(January 9, 2016 at 4:24 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:(January 9, 2016 at 4:18 pm)Faith No More Wrote: I understand not wanting to be referred to something that has a lot of stigma attached to it, but isn't that the nature of being diagnosed with a disorder? I guess what I'm not understanding is how using the phrase "person with autism" lessens the stigmatization as opposed to using the word "autistic."
Let's not forget that there is a lot of stigma attached to the word "atheist." Is there anyone here that prefers to be called "person that does not believe in god?"
That isn't quite the position that I'm taking. I think, in general, it isn't necessary to refer to the disorder at all unless it's necessary to provide context - and it very rarely is IMO.
To illustrate, what is the semantic difference between these two interactions?
Person A: "Do you know Cthulhu?"
Person B: "Yeah, isn't he that bipolar guy?"
Person A: "Do you know Cthulhu?"
Person B: "Yeah, isn't he that cracker guy?"
Now, you might argue that "cracker" carries with it more baggage, and you might be correct, however, that only makes the difference one of degree.
