The Woke Contrarian

I don't think I'm one of them either. I'm one of mine.

Drop out, Joe!

A second Trump presidency, which seems likelier by the minute, will be a disaster not just for the United States, but the world generally. He is a mendacious, corrupt, vile, felonious excuse for a human being who should never have been near the Oval Office in the first place. Any Republican presidency would be dangerous for marginalised people (do you think that the chillingly fascistic Project 2025 is just for Trump?), but Trump is his own brand of awful because of his cult following. (And this time around, there will be fewer safeguards, since he no longer has to face the voters as he did in 2020, and the Supreme Court has declared him immune from prosecution if they believe that he has performed “official acts.”)

And Joe Biden is going to hand Trump the election on a silver platter if he continues to stay in the race. States like New Jersey—yes, New Fucking Jersey—are in play. The swing states all seem to be going to Trump.

If Biden stays in the race, I will never forgive him. No matter what he did during his presidency, he will sully his legacy by letting his ego get in the way of preserving democracy.

Drop out, Joe! Only then can we dump Trump for good.

More autism community frustrations

Back when I was on Twitter, I noticed autistic people who would say that anyone who identified as a highly sensitive person was actually autistic and expressing internalised ableism. You can be sensitive without being autistic. People who say they’re highly sensitive rather than autistic are just saying what’s true for them, not trying to dissociate themselves from the disability community.

When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

“Inclusion”

Offering undifferentiated instruction to students who are getting severely confused or bored to tears isn’t real “inclusion.”

Merely physically including students in a classroom isn’t real “inclusion,” especially if they get beaten up for being too different.

I support accessible and inclusive classrooms, but a lot of the talk about “inclusion” doesn’t support the real thing at all.

The unholy marriage of sexism and anti-intellectualism in the autism community (CW: rape/child sexual abuse)

I find it really fucking infuriating when highly intelligent autistic people attribute every single positive trait or ability of theirs to autism. Typically, these people are women or AFAB nonbinary, which gives it a weirdly sexist feel. (And most of them are white, too. It’s painful to see when you’re Black like me.) Admittedly, this fury is personal and is connected to old, deep trauma.

(I’ve been talking about myself a lot more lately, mostly because I’ve been processing over three decades’ worth of trauma, and it’s inextricably tied to my beliefs. I had dissociative retrograde amnesia for years, and only now am I remembering.)

My father lived in a 1950s time warp, where women were supposed to be quiet, tidy, somewhat dull, subservient, mousy, and unambitious. The idea of having a loud, intelligent, brash, creative, dreamy, transmasculine child was anathema to him.

On top of that, I was sexually assaulted by my father for being “too intelligent.” Specifically, around the time I hit the ceiling on an IQ test at the age of three (around the time I also received an autism diagnosis), I corrected my father’s spelling. I was declared the most intelligent child the examiners had tested. His ego wounded, he decided to teach me a lesson by abusing me for it—mostly because he wouldn’t get away with his earlier molestation from when when he thought I was average or slow. I developed dissociative amnesia as a result, which lifted much later. From that moment onward, the autism diagnosis was used to suppress my intellect, stifle my creativity, justify the family’s sexism, and force me into obscurity. It is to the point that I have spent a great deal of my intellectual ability on hiding it, to the point that I am sometimes overlooked.

And I come across countless autistic people—typically ones who were held up as gifted children, put through a different kind of pressure—describe themselves as being “just autistic,” “just developmentally disabled.” I know they are in pain because they were objectified for their intelligence and didn’t receive accommodations for their disabilities growing up. They didn’t deserve to be put on a pedestal when they were just kids who needed an education that worked for them, not for their starry-eyed parents. But when someone’s been literally raped for being too intelligent, when someone has been crushed and stifled with an autism diagnosis, when someone has been given useless accommodations and forced through special ed and ABA, that pain is going to be a lot louder.

When I hear this kind of talk, it is painful, as in physically painful. It reminds me of what I was forced to believe about myself—that I was “merely” an autistic savant who said intelligent-sounding things, but was really talking nonsense. That everything about me could be reduced to an entry in the DSM. I had the developmental disability identity shoved on me to destroy me. I am a disability activist, but I refuse to do that shit. I find it demeaning and degrading, and honestly a little insulting.

And to see people do this voluntarily makes me want to put myself in sackcloth and ashes as I mourn what could have been. It’s especially awful when it’s AFAB autistic people doing this (more frequently women and nonbinary people than trans men). And that is nearly always the case. The idea of anyone brought up as a girl in a patriarchal society minimising their intelligence feels as though it’s set the feminist movement back by sixty years.

Do you even fucking hear yourselves? You sound like “I’m just a dumb little woman. I’m not that intelligent, tee hee hee.” Do you realise how much this sounds like internalised sexism? Did those feminist leaders fight and bleed and sweat for nothing when they tried to prove their intelligence and competence?

While I sit here keening in agony because I had to deal with this kind of undiluted patriarchal bullshit that you were privileged enough to escape.

Don’t be an unwitting tool of the patriarchy.

 

Why the fuck do certain leftists love using “politic” as a singular?

“Anticapitalist politic.” “That’s not my politic.” “I support a politic of decolonial liberation.” Why not just call it “politics,” “view,” “viewpoint,” “stance,” or just plain “opinion”? Or just replace it with -ism, like “anticapitalism” or “anticolonialism.” “Politic” as a singular is weird jargon.

