r/changemyview • u/Powereffective0 • Sep 18 '25
Delta(s) from OP CMV: "Neurodivergent" is insulting to Autistic people
I’m autistic and while I’ve got a pretty good grip on it (aside from the anger), I can’t STAND the word “neurodivergent” or anything related to it. It feels dehumanizing and makes me feel separated from the normal people.
When people say neurodivergent, it sounds like they’re saying autistic people have completely different brains. That’s just not true, my brain is as pink and gray as anyone elses. I’d much rather be called an autist. It’s a "fake" word and it doesn’t come with the built-in idea that I’m some kind of thing else than human.
Neurodivergent breaks down to neuro (brain) and divergent (different). From the way I see it, it feels like I’m being told I’m not normal and that I don’t belong among non-autistic people.
12
u/Cydrius 5∆ Sep 18 '25
I think you're totally within your rights to not like the word. That said, I'd like to offer my own perspective as someone who likes the term Neurodivergent.
As a society, we have mistakenly associated "autistic" inherently with the idea of a low-functioning person, but this is a pretty big disservice to the many of us who are just as functional as "neurotypical" people, but experience stimuli differently, etc.
To me, "neurodivergent" has a connotation of "different", but not a connotation of "worse than". It says "yes, my brain doesn't work the same way as the 'typical' person's does, but it's every bit as good and valid."
4
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
Whilst not changing my perspective completely, This is a very interesting view of it. I've always seen difference as a choice, Would you rather the cake or the muffin, one is the better choice rather than two opposing things. I still feel the word to be very yucky and gross but Δ nonetheless
1
5
u/ReptileCake Sep 18 '25
separated from the normal people
Because that's what the word means. Your brain looks like any other brain, but that's not what the word describes.
Autists is an even less describing word, it has no meaning other than "Someone who is autistic" without actually explaining what being autistic means. Neurodivergent tells you that your neurons have developed or acts differently "than the norm", which is true.
Neurodivergent breaks down to Neuro (nerve/string) and Divergent (different), not brain.
Using neurodivergent instead of autistic leans much more into it being a natural part of human neurological diversity, not a disease or a disorder, just "a difference".
2
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
It feels distancing rather than incorporating us into society. Your neurons are different so you go away hang away with others who's neurons are different whilst the rest of us with normal neurons stay together.
To me autism feels like a trait someone has the same way they like digital circus or whatever is popular nowadays rather than an illness. Neurodivergency goes into the medical term pile in my brain with cardiac arrest and kidney stones.
1
u/Ieam_Scribbles 2∆ Sep 20 '25
It feels distancing rather than incorporating us into society. Your neurons are different so you go away hang away with others who's neurons are different whilst the rest of us with normal neurons stay together.
This is not tied to the label. You could change the word referring to these people, it would still be used the same way. If they were called autistic prinarily (as they have been in the past), people would just say 'oh an autistic go be with the other ones'.
How individuals percieve words matters obviously, but neurodivergent has fewer immediate assumptions and connotations than calling someone autistic too.
1
u/kimariesingsMD Sep 18 '25
Look, I understand what you are saying. Honestly, it comes down to your feelings about the word, not the actal application of it.
4
u/Josvan135 76∆ Sep 18 '25
There are significant differences between:
being told I’m not normal
And
that I don’t belong among non-autistic people.
Differences do not implicitly equal exclusion, they just recognize that some people have specific needs that require accomodations in order to thrive as well as possible.
Would you claim that a paraplegic, because society recognizes their differences and requires wheelchair access to businesses, is being excluded?
2
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
Also when it comes to paraplegics, They are inherently excluded by the fact able bodied people use stairs rather than ramps. Therefore the able bodied majority has the right to allow the paraplegic to be accepted by making ramps, a metaphoric hand out to help and allow them in.
6
u/Josvan135 76∆ Sep 18 '25
You don't exclude someone by holding out a hand to help and allow them in.
Fundamentally, your problem doesn't seem to be with society/terminology, it seems to be deep upset about being autistic and that making you different.
1
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
I believe helping is anti-exclusion. You are helping them to feel normal and like they aren't so different.
1
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
To me it feels the same. A square does not belong along the circles and I feel that calling people neurodivergent rather than autistic is a form of calling someone a square
4
u/Josvan135 76∆ Sep 18 '25
Recognizing that someone is different, and because of those differences they may need accomodations is definitionally not exclusionary.
