Autism Representation: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
Sheldon Cooper. The Good Doctor. Rain Man. Music. The Blue Power Ranger. Donatello from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Temple Grandin. Even Matthew from The Chosen. All of these movie characters have something in common: their creators characterized them as being on the autism spectrum. Some of these examples are better than others, and some of them are actively harmful in their representation of autistic people. This week, I'll be going into the aspects of autism representation, why it matters, things to avoid, and how to do it well.
Other characters, like Donatello from TMNT and Matthew from the Chosen, are not labeled as autistic within the context of the show because one is a turtle or because the story took place before autism was even a diagnostic term. However, when their creators were interviewed, they revealed that they intended for the character to be autistic, and intentionally gave them autistic traits, often doing research or consulting with others to help with this representation. These two examples are pretty good, in my opinion, and I'll go more into why I like these characters later.
Finally, there are characters who are autistic, confirmed autistic within their fictional world, and actively mention their autism within the context of the show. Unfortunately, these representations are most often misused, in my opinion, going from Sheldon Cooper to Rain Man to the character Music from Sia's failure of a movie. These characters have the potential to do the most harm or the most good for representation of autistic people.
When people better understand autism, they can better respect and appreciate autistic people. They can understand that autism is not simply a problem to be fixed, but a reality to be understood and accommodated for. When autism is characterized as a tragedy, society will see it as such. That's why it is so important to think critically when representing autism.
This is also why accurate autism representation is especially important for autistic people in the audience. Seeing a part of ourselves represented on a stage can be either really affirming or extremely painful, depending on whether that side of ourselves is done justice. As an autistic person, I've yet to see anyone like me as an on-screen representation of autism, especially as a Hispanic woman. For me, when I see autism misrepresented in tv shows, movies, and even in my textbooks, I get anxious because that misrepresentation of autism is often all my classmates or peers will know about autism. Even doctors, bosses, teachers, coworkers, and family members will be affected by this mistaken knowledge of autism, and it may come to affect how they treat me and other autistic people like me. It may even affect how I see myself if I didn't already have a solid idea of what autism was. Autism representation affects how people see autistic people, so in order to improve societal attitudes towards autism, it is extremely important that autism is represented well in media.
1. Participation - Good autistic representation has input and participation from autistic people. It can't get much simpler than that. The Autistic Self-Advocacy Network has a motto that's shared by many in the autistic community: "Nothing about us without us" (Autistic Self-Advocacy Network, 2011). This motto is super important, especially because, for most of autism's history, medicine and media had a bad habit of making decisions that affected autistic people without involving autistic people in the decision-making process. In other words, everything was “Without us, about us,” which hurts us. Often when doing their research, media groups will consult doctors or parents, but this isn't the same as consulting actual people on the autism spectrum, and this can lead to medicalization, tragedy narratives, and misconceptions about what it actually means to be autistic.
Many autistic people are extremely passionate about topics related to autism, myself included, and their knowledge can be extremely useful in seeing those misconceptions and finding ways to portray autistic characters more accurately. Many times when autism is mentioned as a diagnosis, the only "autistic" traits the character exhibits are social awkwardness and genius-level IQ (which isn't actually a diagnostic requirement). Stimming behaviors, sensory sensitivities, heat intolerance, anxiety disorders, overactive empathy, and a variety of other common autistic experiences, are almost never mentioned. Autistic people know what it is like to be autistic, so including them in the process of creating autistic characters means that you get more interesting characters. These characters’ autism affects them in more than one way, and many of these experiences are not shared by neurotypical people. This makes it extremely difficult to represent autistic people without consulting us at least a little bit.
Participation can have many different forms, including the creation of autistic characters and the playing of autistic characters. For best practice, both would be included in autism representation. Authentic autism representation includes the casting of autistic actors for autistic roles.
This statement may step on a few toes. Some people may say, "Isn't the point of acting to be something you're not?" And I would agree with that statement if it weren't combined with the fact that nearly 95% of disabled movie characters are played by nondisabled actors, and this is no different for autism (Anderson, 2016). Currently, there are only a few popular shows or movies where autistic actors play autistic characters, at least that I know of. This tendency to cast non-disabled people for disabled roles is extremely common, like I mentioned before, and this can lead to further stigmatization of disabled people's experiences.
