Jump to content

Talk:Autism rights movement

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeAutism rights movement was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 3, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
March 20, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
September 29, 2014Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

Just noticed that some years ago, the autistic culture article was removed and merged into societal and cultural aspects of autism, an article on neurotypical society and how it deals with the problem of autism. This was done by one editor, not obviously identifying as autistic, and without any visible attempt at discussing the merge.

Which all seems just about typical, really. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also note that this article also perpetuates the belief that both Autistic people, and parents of Autistic people, are different segments of the Autistic Community. But, as I think you and I have already discussed, to me this is like arguing that fathers of daughters are part of the community of women. Which is presumably not something that anyone seriously argues.
I trust that you already know my objections to placing the voices of non-Autistic parents on a par with self-determination of Autistic people.
I do agree that we need to engage with the conversation of who people like me are speaking for, but I believe (and I have a number of medium- to high-support Autistics in my circle) that my perspective is representing them better than the medical view, and have concrete examples of things the medical community gets harmfully wrong. Zenmasterbear (talk) 09:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! This talk page is for discussing matters concerning the autism rights movement, not other subjects (as per WP:TALK#TOPIC). An appropriate place to voice your concern is on Talk:Societal and cultural aspects of autism :) Kindly, Pinecone23 (talk) 16:14, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have a feeling Andy might have brought it up because they might think the topic of autistic culture is relevant to this article in some way. I can't say for certain, though. - Purplewowies (talk) 18:29, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I interpreted it as a continuation of a discussion between Andy Dingley and Zenmasterbear (in the NPOV-dispute thread) on people without autism making decisions on matters about people with autism instead of autistic people being the primary decision-makers on issues regarding autism. However, I am open to the idea that I may have misinterpreted Andy's comment! Which part makes you think the comment was about "autistic culture" being relevant to this article? Sincerely, Pinecone23 (talk) 12:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What counts as an "autism rights group"?

[edit]

Right now, it is unclear to me what the point of this section is. Is it a list of organizations "approved" by the autism rights movement or created by advocates active within the ARM?

For example, ASAN is mentioned several times in the article but is not listed. AFF and Autistic Women & Nonbinary Network are not on the list either. The Autism National Committee is mentioned in the section text but is not on the list, which I find odd.

What counts as "organizations in the autism rights movement"? Kindly, Pinecone23 (talk) 16:10, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That section might be better worded as "There are several organizations that campaign or advocate for autistic rights. ..." That removes the suggestion that they are "in" some specific group (the ARM). Mitch Ames (talk) 11:11, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, it makes more sense to phrase it that way. Thank you!
I am struggling to understand the section's value to the article for describing what the ARM is, the movement's principles, and what the movement aspires to achieve. It feels very vague to me (I'm not saying it is pointless! I just don't get it). It would be easier if the organizations explicitly said "we ally ourselves with the ARM" :-P
I have some follow-up questions to understand what organizations belong in "Autism rights groups":
  • Should the organizations operate by neurodiversity principles?
  • Do the organizations need to be exclusively operated by people with autism?
  • Do they need to be active, or should inactive organizations also be mentioned?
Another concern I have is, depending on the length of the list, would it be better to create a list class article instead? Kindly, Pinecone23 (talk) 18:24, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's the job of Wikipedia editors to decide which organization does or doesn't belong to the Autism Rights Movement, and to come up with "rules" to make this decision. I think we should strictly follow what can be backed by reliable sources and consider organizations that claim association with the movement and/or organizations that have been considered autism rights organizations by others. Quite possibly there are cases where these two assessments disagree, then this should be noted.--TempusTacet (talk) 20:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]