[ SECRET POST #2929 ]

[case]

⌈ 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.

Comments

Re: Terminology question TW: everything?

[herpymcderp]

I actually hate this term. People use it to assume that there actually IS a typical or average status for some mental illnesses that honestly doesn't exist.

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)]

IA, I think the way people on tumblr are using "non-neurotypical" is watering down the original meaning, similar to the way they've used "trigger warning" and the whole concept of being triggered by something.

Which is damaging to people with PTSD and other disorders like autism...

/rant

Re: Terminology question TW: everything?

[(Anonymous)]

+2

Re: Terminology question TW: everything?

[(Anonymous)]

OP

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