When actors don't do their research, these examples can feel like cheap caricatures, similar to a grade-school bully making fun of autistic traits they don't understand. For some movies, the creators have even made the excuse that Autistic people are bad actors, and that we couldn't accurately represent the autistic experience, even though that's something we have to do every day.
Especially for autistic people who are able to practice masking, or the subconscious concealing of autistic traits in order to appear more "socially acceptable," we can be pretty good at monitoring how we act in different environments, and hearing people claim that autistic people are bad at... acting autistic? That's the most ridiculous claim I've ever heard! If you are autistic, there's no wrong way to "act autistic," and even if there were, that's no reason to intentionally exclude autistic people from the entire field of acting. Sometimes a non-disabled actor will be casted in a movie to increase that movie’s popularity, which is understandable, but there’s no quota of one disabled character per movie, so it’s easily possible to cast both disabled and non-disabled actors within a movie while still allowing for disabled participation in media representation.
Some autistic actors may require more accommodation and support than other autistic actors, and that's totally okay. Those accommodations can and should be made, and if the filming of an autistic character is unchangeably inaccessible to autistic people, then is it the autistic person that needs to change or the nature of the film? The movie Music is an extreme and stigmatizing version of this, where autistic people's competence was questioned, accommodation was not even attempted, and the end-product of the movie was what I like to call "sensory overload in a bottle."
If, in making a movie about autism, the creators learn that autistic people disagree with a portion of the representation of autistic characters, their thoughts and opinions should be taken into account. That doesn't have to be a major overhaul in most circumstances, and often this input can make autistic representation more accurate and interesting, which can lead to a better movie overall. Conversations about participation and diverse representation are only getting more common to success in media, so keeping these things in mind helps both autistic people and the people trying to represent them, so this is an extremely important part of autism representation.
2. Research - Good autistic representation is backed up by a desire to learn about the realities of autistic people. I already mentioned how important it is to include autistic people in the development process of autistic characters, and they should also be consulted during this research component as well. Many sources of information about autism are heavily affected by autism's negative history, and sources about autism should be viewed critically, rather than being taken at face value. I've had textbooks claim that all autistic people lack imagination, that we have no awareness of other people, and that we lack the (apparently innate) human ability to read minds. Last I checked, telepathy was not a human ability, and unsupported and inaccurate claims like this should be ignored when doing research on autism.
I've already mentioned that many autistic people are passionate about topics related to autism. This makes us great subject matter experts, either for speaking about our own experiences or pointing others toward great resources for learning about autism. I've already mentioned the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network, and they've consulted on a number of forms of autism representation, and I'd highly recommend getting their input in creating media on autism.
What is Autism Representation?
In media, autism representation happens when a character exhibits various traits of autism. These traits do not necessarily need to be labeled as autism, in fact many characters with autistic traits are simply referred to as "eccentric," "quirky," or "socially awkward." Even if a character wasn't originally intended to be seen as an autistic person, one only has to look as far as the internet to find autistic people who identify with these character's experiences in media. One example of this would be Lilo from Lilo and Stitch. Socially blunt with different interests, she has trouble making friends and relating to her peers, but she is an amazing, fully developed female character, and for many people she exists as the autism representation that media is currently lacking.Other characters, like Donatello from TMNT and Matthew from the Chosen, are not labeled as autistic within the context of the show because one is a turtle or because the story took place before autism was even a diagnostic term. However, when their creators were interviewed, they revealed that they intended for the character to be autistic, and intentionally gave them autistic traits, often doing research or consulting with others to help with this representation. These two examples are pretty good, in my opinion, and I'll go more into why I like these characters later.
Finally, there are characters who are autistic, confirmed autistic within their fictional world, and actively mention their autism within the context of the show. Unfortunately, these representations are most often misused, in my opinion, going from Sheldon Cooper to Rain Man to the character Music from Sia's failure of a movie. These characters have the potential to do the most harm or the most good for representation of autistic people.
Why does autism representation matter?
Media shapes public opinion. Most people don't care enough to do their research after watching a movie with an autistic character, which means that many people only ever learn about autism through their favorite movies and tv shows. This means that autistic characters in media may be the only way many people learn about autism. If this is good representation, the audience can gain a better understanding of what autism is, who can have it, and how to interact with autistic people. Conversely, if it's bad representation, this can lead to stigmatization, mistreatment, and even denying accommodations because of misconceptions about autism.When people better understand autism, they can better respect and appreciate autistic people. They can understand that autism is not simply a problem to be fixed, but a reality to be understood and accommodated for. When autism is characterized as a tragedy, society will see it as such. That's why it is so important to think critically when representing autism.
