Thought police

firemonkey

I'm all for things that make life better for an autistic person, and that these have to fought for in a less than perfect world. That's where advocates can do good.

However there's also what I would call a 'thought police' element centring round use of language, and how things should be approached,  that  is sometimes more about  dominant people wanting to control the agenda than something that is useful in itself. For me it can come over as quite  anxiety provoking ,intimidating and puritanical.

Statest16

I'm surely against the thought police

Bender

Statest16 said:

I'm surely against the thought police

You can add me to the list!

Save_Ferris

Bender said:

Statest16 said:

I'm surely against the thought police

You can add me to the list!

No point adding me to the list , the thought police know how I feel about them before I do

verity

Do you mean ridgid use of terms and definitions? What kind of language?

I personally dislike gatekeeping/exclusivity as while we do have similarities we are also  quite different. The similarise might help us belong but for me it is our differences that I celebrate.

Mona_Pereth

firemonkey said:

I'm all for things that make life better for an autistic person, and that these have to fought for in a less than perfect world. That's where advocates can do good.

However there's also what I would call a 'thought police' element centring round use of language, and how things should be approached,  that  is sometimes more about  dominant people wanting to control the agenda than something that is useful in itself. For me it can come over as quite  anxiety provoking ,intimidating and puritanical.

Are you talking about, for example, people with person-first language-ism vs. adjectivistic people?

What I call the "adjectivistic" stance (a.k.a. "identity-first" language, e.g. "autistic person") arose in reaction to the "person-first language" (e.g. "person with autism") that many parent-oriented groups insisted on.

But most people who call themselves "autistic" would also say that it should be up to the individual autistic person whether to call oneself an "autistic person" or a "person with autism."  The point isn't to make a negative judgment about autistic people who call themselves "people with autism," but to resist being dictated to by the parents' groups that insisted on "person with autism.;"

Personally I prefer to use whichever term flows better in a given sentence.  Usually that's "autistic person," but occasionally I also say "person with autism."

firemonkey

Language usage is certainly  part of it.   I accept some language should be kicked into the long grass. However   there are some,especially on places like Twitter, that are zealots when it comes  to what should be said and how things should be  approached. The phrase 'control freak' springs to mind.It's  the fanaticism of some that I find disturbing and anxiety provoking. Like you I'll use both 'autistic person' and 'person with autism'. 

Mona_Pereth

Twitter is notorious for fanatical mob mentality and general nastiness.  That's one of the reasons why I've never had a Twitter account, although I am now, reluctantly, considering getting one.

Prometheus81

In general, although I think Huxley was the more prophetic writer, Orwell was dead right about the dumbing-down and policing of language. Hence the PC/"woke" nonsense, as well as the almost complete inarticulacy of most recent products of the school/university system.