Understanding the Spectrum

May 26, 2016 6:57 AM

Rebecca Burgess' Comic Redesigns the Autism Spectrum to Crush Stereotypes : “I want people to understand that autistic people don’t all fit a stereotype, and show people the consequences of stereotyping,” Burgess, from the U.K., told The Mighty in an email. “[Stereotyping leads to] underestimating the skills of autistic people or not believing someone [who is on the spectrum].”
posted by jillithd (13 comments total)

That's excellent, and I like "neurotypical people find language confusing too"—very true!
posted by languagehat at 7:19 AM on May 26, 2016 [2 favorites]

Yeah, the more I was looking at this, I was thinking about the Myers Briggs tests and how this just explains so well SO MANY people.
posted by jillithd at 7:30 AM on May 26, 2016

This is really good.
posted by rorgy at 8:05 AM on May 26, 2016

I really liked this. And it made me realize that this is probably a great way to describe other non-neurotypical states. ADHD on an x-y-z polt for hyperactivity vs. inattention vs. impulsiveness (although there are probably more axes to add to that, maybe adding executive function) and depression being broken down into energy vs. pain vs. anxiety, etc.

I want a whole book of these now.
posted by Hactar at 8:28 AM on May 26, 2016 [4 favorites]

I thought this was going to be a redesign to things like celebrity, person you see on the train, coworker, one or both hosts of CYGF, subversive, character from Austen novel...
posted by bdc34 at 9:02 AM on May 26, 2016 [1 favorite]

I like the comic, but the actual illustration to be the new visualization of the spectrum is just confusing. To many bright colors and I can't figure out what's going on. Needs more work to be understandable and not overwhelming.
posted by Margalo Epps at 9:17 AM on May 26, 2016 [2 favorites]

This is great as a whole concept! But I'm also confused by the visualization as a circle. Why are there different discrete points on this quasi-Cartesian but multi-axed scale? Do the different scales relate to each other? Are we trying just to represent multidimensionality on a two-dimensional frame? This doesn't seem like a great way to do so.
posted by quadrilaterals at 11:00 AM on May 26, 2016 [1 favorite]

quadrilaterals, it's basically a radar chart.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 11:14 AM on May 26, 2016 [3 favorites]

On consideration I have already backspaced several ill-judged posts. Teal deer: Cheers for FPP'ing this. Thumbs up!
posted by comealongpole at 11:30 AM on May 26, 2016 [1 favorite]

It's almost like everybody has different strengths, weaknesses, and abilities and that something that seems easy for me isn't necessarily easy for you.
posted by straight at 2:06 PM on May 26, 2016 [1 favorite]

straight, I'm not sure what you're saying. Are you saying that the author's diluted the definition of autistic spectrum disorders down so much that it's meaningless?

Because if you are, you're wrong. And it would seem that you're being weak in empathy when you say that. Despite appearing to identify as non-autistic.
posted by ambrosen at 4:09 PM on May 26, 2016 [4 favorites]

No, I'm saying we should take other people seriously when they say they have limitations and not demand a doctor's note or get lazy with labels thinking we can put people into easy boxes and then assume we know what they can and can't do. I'm saying we owe that courtesy to everyone.
posted by straight at 6:31 PM on May 26, 2016

The issue with saying "we shouldn't label anyone" is that it overshadows the pattern for people with autistic spectrum disorders where we pass admirably until suddenly we're overwhelmed, and we have no idea how to make things work and people just end up thinking we're being maliciously uncooperative. And that's not a nice situation to be in.
posted by ambrosen at 4:01 PM on June 4, 2016 [1 favorite]