This is also why accurate autism representation is especially important for autistic people in the audience. Seeing a part of ourselves represented on a stage can be either really affirming or extremely painful, depending on whether that side of ourselves is done justice. As an autistic person, I've yet to see anyone like me as an on-screen representation of autism, especially as a Hispanic woman. For me, when I see autism misrepresented in tv shows, movies, and even in my textbooks, I get anxious because that misrepresentation of autism is often all my classmates or peers will know about autism. Even doctors, bosses, teachers, coworkers, and family members will be affected by this mistaken knowledge of autism, and it may come to affect how they treat me and other autistic people like me. It may even affect how I see myself if I didn't already have a solid idea of what autism was. Autism representation affects how people see autistic people, so in order to improve societal attitudes towards autism, it is extremely important that autism is represented well in media.
What is good autism representation?
While autism representation varies widely in each of the cases I talked about earlier, many of the best examples share some things in common, and I'll spend some time going into this.1. Participation - Good autistic representation has input and participation from autistic people. It can't get much simpler than that. The Autistic Self-Advocacy Network has a motto that's shared by many in the autistic community: "Nothing about us without us" (Autistic Self-Advocacy Network, 2011). This motto is super important, especially because, for most of autism's history, medicine and media had a bad habit of making decisions that affected autistic people without involving autistic people in the decision-making process. In other words, everything was “Without us, about us,” which hurts us. Often when doing their research, media groups will consult doctors or parents, but this isn't the same as consulting actual people on the autism spectrum, and this can lead to medicalization, tragedy narratives, and misconceptions about what it actually means to be autistic.
Many autistic people are extremely passionate about topics related to autism, myself included, and their knowledge can be extremely useful in seeing those misconceptions and finding ways to portray autistic characters more accurately. Many times when autism is mentioned as a diagnosis, the only "autistic" traits the character exhibits are social awkwardness and genius-level IQ (which isn't actually a diagnostic requirement). Stimming behaviors, sensory sensitivities, heat intolerance, anxiety disorders, overactive empathy, and a variety of other common autistic experiences, are almost never mentioned. Autistic people know what it is like to be autistic, so including them in the process of creating autistic characters means that you get more interesting characters. These characters’ autism affects them in more than one way, and many of these experiences are not shared by neurotypical people. This makes it extremely difficult to represent autistic people without consulting us at least a little bit.
Participation can have many different forms, including the creation of autistic characters and the playing of autistic characters. For best practice, both would be included in autism representation. Authentic autism representation includes the casting of autistic actors for autistic roles.
This statement may step on a few toes. Some people may say, "Isn't the point of acting to be something you're not?" And I would agree with that statement if it weren't combined with the fact that nearly 95% of disabled movie characters are played by nondisabled actors, and this is no different for autism (Anderson, 2016). Currently, there are only a few popular shows or movies where autistic actors play autistic characters, at least that I know of. This tendency to cast non-disabled people for disabled roles is extremely common, like I mentioned before, and this can lead to further stigmatization of disabled people's experiences.
When actors don't do their research, these examples can feel like cheap caricatures, similar to a grade-school bully making fun of autistic traits they don't understand. For some movies, the creators have even made the excuse that Autistic people are bad actors, and that we couldn't accurately represent the autistic experience, even though that's something we have to do every day.
Especially for autistic people who are able to practice masking, or the subconscious concealing of autistic traits in order to appear more "socially acceptable," we can be pretty good at monitoring how we act in different environments, and hearing people claim that autistic people are bad at... acting autistic? That's the most ridiculous claim I've ever heard! If you are autistic, there's no wrong way to "act autistic," and even if there were, that's no reason to intentionally exclude autistic people from the entire field of acting. Sometimes a non-disabled actor will be casted in a movie to increase that movie’s popularity, which is understandable, but there’s no quota of one disabled character per movie, so it’s easily possible to cast both disabled and non-disabled actors within a movie while still allowing for disabled participation in media representation.