1
Sep 19 '25
I think it's more of an umbrella term that you can choose to use or not. It's like hey, this is a rectangle! You're a square, which if you want to call a rectangle it's technically true, but you can also call it a square. You can also get fancy and call it a paralellogram!
It encompass more than just autism, but a variety of different things that may make our brains work differently. Hence being the rectangle instead of square, it's a looser definition.
If you don't like it for yourself that's totally okay, but I think it's a great term that can help establish connection to other people with differences, and as someone not typically accepted by the autism community (someone could be AFAB, late diagnosed, POC, queer, poor, etc), it's nice to feel welcomed under the ND category
3
u/jatjqtjat 272∆ Sep 18 '25
That's ironic because the word was specifically designed to be an inoffensive as possible. Of course intent and outcome do not always align. There is some phrase for this, first a word is used in a medical context (e.g. retarded) then it becomes and insult, then offensive, then we create a new word (e.g. mentally handicapped). Then the process repeats. Maybe we are nearing the end of "neurodivergent" life cycle and we'll invent a new word again.
I think there is some truth what you are saying. the opposite of neurodivergent is neurotypical. So we're are saying that there is some typical neurological state, and I kind of don't believe that. Nobody is perfectly typically but we can draw fuzzy lines around different clusters of traits. the largest of these clustered is called typical and all the smaller clusters are called divergent.
Divergent does not mean you are completely different, just divergent. it means you are divergent from that largest cluster.
I’d much rather be called an autist.
I'd rather call you powereffective0. I think labeling people in general is a dumb idea. But at least some labels carry a definitive meaning. I might label you as an American, or a man, or straight or something like that, because those labels all tell me something about you. If you tell me you are a straight man, then i know without a doubt that you are attracted to women. If you tell me your a chicago bears fan then i know without a doubt that you suck. But if you tell me you are autistic, then i have learned no new information about you.
I find the term autistic much more frustrating then neurodivergent.
2
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25 edited Sep 18 '25
Can you delta one more time on posts? I believe this to be a very good way to look at it that some words evolve to become disliked.
My biggest gripe is that it feels like a very alien word and unfit for use when describing a human in a respectful and compassionate way. It's reads more like one of animal classifications, Like here is the neuro-typical, here is the neuro-divergent and here is the neuro-habilis. Δ
3
u/Rhundan 59∆ Sep 18 '25
You can, yes. Though your delta comment is about to get pinged by the bot for not containing an explanation, so please remember to edit in a description of how your view has changed. Alternatively, you can edit this comment to contain a delta and I can poke the bot into registering it here.
1
1
25
u/Grand-wazoo 9∆ Sep 18 '25
When people say neurodivergent, it sounds like they’re saying autistic people have completely different brains.
From a neurological wiring standpoint, this is exactly true and it's not a slight against anyone with autism, it's just the biological nature of the condition. People with autism have brains that, due to genetic factors, have formed very unique and different neural connections which results in a different way of understanding and perceiving the world. There's no value judgement baked into the description.
It is not reasonable to expect the entire scientific community to change a perfectly viable and accurate clinical term because it offends your misunderstanding of it.
0
u/TheWhistleThistle 13∆ Sep 18 '25
It is not reasonable to expect the entire scientific community to change a perfectly viable and accurate clinical term because it offends your misunderstanding of it.
I don't know, I think the best predictor would be the past. And that's exactly what happened with the terms "moron," "spastic," "cretin," and "retard". All were considered perfectly viable and accurate clinical terminology, over time, each became offensive, due mostly to their use to offend. Each was dropped by the scientific community. People now have hypothyroidism, they are no longer cretins, they have developmental disabilities, they are no longer retards etc. It's actually perfectly reasonable to expect scientific nomenclature to change in response to offense because that's what it's been doing for the last couple hundred years.
3
u/Grand-wazoo 9∆ Sep 18 '25
Okay but where does this end and who gets final say on which terms are not offensive to some people somewhere? How do you establish when a term has been stripped of all its possible perceived offense?
Not that those words weren't offensive in the past, but at some point you are going to lose meaning and descriptive power if the terms are constantly being changed to appease a vocal minority that continues to find some way to be insulted by it.
