@actuallyautistic I'm actually fairly impressed with this magazine so far.
It leads with a brief history of Autism as defined by the DSM, from 1980 onward, then introduces Autism as a form of neurodivergence, and speaks to the paradigm shift behind Autism acceptance.
The next article leads with more detail about neurodivergence: "With this shift, practitioners are no longer treating neurodivergence inherently as an illness. They are instead viewing it as a group of different methods of learning and processing information, some of which become disabilities in an inaccessible and ableist society."
"Self-diagnosis is a valid form of identification and is often the only accessible diagnostic avenue for many marginalized people."
Wow, I really didn't expect to see this acknowledged in this magazine.
I feel like the word "treatment" was used on the cover intentionally to give the magazine broader appeal. The fact that the first handful of articles discuss neurodiversity and neurodivergence as a natural form of human diversity is incredibly satisfying and gives me hope. It's like this magazine was designed to educate people who don't know anything about neurodivergence.
@dave@actuallyautistic that's awesome. i wonder if this a case of editors choosing the headlines and writers having no say in how their writing gets titled?
@Susan60@dyani@dave@actuallyautistic yeah likely that... if I recall correctly, the "title writers" are a totally different breed than article writers.
<trawling wikipedia>
Yup. A Quora response says the titles are written by copy editors, and lo and behold, copywriting is done by marketing: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copywriting
I finished reading this magazine I picked up last week. Overall, I didn't learn much I didn't already know, but I'm incredibly satisfied and impressed to have found such neuroaffirming content in the mainstream.
Ultimately, it felt like it was written by allistics, but ones who had spent a ton of time in #ActuallyAutistic communities and understood, to the best of their abilities, the neurodiversity movement.
ABA got about 100-150 words of coverage in a 90 page magazine, and was referred to as "controversial" but also "the oldest and most researched" form of therapy for Autism. I'd much rather it didn't get any coverage at all - or called "totally unacceptable and unethical" - but I can also imagine that the writers might've wanted or needed to be impartial.
On the whole, the magazine reinforced the idea that Autism is not an illness, and that supporting an Autistic loved one should be about understanding and meeting their support needs and not forcing them into neurotypical norms.
It came across as a crash course in neurodivergence, and many of the ideas and beliefs I've discovered in the community here were reflected in it. And that makes me incredibly hopeful for the future of neurodivergent folks. ❤️
@adelinej@dave@actuallyautistic I think they should be using a different word. I've had a quick scan of this page and their suggestions for treatments are more things to help autistics get through the day living in this capitalist hellscape. But they do bring up ABA, and while they mention "some autism advocates" consider it harmful, they also call it the gold standard of treatments; https://www.verywellhealth.com/the-best-treatment-for-autism-4585131
Ha I was just skimming the treatments section in the magazine and found mostly the same thing. ABA got a very brief mention amongst a bunch of lifestyle and therapy options
Though ABA was not called the gold standard here... just "the oldest and most researched behavioural therapy.
@dave@adelinej@actuallyautistic
Verywell, has a web page for you to search medical matters. It's written by actual doctors, but the pages on autism are actually quite good.
I skimmed the "treatments" section, and interestingly ABA got two short paragraphs across about 5 pages of stuff ranging from various therapies, medications for cormorbid conditions (depression, OCD, anxiety), lifestyle suggestions, etc
I'd rather it didn't get a mention at all, but I guess it behooves the authors to be thorough and cover everything.
@dave@adelinej@actuallyautistic
Yes, it would be better without it, or at least with slightly more of a disclaimer. But these are medical professionals, as opposed to actual autistics.
Add comment