Some autistic actors may require more accommodation and support than other autistic actors, and that's totally okay. Those accommodations can and should be made, and if the filming of an autistic character is unchangeably inaccessible to autistic people, then is it the autistic person that needs to change or the nature of the film? The movie Music is an extreme and stigmatizing version of this, where autistic people's competence was questioned, accommodation was not even attempted, and the end-product of the movie was what I like to call "sensory overload in a bottle."
If, in making a movie about autism, the creators learn that autistic people disagree with a portion of the representation of autistic characters, their thoughts and opinions should be taken into account. That doesn't have to be a major overhaul in most circumstances, and often this input can make autistic representation more accurate and interesting, which can lead to a better movie overall. Conversations about participation and diverse representation are only getting more common to success in media, so keeping these things in mind helps both autistic people and the people trying to represent them, so this is an extremely important part of autism representation.
2. Research - Good autistic representation is backed up by a desire to learn about the realities of autistic people. I already mentioned how important it is to include autistic people in the development process of autistic characters, and they should also be consulted during this research component as well. Many sources of information about autism are heavily affected by autism's negative history, and sources about autism should be viewed critically, rather than being taken at face value. I've had textbooks claim that all autistic people lack imagination, that we have no awareness of other people, and that we lack the (apparently innate) human ability to read minds. Last I checked, telepathy was not a human ability, and unsupported and inaccurate claims like this should be ignored when doing research on autism.
I've already mentioned that many autistic people are passionate about topics related to autism. This makes us great subject matter experts, either for speaking about our own experiences or pointing others toward great resources for learning about autism. I've already mentioned the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network, and they've consulted on a number of forms of autism representation, and I'd highly recommend getting their input in creating media on autism.
What is good autism research?
Good research treats autistic people with respect. It doesn't include any extreme experiments, and it doesn't start off with the presumption that autism is the result of bad parenting, vaccine damage, chemical exposure, or overwhelming tragedy. It doesn't assume that autism is something to be fixed or cured, and it doesn't assume that autistic people are incapable of having thoughts, feelings, or a perception of self and others. The best autism research, much like the best autism representation, includes autistic people in both the deciding of research topics, and in the implications of the results. Autism research should not hurt autistic people.
3. Diversity - When looking at autistic characters in media, the vast majority are white males (either boys or men), and the majority of them are able to speak. Diversity in autism representation means showing variety in who can be autistic. I'm half-Hispanic, and to my knowledge, there has never been an autistic Hispanic person featured in any movie or tv show, let alone an autistic Hispanic woman like myself (feel free to correct me if you know of one).
When media shows more than one type of autism representation, it gives us a fuller picture of what autism can look like. As it is, women and racial/ethnic minorities are much less likely to receive autism diagnoses than white males because of misconceptions like this, and how they're made popular by media. For women, it is far more likely for us to be diagnosed with anxiety or to simply be thought of as quiet and shy. For racial/ethnic minorities, conduct disorders and oppositional defiant disorder are often misdiagnosed instead of autism. These things can coexist, but this tendency is often shaped by social misconceptions about who is able to be autistic, an opinion that is often formed by media representation, or lack thereof.
Diversity also means having a diversity of personalities with a diversity of interests. Not every autistic person dislikes being social, and not every autistic person has a special interest in trains, math, or science. Some autistic people visibly stim and some do not. Some autistic people may want to be non-autistic or "normal" like media tends to portray us, but many of us find some identity in our autism, so please include characters who are proud to be autistic.
4. Respect - Acknowledge that autistic people's experiences are equally valuable representations of humanity. This means that autistic characters should not be made into caricatures or used only as plot foils for non-autistic characters, but that they are represented as complete characters of their own accord. If autistic people protest a movie's representation of autism-centric issues, that movie's producers should do their best to remedy these issues. Autistic actors should be respected, and their abilities shouldn't be doubted because of their disability. Autistic characters should not be the butt of every joke, and autistic villains should not be made villains because of their autism. Autism is also not inherently inspiring; it does not exist for the purpose of making non-autistic people feel good about themselves.
Autistic adults in media shouldn't be treated like children, incapable of making their own decisions. For those with comorbid intellectual disabilities and nonspeaking autistic people, it's okay to show that they have different needs than others, but also mention that supported decision-making is a thing, that their autonomy should be respected, and that even if the person can't speak, they can still use their body to advocate for what they want (running away, screaming, etc). Autistic people live in the same world as everyone else (not their own world), and as such, they should receive the same rights as others in this world.