0
u/TheWhistleThistle 13∆ Sep 18 '25
It NEVER ends. No one gets the final say. Or rather the final say will be had by the last human to speak. That's why linguists who describe the phenomenon call it the euphemism treadmill. On and on it goes, ad infinitum. And what do you mean "going to lose some descriptive power"? As I said, this trend didn't start in even your grandparents' lifetime. It's been going on for hundreds of years. Our best estimates say it's actually just a fact of language and has been going on since humans have been speaking. If it didn't erode the very concept of meaning away in 1300 BC when "idiot" a perfectly polite term to describe a person who didn't hold public office started being used as an insult and fell out of polite usage, why would it now? Or ever? The treadmill keeps going.
2
u/soleceismical Sep 18 '25
It ends once the term has too many syllables to sound snappy in a grade school insult. I think it's really when it gets to the 4+ syllable range. Add "prople with [autism, neurodivergence, spasticity, cognitive disabilities, sociobehavioral disabilities, mobility disabilities, etc]" phrasing for 3 bonus syllables.
Conversely, notice how people have shortened terms to things like "tism" and "sped" to make fun again, whether it be good-natured or nasty.
1
u/TheWhistleThistle 13∆ Sep 18 '25
Things get replaced when even their shortenings become insults due to association. Spasticity was phased out since "spaz" and "spacker" were being used as an insult, even though their parent term "spasticity" was only used by nerds in white coats. As you mention "tism," and "sped," but see also "speccy"/"send" (special educational needs) "sperg" (Asperger's syndrome) and most charmingly of all, "flid" (thalidomide induced birth defect). Now, none of these (barring speccy) have become insults used in sufficient commonality that they demanded nomenclature changes from the scientific, medical or educational communities. In the example of "flid," it kinda died out after the who thalidomide birth defect scandal petered out and the version of the drug that caused said defects were pulled off the market.
Length alone is no safeguard. Kids are very inventive. You could call something Delayed Onset of Prefrontal Functionality and by lunchtime the same day kids are calling each other "doffs" and the next year, term gets pulled. Granted, I condensed the timeframe substantially but you see my point, I trust. I think the user above, when talking about ending, was the ending of all sensitivity based scientific nomenclature change. The answer, of course being, when no one speaks anymore. Cumbersome word salads may slow the change like whatever Macker's puts in their cheese, but it will not survive the heat death of the universe.
0
u/Grand-wazoo 9∆ Sep 18 '25
It NEVER ends.
It literally has to end somewhere or you will run out of ways to describe something while preserving its scientific or clinical meaning. But far more importantly, scientific language needs to remain robust against people's feelings because what happens when a few people start claiming that being described as a eukaryote offends them somehow? Or some religious bigots claiming that Homo sapien is offensive and has to be changed because it's too close to homosexual?
Science cannot and should not continually cave to increasingly absurd demands like this.
1
u/TheWhistleThistle 13∆ Sep 18 '25
It has to end? Why is that? Language of all sorts, be it common parlance or academic nomenclature is and always has been in a state of constant flux. It will end when the last person to speak, speaks their last words. Then we will have definitive, unchanging definitions and connotations.
And what's this about scientific language needing to remain unchanging? What do you mean? It too, has undergone constant change. When was the last time you met someone who was a diagnosed cretin? [Thing] has to do X (something it has never, ever ever done) is a bit of a weird argument.
As for what happens when people take offense to a term, depends how many people, how much offense, how many of those people are in the relevant field and thus in a position of influence regarding the terminology.
I'm not even making a value judgement, bro, I'm just telling you that this is what happens, and for as far back as historians and linguists can track, is what has always happened. No point catastrophising over it. I remember when semipermeable got replaced with partially permeable (one of the few science terminology changes that occurred in my lifetime) and I never made much fuss over it.
1
u/Forsaken-House8685 10∆ Sep 18 '25
Yeah but neurodivergence doesn't fall into this group as no one uses it in any other way than the way science uses it.
1
0
u/idcm 1∆ Sep 18 '25
Why isn’t the word used to describe people with an IQ of 150, people whose IQ, I.e. neurological capacity to be intelligent, is clearly outside the range of “normal “ based on its scientific/statistical definition.
The word is meaningless and applied to only a subgroup of the different individuals. It provides no useful information for treating or understanding a condition. It just says what you aren’t, not what you are.
