Reply to comment

What I was trying to say in my ramblings is that I think that one aspect leading to the eventual success of women becoming a 'difference' instead of a disorder is time. Autism seems to have become prominent in recent decades and since it is not 'needed' for reproduction (like women), it could fade out in a short span of time (since at the time the causes of it are very debatable). Think about how long it did take women to finally not be classified as a disorder. I wasn't trying to imply that I thought we SHOULDN'T view people as autism as different (instead of disordered), but that our culture probably WILL not since it has not been around (at least at the rate of today) for a long time.

Again, (to your second paragraph), I wasn't trying to say that women are now accepted because they are necessary, but because they have had TIME to finally push pass being disordered. I do think that if autism stuck around for hundreds of years in a prominent way, it would go through a similar transformation.

I don't disagree with the comment that these examples are different progressions of moving from disordered to different, I disagree with what some people were saying after this that maybe autism is the "next step" in the progression of human life. I do not see autism as the next step but a side step. I guess if I have a disagreement with the example it is because I don't see autism being able to move out of its 'disordered' since at the moment it is not yet a major section of the community. I do think that we should move to call them just different, but I don't think it will happen (in any foreseeable future) as it did for women).

I hope this has cleared up a bit what I said, but I'm not sure since I still feel like I'm rambling. Feel free to email me!