Sometimes, it may be necessary in a movie's plot to show characters who infantilize or mistreat autistic people, but it should be made very clear that doing so is wrong, and I would highly recommend getting advice from autistic people about the best way to touch on more controversial issues. Keeping us involved in these issues is vital when representing autism, and doing so further displays a respect of this community and its values.
I want to mention that it isn't inherently bad to show autistic characters who are skilled in their fields or well-known for their accomplishments. Autistic people can succeed in these areas, and it is great when they do. My issue is that often, media seems to think that every autistic person has this "extraordinary gift," and that every autistic person is an untapped genius, or they would be if they applied themselves. This misconception can hurt autistic people. When society believes that every speaking autistic person is a genius, those who aren't can be ostracized, denied accommodations, and presumed incompetent just because we're not vastly overachieving everyone else in our field.
This prodigy rhetoric is also harmful because it pushes the idea that autistic people have to prove their worth in order to be accepted by others. Often, it shows autistic people as socially repugnant, disliked, and rude, and their only saving grace is the fact that they can do calculus in their heads. This tells autistic people that we can only be accepted, that we only have worth, if we have something to contribute to make people ignore a large part of who we are. Very few movies about autism show autistic characters who are accepted by others without first proving their worth, and this creates a societal expectation and demand for overachieving autistic people. As a Christian, I strongly believe that a person's worth is not defined by their ability to perform specific tasks, and I find it really sad that societal representations of autism have not moved past this tendency.
In terms of the tragedy rhetoric, this side tends to more negatively affect recently diagnosed autistic people, families of autistic people, and nonspeaking autistic people. In this rhetoric, autism is seen as a disease, a tragedy, and sometimes a fate worse than death. This view is supported by major groups like Autism Speaks (considered a hate group by many autistic people), and they use their funding to push for the creation of more of these types of characters, spreading a sense of fear, confusion, and even feelings of loss to families of autistic people, telling them that their child is trapped in autism's cage, that autism is like a cancer, and that their child's only hope is aggressive dieting, applied behavioral analysis therapy, bleach ingestion, and other harmful treatments that don't actually help anyone. The tragedy rhetoric treats autistic people as less than human, forcing us all to prove our humanity in every new interaction with others.
Many autistic self-advocates have fought against this idea that autism is a fate worse than death, and in an essay called "Don't mourn for us," a self-advocate named Jim Sinclair wrote, “We need and deserve families who can see us and value us for ourselves, not families whose vision of us is obscured by the ghosts of children who never lived." Autism is a disability; it changes how we experience the world, and we may have more struggles or different struggles than non-autistic people, but it is not a tragedy. Autistic people are alive, we have feelings and emotions, we are not dying from autism, we are not trapped in a cage by our autism, and many of us can thrive in an accepting, accommodating environment that understands the value and complexity of the autistic community.
Unfortunately, organizations like Autism Speaks make this environment of acceptance harder and harder to come by, using the tragedy rhetoric to hurt autistic people and their families. Here are a few examples of media influenced by Autism Speaks that circulate the tragedy rhetoric in ways that harm autistic people:
When Sesame Street created the character Julia, an autistic Muppet, Autism Speaks was a major influencing body, and they showed Julia's parents going through the stages of grief over her autism while also using the show as a way to gain support for their 100-day kit that further indoctrinated families about the tragedy of autism, recommending things like ABA therapy, gluten free diets, and other questionable treatments of autism. Autistic Self-Advocates were actually involved in the beginning stages of this character's creation, but broke with Sesame Street when Autism Speak's funding took over, monopolizing the character and the representation of autism, using it as a platform to hurt autistic people. For this reason, Julia herself is a decent character, but those around her turn this into a terrible and hurtful representation of autism.
Another example of the tragedy rhetoric can be seen in Sia's recent movie "Music," which I've mentioned a few other times. Music is a non-speaking autistic teenager who is cared for by her drug-addicted older sister, and during the movie, her sister grows as a person and becomes a more developed character. Music herself only has two lines using her AAC device, featuring the single word "happy," and the movie is filled with the idea that she is trapped in her own world, and multiple instances of mistreatment are shown without being further commented on. AAC is much more complex than this, and many autistic people can communicate full sentences and ideas, rather than one-word emotions.
