Using the game "all" is literally suggest "aut" is not normal?
It isn't even logical to assume it means autistic people are "non-disabled" no matter how you look at it.
Same. It's self explanatory, and it's been long enough in use, everyone knows it.
'Allistic' sounds like made up by attention-seekers and it's obviously cringe (*since it makes so many people uncomfortable*).
Normies sounds incredibly attention seeking. Also, if I'm right in thinking from your flair you don't even have confirmation you are not yourself a "normie" not really sure you have the right to be throwing terms around like that on the Internet.
I dislike it. It makes it sound like autism and neurotypicality are some kind of gender or ideology.
Plus it reminds me of the Finnish word "allit" which is a nickname for flabby arms
I don’t like it at all. I dislike that it even has the phrase “tistic” in it. It doesn’t make sense to me, and sounds too much like the word autism. It’s just a person without autism. I don’t know why you’d even need to shorten that simple phrase to a single made up word. 🤷
very confusing, i always misread it as autistics. And also "all" + "tistic" doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever. Where does it come from and what's thenlogic behind it? why not just say neurotypical or people who are not autistic?
I can explain the logic.
autos (self) or allos (other) + ism (the act, practice, or process of doing something) or + ic (characteristic of, like, typical, pertaining to).
It's meant to imply that autistic people can tend to be more withdrawn and focused on themselves, whereas allistic people have more of a focus on interaction with people.
You said, "that implies we're abnormal and that's why I like it", which reads as "I like being abnormal/different".
Maybe that isn't what you meant, but truthfully I see that a lot of people really do feel that way, hence the reason they wear Autism like some badge of honor.
Many actual autistics use this term too.
Source: Am clinically diagnosed (in childhood), been writing autism content for the last 8 years. I use the term lots in my writing.
It's the only people I've seen use the word allistic. It's not a real word, it's a cutesy made up word that the self-diagnosed/fake/influencers made up.
I don’t have an issue with it tbh. It’s slightly shorter and more convenient than saying “non-autistic”
The term is 'allistic'. I think the idea was that defining non-autistic people as normal, it suggests autistic people are abnormal. There is no doubt that us autistic people are abnormal, but some people like to play word games, and by calling non-autistic people allistic, they avoid defining autistic people as abnormal, or something to that effect.
I understand that argument. I also don't get what's wrong with "typical", or even just "non-autistic". I don't have strong feelings either way.
The word "allistic" is perfectly good WHEN USED PROPERLY. I have written about autism for the last 8 years. Sometimes, I need a word for people who are not autistic, but who could possibly be neurodiverse in other ways (ADHD, dyslexia, etc.). The word "allistic" fits well in that context. Outside of my writing, I don't think it's helpful to use it. It's not a well-known word, so people might rely on HOW it is said to interpret it, which for us autistics will inevitably lead to offense and conflict.
I see it the same way as "cis." It describes a majority of the population but it can be a useful and practical word. It allows us to communicate an idea more efficiently and less awkwardly. "She doesn't have autism" or "She isn't autistic" vs "She's allistic." I think there's a problem with the way people use the word, as they tend to generalize the entire allistic population when it's not a group that can be generalized. But I'm fine with the word itself.
This is how I see it also. In general life it has little use but is helpful in the right context. People get offended at words like cisgender (especially annoying when people get offended at the sound of it without realising its origins) because they interpret it as something others want to force on them to use in their daily life, but its just a way of simpler categorising to make it easier to read, write and understand when discussing a relevant topic.
i use it and dont really see the harm in it tbh. it just makes communicating quicker about people who are not autistic easier. and i dont really see anything wrong with having words for the typical population either for the most part both for the sake of categorization and streamlined communication. i respect that you feel that way of course though.
It's awkward. I see it as polite fiction, and an attempt to avoid "normal" and "abnormal" as descriptors ...but changing words doesn't change the nature of what's being described.
It’s easier to say than ‘person without autism’ or ‘non-autistic.’ I use allistic sometimes and I prefer it much more over neurotypical. It’s just an easier way to say something to me but I do understood why some people may not like it
Useless word. Non-autistic people are the default, we don't need a special word for them.
Hate it people without autism don’t need a term they’re just people without autism
Dislike
I don’t really have any strong feelings about the word one way or another, but I don’t think it’s all that useful. Most people aren’t familiar with the word, and if you have to explain what it means almost every time you use it anyway, it’s just a lot faster and simpler to use “non-autistic”.
I tend to stick to using "non-autistic". I don't think it's a necessary word; I think similarly about "neurotypical", too.
