Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2015-01-10 04:16 pm
[ SECRET POST #2929 ]
⌈ Secret Post #2929 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.

__________________________________________________
02.

__________________________________________________
03.

__________________________________________________
04.

__________________________________________________
05.

__________________________________________________
06.

__________________________________________________
07.

__________________________________________________
08.

__________________________________________________
09.

__________________________________________________
10.

__________________________________________________
11.

__________________________________________________
12.

Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 088 secrets from Secret Submission Post #419.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Terminology question TW: everything?
(Anonymous) 2015-01-10 09:57 pm (UTC)(link)Re: Terminology question TW: everything?
(Anonymous) 2015-01-10 10:00 pm (UTC)(link)Re: Terminology question TW: everything?
(Anonymous) 2015-01-10 10:01 pm (UTC)(link)Is it also used for depression? How about PTSD? Or eating disorders? Do trans or genderqueer or agender people fall under that umbrella? Do gay or lesbian people? What about religious fanatics?
Re: Terminology question TW: everything?
(Anonymous) 2015-01-10 10:09 pm (UTC)(link)Re: Terminology question TW: everything?
(Anonymous) 2015-01-10 10:36 pm (UTC)(link)Re: Terminology question TW: everything?
(Anonymous) 2015-01-10 10:45 pm (UTC)(link)Yes. I'm not entirely sure how the distinction is made, but I'm fairly sure OCD is not, in itself, a marker of neuroatypicality. The Wikipedia page does a fairly good job of defining it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurotypical), but it's a messy term with few concrete definitions; while it's reached more common usage than terms like "demifemale", the definition is just about as fluid.
Re: Terminology question TW: everything?
Re: Terminology question TW: everything?
(Anonymous) 2015-01-11 01:53 am (UTC)(link)Re: Terminology question TW: everything?
Re: Terminology question TW: everything?
Depression, for example. Would you like to guess the average for depression rates? Most people get it wrong. It's 80%.
The vast majority of the population will experience depression at least once in their lives for a period longer than 3 weeks and up to 3 months. That makes depression a "neurotypical" state, but that's not how tumblrites like to view it.
It's fine to say that your autistic friend or your cousin with cerebral palsy or your aunt with a major brain injury is non-neurotypical but one should bear in mind that the correct way to refer to these deficiencies is just that: deficient. It's not an insult to say so. Hell, often it's an erasure of previous status and ability to say that someone is non-neurotypical instead of having a cognitive deficit. In TBI specifically, when an individual was capable of cognitive functions that are now lost to them, saying they're just not "typical" now is to silence the fact that they have a right to be furious about that loss of function. To them it can imply that their difference in ability is less serious or important.
tl;dr I really hate this trend, and so do a lot of people I work with and I will stop ranting about it now
Re: Terminology question TW: everything?
(Anonymous) 2015-01-10 11:03 pm (UTC)(link)Which is damaging to people with PTSD and other disorders like autism...
/rant
Re: Terminology question TW: everything?
(Anonymous) 2015-01-11 12:41 am (UTC)(link)Re: Terminology question TW: everything?
(Anonymous) 2015-01-11 01:58 am (UTC)(link)That's one of the reasons I find the term difficult to understand, hence the questions. Peoplee seem to use it to mean "neuro-ideal" as opposed to "typical" which means a completely separate thing, so I never know what's considered typical/atypical or who does/does not fall under the umbrella term
Re: Terminology question TW: everything?
I would definitely say that anything under the queer umbrella would NOT count...
*I actually am pretty sure I have very, very slight autistic tendencies but not enough to warrant a diagnosis or to prevent me from living as a well-functioning adult or present any major barriers to having a social life or any of those other things. So I wouldn't use those words for myself - they'd lose meaning for people who are diagnosed with ASD and whose non-neurotypical-ness actually affects their lives in major, visible ways.