In one scene, the movie recommended a technique called prone restraint that has led to the suffocation and death of many autistic children, adults, and people with other disabilities. In fact, self-advocates and other agencies have been working on an initiative called the "Keeping All Students Safe Act" that would make these deadly restraint techniques illegal, and further protect the rights of children with disabilities. None of this was mentioned in the movie, however, only a statement that "crush her with love" would help curb a meltdown, which wouldn't help in real life. Outside of this scene, there were too many instances of the tragedy rhetoric to count, along with the fact that the other characters hardly ever talked directly to Music, instead talking about her without her input. Both the character and the movie "Music" cause harm to the autistic community by pushing these stereotypes in front of an audience that doesn't know any better.
3. Diversity - When looking at autistic characters in media, the vast majority are white males (either boys or men), and the majority of them are able to speak. Diversity in autism representation means showing variety in who can be autistic. I'm half-Hispanic, and to my knowledge, there has never been an autistic Hispanic person featured in any movie or tv show, let alone an autistic Hispanic woman like myself (feel free to correct me if you know of one).
When media shows more than one type of autism representation, it gives us a fuller picture of what autism can look like. As it is, women and racial/ethnic minorities are much less likely to receive autism diagnoses than white males because of misconceptions like this, and how they're made popular by media. For women, it is far more likely for us to be diagnosed with anxiety or to simply be thought of as quiet and shy. For racial/ethnic minorities, conduct disorders and oppositional defiant disorder are often misdiagnosed instead of autism. These things can coexist, but this tendency is often shaped by social misconceptions about who is able to be autistic, an opinion that is often formed by media representation, or lack thereof.
Diversity also means having a diversity of personalities with a diversity of interests. Not every autistic person dislikes being social, and not every autistic person has a special interest in trains, math, or science. Some autistic people visibly stim and some do not. Some autistic people may want to be non-autistic or "normal" like media tends to portray us, but many of us find some identity in our autism, so please include characters who are proud to be autistic.
4. Respect - Acknowledge that autistic people's experiences are equally valuable representations of humanity. This means that autistic characters should not be made into caricatures or used only as plot foils for non-autistic characters, but that they are represented as complete characters of their own accord. If autistic people protest a movie's representation of autism-centric issues, that movie's producers should do their best to remedy these issues. Autistic actors should be respected, and their abilities shouldn't be doubted because of their disability. Autistic characters should not be the butt of every joke, and autistic villains should not be made villains because of their autism. Autism is also not inherently inspiring; it does not exist for the purpose of making non-autistic people feel good about themselves.
Autistic adults in media shouldn't be treated like children, incapable of making their own decisions. For those with comorbid intellectual disabilities and nonspeaking autistic people, it's okay to show that they have different needs than others, but also mention that supported decision-making is a thing, that their autonomy should be respected, and that even if the person can't speak, they can still use their body to advocate for what they want (running away, screaming, etc). Autistic people live in the same world as everyone else (not their own world), and as such, they should receive the same rights as others in this world.
Sometimes, it may be necessary in a movie's plot to show characters who infantilize or mistreat autistic people, but it should be made very clear that doing so is wrong, and I would highly recommend getting advice from autistic people about the best way to touch on more controversial issues. Keeping us involved in these issues is vital when representing autism, and doing so further displays a respect of this community and its values.
What is bad autism representation?
Too often, media representation of autism can be categorized either into the "Tragedy rhetoric" or the "Prodigy rhetoric." The tragedy rhetoric is based on the assumption that autism is a disease, a mistake, and that its "sufferers" are useless, except for when they can be used as plot devices to inspire and develop non-autistic characters. The prodigy rhetoric, on the other hand, uses the stories of gifted autistic people (who are usually white males) to inspire non-autistic people, implying that all autistic people must be extraordinarily gifted in order for others to respect them. Often, these character's autistic traits are only overlooked because of what they can contribute with their big brains. Examples of the tragedy rhetoric can be seen in the movie "Music" that came out recently, and the prodigy rhetoric can be seen in tv shows such as "The Good Doctor."I want to mention that it isn't inherently bad to show autistic characters who are skilled in their fields or well-known for their accomplishments. Autistic people can succeed in these areas, and it is great when they do. My issue is that often, media seems to think that every autistic person has this "extraordinary gift," and that every autistic person is an untapped genius, or they would be if they applied themselves. This misconception can hurt autistic people. When society believes that every speaking autistic person is a genius, those who aren't can be ostracized, denied accommodations, and presumed incompetent just because we're not vastly overachieving everyone else in our field.