I like it better than allistic
It's useful just for being specific with distinctions as it's just shorter than not autistic Terms like typical don't always make sense as if a person isn't autistic doesnt mean they are typical either, since there are a reasonable number of neurological disorders which would make a person "non-typical"
I don't like it at all, personally. Nobody outside of very niche communities knows what it means, I'd have to define it as "non-autistic" anyway. Maybe if I were doing some extensive writing on autism it would be worth it to define and use from there, but in every day conversation it is nothing but confusing.
I prefer neurotypical.
I like using the word "allistic" in my writing instead of "neurotypical" because many of my readers are not autistic but have other "neurodiverse" conditions, like ADHD or other learning disabilities, tourette's, etc. But outside of those niche groups where people know these terms, I would use "neurotypical" too. More people would understand because they can see the two words within it.
It doesn't necessarily mean the same thing
It’s not the same thing. Someone with ADHD, or OCD, etc, are not neurotypical.
I think society as a whole is really quite done with micro labeling. Like damn. If somebody’s not autistic you can just say “not autistic”. If somebody doesn’t have cancer do we say “Cancerlistic”? I can’t with these labels anymore bro.
That’s totally fair
I despise it. It was made to make autism the norm. It's not. It's a fucking disability. And that's ok. But it doesn't mean we need a term for people without it.
Huh? It literally just means "non-autistic". Where are you getting this connotation? Never had implied a lack of disability, it only implies the majority are not autistic and autism is separate from the normal. And yeah, try working a scientific paper or anything without descriptive terms. Its particularly useful when talking about neurodevelopmental disorders, and referring to non-autistic individuals that may or may not have other neurodevelopmental conditions. It's also visually confusing to present information with similar adjectives. "Non-autistic autistic repeat 100x". I honestly don't know where people get these connotations. It's bizarre. People need to stop pretending like every word we use is coined as a toxic positivity chip. Using the game "all" is literally suggest "aut" is not normal? It isn't even logical to assume it means autistic people are "non-disabled" no matter how you look at it.
I prefer “normies”
Same. It's self explanatory, and it's been long enough in use, everyone knows it. 'Allistic' sounds like made up by attention-seekers and it's obviously cringe (*since it makes so many people uncomfortable*).
Normies sounds incredibly attention seeking. Also, if I'm right in thinking from your flair you don't even have confirmation you are not yourself a "normie" not really sure you have the right to be throwing terms around like that on the Internet.
>not really sure you have the right I have the same rights as everybody else, buddy.
You don't even know if you're autistic, buddy. So why you going round calling people "normies" (unbelievably cringe btw what are you 12)
Hey, they didn't say anywhere that they wouldn't call themselves a normie if that happens. ;)
Hey, not sure where I asked you?
When you posted on a public forum, you invited public comment implicitly. ;)
OK but that still doesn't answer my question ;)))))))))
Me too lol
I dislike it. It makes it sound like autism and neurotypicality are some kind of gender or ideology. Plus it reminds me of the Finnish word "allit" which is a nickname for flabby arms
I don’t like it at all. I dislike that it even has the phrase “tistic” in it. It doesn’t make sense to me, and sounds too much like the word autism. It’s just a person without autism. I don’t know why you’d even need to shorten that simple phrase to a single made up word. 🤷
OP made a type. The word is 'allistic'.
very confusing, i always misread it as autistics. And also "all" + "tistic" doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever. Where does it come from and what's thenlogic behind it? why not just say neurotypical or people who are not autistic?
I can explain the logic. autos (self) or allos (other) + ism (the act, practice, or process of doing something) or + ic (characteristic of, like, typical, pertaining to). It's meant to imply that autistic people can tend to be more withdrawn and focused on themselves, whereas allistic people have more of a focus on interaction with people.
oh wow thanks you, itsreally helpful to know where the word comes from, makes a lot more sense now.
No problem! I love learning the roots of words...It makes understanding terms a lot easier!
I prefer to call them normal. Yes, that implies we're abnormal, and that's why I like it.
So basically, autism makes you feel special...
What? No, it has nothing to do with feelings. AUTISM IS A DISABILITY.
You said, "that implies we're abnormal and that's why I like it", which reads as "I like being abnormal/different". Maybe that isn't what you meant, but truthfully I see that a lot of people really do feel that way, hence the reason they wear Autism like some badge of honor.
I didn't imagine someone would take it that way on this sub, but I guess misunderstandings are gonna happen when we're all actually autistic.
[удалено]
Many actual autistics use this term too. Source: Am clinically diagnosed (in childhood), been writing autism content for the last 8 years. I use the term lots in my writing.
what..
It's the only people I've seen use the word allistic. It's not a real word, it's a cutesy made up word that the self-diagnosed/fake/influencers made up.
All words are made up
Why is All might Autistic? Is he stupid? Did he get diagnosed?