(As an aside, what is the deal with “praxis” instead of “practices” or merely “actions”? Or just dropping the word altogether, as with “politic,” and replacing it with -ism, -ation, -ity, or some other suffix? For example, “liberatory praxis” instead of “liberation.”)

Is this some subconscious desire to sound more educated or woke if they write and talk like this? I don’t think most of it is intentional, but it makes me want to gouge my eyes out every time I read it.

 

I want there to be more space for…

…leftists who are metaphysical idealists. Religious leftists. Leftists whose views come from their religion, not in spite of it. I hate that, at least for some, to be a socialist, you have to be a materialist. Nope, I tried that for a while. Materialism just doesn’t work for me as a way to understand the Universe, though I respect those who have made it work. As a grad school professor of mine said repeatedly, “Intelligent people disagree.” And I’m going to do that with the materialists.

Ambiguous activist argot

(CW: child sexual abuse, incest, and rape)

  1. Abolitionism or defunding the police. I’m no fan of prisons, policing, or psychiatric wards, but abolitionists need to be clear about what the alternatives are. People aren’t going to trust you if you think “restorative justice” is going to stop murderers, rapists, and child molesters. (I don’t think restorative justice would have stopped my paedophilic child-raping father from attacking me when I was a preschooler. There’s no restoring someone who destroys a child’s innocence.) Rapists, serial killers, and child molesters do not deserve to be in the community. Would you want Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Kaczynski, or Ted Bundy walking free to rape, murder, and torture more victims? I don’t, either. You need to present a solution for policing, forced psychiatric holds, and prisons that is free from logical holes and written in plain language. So far I haven’t seen anything of the sort, even though I’m sympathetic to their cause (with the exception of exceptionally violent criminals).
  2. Decolonial/decolonise. I’ve complained about this term before, since it’s often used to defend authoritarian groups and regimes like Hamas, the Taliban, and North Korea. But it’s ambiguous: do you mean creating systems that include peoples who were or are formerly imperial subjects? Or do you mean that you want to kill everyone who belongs to the coloniser’s ethnic group, regardless of their individual political beliefs (Hamas)? Or are you trying to establish a new form of ethnic supremacy to replace the previous one (North Korea)?
  3. Anticapitalism. What do you mean? Do you mean doing away with the market economy? Or private business? Or do you mean using barter instead of currency? For me, anticapitalism refers to socialist economic systems in which the general public (or a government representing the public) controls some or all of the means of production. Goods and services can be provided by governments, individuals, and unions, depending on the form of socialism. Socialism on its own doesn’t lead to equity (cases in point: USSR and my favourite whipping boy, North Korea).

 

Dumb Dichotomies: the settler/Indigenous construct

When you divide Americans (as well as others from similar cultures) into “settlers” and “Indigenous,” you are unintentionally excluding Black people, who were brought to this continent by force. Stolen people did not steal this land. Instead, we were stolen from our own lands. This kind of good-and-evil, dichotomous thinking doesn’t stop anti-Indigenous racism. Instead, it just drives wedges and ends up alienating Black people.

(There is so much about “anti-imperialist” and “decolonial” cant that makes me want to pitch something out of a window—and I come from a miscellany of colonised cultures. I do not feel represented by these people at aaaaaaaaall. It’s sad when you have friends and colleagues talking like this, but you don’t want to make them feel bad.)

Autism community rants, part 1 of over 9,000

Saying I’m not autistic is disingenuous, but I’m not in love with the label and use it only for convenience and politics. Here’s why, in classic bullet-point form:

  • I keep finding myself thinking, “What the hell do you mean by autistic, anyway?” This is because there are several neurotypes associated with the diagnostic criteria for autism, not one. (But I also don’t think the old structure was ideal, either, since the Asperger Syndrome construct was also heterogeneous—and connected with a Nazi collaborator.)
  • The accommodations each autistic person needs are too heterogeneous for a single label. People with intellectual disabilities have relatively straightforward accommodations: slower instructional pace, easier materials, more explanations, more patience, more adaptive supports. Autistic people, on the other hand? Make it faster, make it slower. Be more abstract, be less abstract. Be more explicit, be less explicit. Be more linear, be less linear. Use a firm and even tone, be sensitive to your tone of voice and adapt it as necessary. These accommodations are sometimes self-contradictory.
  • Attributing all my eccentricities and atypical abilities to autism reminds me too much of my early childhood, where everything, everything, that wasn’t standard issue was attributed to PDD-NOS, and therefore ready to be restricted, tamed, denied, or suppressed.
  • I hate the “high-functioning”/“low-functioning” bullshit. The same goes for “you’re not like my child.” But acknowledging that the autism label is imperfect, or that it shouldn’t be used in a totalising way, is not the same thing as that.
  • Autism isn’t always a developmental disability. It’s better described as asynchronous or differentiated development, especially among certain populations.
  • I have less in common with hyposensitive autistic people than I do with neurotypicals. I’m hypersensitive, that’s why, and NTs and hypersensitive autistic people are better at picking up tone of voice and body language than hyposensitive autistic people. (My affect is calm, though, and it’s hard to get a rise out of me despite my sensitivity.)
  • I think some people end up using the autism label to pathologise being highly intelligent, creative, or sensitive—and the saddening part is that I keep seeing creative, sensitive, and intelligent people using the diagnosis to apologise for themselves. That’s heartbreaking.

 

« Older posts