This prodigy rhetoric is also harmful because it pushes the idea that autistic people have to prove their worth in order to be accepted by others. Often, it shows autistic people as socially repugnant, disliked, and rude, and their only saving grace is the fact that they can do calculus in their heads. This tells autistic people that we can only be accepted, that we only have worth, if we have something to contribute to make people ignore a large part of who we are. Very few movies about autism show autistic characters who are accepted by others without first proving their worth, and this creates a societal expectation and demand for overachieving autistic people. As a Christian, I strongly believe that a person's worth is not defined by their ability to perform specific tasks, and I find it really sad that societal representations of autism have not moved past this tendency.
In terms of the tragedy rhetoric, this side tends to more negatively affect recently diagnosed autistic people, families of autistic people, and nonspeaking autistic people. In this rhetoric, autism is seen as a disease, a tragedy, and sometimes a fate worse than death. This view is supported by major groups like Autism Speaks (considered a hate group by many autistic people), and they use their funding to push for the creation of more of these types of characters, spreading a sense of fear, confusion, and even feelings of loss to families of autistic people, telling them that their child is trapped in autism's cage, that autism is like a cancer, and that their child's only hope is aggressive dieting, applied behavioral analysis therapy, bleach ingestion, and other harmful treatments that don't actually help anyone. The tragedy rhetoric treats autistic people as less than human, forcing us all to prove our humanity in every new interaction with others.
Many autistic self-advocates have fought against this idea that autism is a fate worse than death, and in an essay called "Don't mourn for us," a self-advocate named Jim Sinclair wrote, “We need and deserve families who can see us and value us for ourselves, not families whose vision of us is obscured by the ghosts of children who never lived." Autism is a disability; it changes how we experience the world, and we may have more struggles or different struggles than non-autistic people, but it is not a tragedy. Autistic people are alive, we have feelings and emotions, we are not dying from autism, we are not trapped in a cage by our autism, and many of us can thrive in an accepting, accommodating environment that understands the value and complexity of the autistic community.
Unfortunately, organizations like Autism Speaks make this environment of acceptance harder and harder to come by, using the tragedy rhetoric to hurt autistic people and their families. Here are a few examples of media influenced by Autism Speaks that circulate the tragedy rhetoric in ways that harm autistic people:
When Sesame Street created the character Julia, an autistic Muppet, Autism Speaks was a major influencing body, and they showed Julia's parents going through the stages of grief over her autism while also using the show as a way to gain support for their 100-day kit that further indoctrinated families about the tragedy of autism, recommending things like ABA therapy, gluten free diets, and other questionable treatments of autism. Autistic Self-Advocates were actually involved in the beginning stages of this character's creation, but broke with Sesame Street when Autism Speak's funding took over, monopolizing the character and the representation of autism, using it as a platform to hurt autistic people. For this reason, Julia herself is a decent character, but those around her turn this into a terrible and hurtful representation of autism.
Another example of the tragedy rhetoric can be seen in Sia's recent movie "Music," which I've mentioned a few other times. Music is a non-speaking autistic teenager who is cared for by her drug-addicted older sister, and during the movie, her sister grows as a person and becomes a more developed character. Music herself only has two lines using her AAC device, featuring the single word "happy," and the movie is filled with the idea that she is trapped in her own world, and multiple instances of mistreatment are shown without being further commented on. AAC is much more complex than this, and many autistic people can communicate full sentences and ideas, rather than one-word emotions.
In one scene, the movie recommended a technique called prone restraint that has led to the suffocation and death of many autistic children, adults, and people with other disabilities. In fact, self-advocates and other agencies have been working on an initiative called the "Keeping All Students Safe Act" that would make these deadly restraint techniques illegal, and further protect the rights of children with disabilities. None of this was mentioned in the movie, however, only a statement that "crush her with love" would help curb a meltdown, which wouldn't help in real life. Outside of this scene, there were too many instances of the tragedy rhetoric to count, along with the fact that the other characters hardly ever talked directly to Music, instead talking about her without her input. Both the character and the movie "Music" cause harm to the autistic community by pushing these stereotypes in front of an audience that doesn't know any better.
.jpg)
Comments
Post a Comment