The power in how we describe autism

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."

In the play "Romeo and Juliet" by William Shakespeare, Juliet suggests that it does not matter that Romeo is a Montague, from her rival's house of Montague. Here, the surname means very little to her, but it is the worth of the individual that counts.

This is noble stuff. Touching. And naive. Names and language have power.

Something I got really into during my Political Science and International Relations studies was the idea of constructing an identity. My masters degree dissertation was on the construction of the terrorist identity and in this case, it explored how an identity can be used for political purposes. Now, I am not going to politicise autism, although I suspect that might be interesting for those into disability politics, but I think there's something in identity construction. My thesis was about how the media created or at least repeated a narrative around what a terrorist should be and it helped to inform the consumer of such media (print in this case) about terrorism. This was framed in a post 9/11 era that polarised the terrorist and freedom fighter in a good versus evil dialogue.

A brilliant book on the subject is this:
Jackson, Richard (2005). Writing the war on terrorism: language, politics and counter-terrorism. New approaches to conflict analysis. Manchester University Press.

Anyway, autism.
What got me thinking is how language has power. Juliet is right in that if Romeo was Romeo Smith, he'd still be this great guy to her but she misses a point: Montague is part of his heritage and his family and he can't just shake that off like it never existed even if he became a smith.
So how do we frame autism?
Do we approach it socially? Culturally? Medically?
If we describe it in different terms, does it change how it is and suddenly cease sensory overloads? No, but it changes how we as society approach it and that is what is important.

I am listing some words and to see what sort of identity they create:

Negative	Positive
Disease Impairment Deficit Disabled Diagnosis Weakness Abnormal Disorder Treatment Limited "Special" Cure Genetic fault Problem Burden	Condition Difference Unique Diverse Acceptance Useful Integration Welcomed Contribution

I am sure there are lots of other words we could add.

I wonder, where do you think autism should fit into? The left column or the right?
See how that now shapes how we see autistic people?

When Juliet said a rose wouldn't change in of itself if it was called something else, I agree. If we called it a tulip, it is still a rose. But that isn't what matters here. Language is how we understand each other and confer meaning to concepts. What matters is not just what Romeo or Juliet thought but the thoughts of "others too" since they shape the narrative in which we must all live.

Whilst we don't need to take our lives to change such identities and force harmony, the way we use language about ourselves as autistic people helps us move from the left to the right column.
We have it within ourselves to change the perception of autism.

"Two households, both alike in dignity

(In fair Verona, where we lay our scene),

From ancient grudge break to new mutiny,

Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean.

From forth the fatal loins of these two foes

A pair of star-crossed lovers take their life,

Whose misadventured piteous overthrows

Doth with their death bury their parents' strife.

And the continuance of their parents' rage,

Which, but their children’s end, naught could remove,

Is now the two hours' traffic of our stage—

The which, if you with patient ears attend,

What here shall miss, our toil shall strive to mend."

Romeo and Juliet, Prologue