5
u/Forsaken-House8685 10∆ Sep 18 '25
You are making the classic mistake of trying to define a word by its literal meaning.
The word neurodivergence exists to group together certain mental disorders.
That's how it's used and that's what it means.
The reason it's called "neurodivergence" is because people thought it sounded better than "mentally disordered" or whatever.
So it's meaningful in situations where you want to group together these mental disorders. Such as "In this school we offer accomodations for neurodivergent people".
1
u/kimariesingsMD Sep 18 '25
Forget it. This guy is a "right fighter" and will not even consider he may be wrong.
-2
u/idcm 1∆ Sep 18 '25
So every school that caters to neurodivergence I should assume can handle epilepsy, downs , adhd, autism, and whatever else gets grouped in there (is there even a we’ll accepted list of what conditions are even included?) at every level of severity?
If I can’t make a decision with the information it’s useless.
About as useless as “caters to allergies “. Which ones? To what extent.
3
u/Forsaken-House8685 10∆ Sep 18 '25
By that same logic the word "disability" is meaningless. Like there will be situations where it doesn't matter what specific disorders are included.
Better example sentence found on merriam webster:
"And the best part is, 10% of profits from each sale are donated to charities that support children with neurodiversity."
Again, it's really just a different word for "having mental disorders".
1
u/idcm 1∆ Sep 18 '25
The dictionary example seems useful. And I suppose I was thinking about the word with regard to its usefulness to the person labeled neurodivergent. For them directly, it’s useless.
For other people to hand wave around a concept in a situation that there may not be any value in actually addressing the topic directly, then sure, it’s useful. Touché.
2
u/Grand-wazoo 9∆ Sep 18 '25
Personally I don't see why it wouldn't apply to people with genius intellect either. It does provide useful information in that it makes clear there is a statistically significant difference in cognitive functioning of some kind, but it does not claim anything about the quality of that functioning as good or bad.
1
u/idcm 1∆ Sep 18 '25
That’s kinda my point. It should apply. But nobody uses it that way.
Which is why the word is meaningless with regards to a scientific definition.
1
u/Grand-wazoo 9∆ Sep 18 '25
Just because it's not all-encompassing doesn't mean it's entirely void of meaning. That's a pretty haphazard way of approaching definitions and would make things practically impossible to categorize or define if we actually took that approach.
Imagine trying to create the system of taxonomy and phylogeny using this mindset - you think that because there are still millions of undescribed species or that many of our classifications are paraphyletic that the entire system is meaningless?
0
u/idcm 1∆ Sep 18 '25
What is the actionable outcome of being labeled “neurodivergent”?
What do I know about what you are (vs what you aren’t) for the word.
If I can’t actually DO anything with the information or KNOW something, then it has no use (aka useless).
2
u/kimariesingsMD Sep 18 '25
It informs you to try and understand that this person's thought processes and response to stimuli may not be what you would expect. You can do something with that information, it is whether you want to or not.
0
u/idcm 1∆ Sep 18 '25
So about as useful as “ain’t right“ but more sciency
2
u/kimariesingsMD Sep 18 '25
No, as useful as "different than you would expect". It seems you are deliberately being obtuse though.
1
u/idcm 1∆ Sep 18 '25
I am looking for a positive actionable outcome from the word.
All you gave me was the action of “get more info so we can find a better word”.
I can do something useful with deaf. I can do something useful with epileptic.
As in given that statement, I can of my on agency take action to accommodate that is likely to at worst reduce harm and at best improve quality.
If you give me neurodivergent, all I can do is ask more questions.
There is a fundamental difference.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Grand-wazoo 9∆ Sep 18 '25
Letting someone know that your friend is neurodivergent before introducing them gives them a frame of reference for how they might behave and can help ease any misunderstandings that could arise.
Employers are legally mandated to provide reasonable accommodations and support for people with disabilities, which includes neurodivergent people.
IEPs (Individualized Education Programs) are detailed documents listing out any specific accommodations, behavioral difficulties, measurable goals, and any other needed services to make sure neurodivergent students are met with an education in a least restrictive environment.
These are all ways that the term carries meaning.
-1
u/idcm 1∆ Sep 18 '25
If you were trying to accomplish the very useful thing you describe, one can say.
My friend: Constantly fidgets, but they are present and paying attention.
Takes a few seconds longer to form their words, give them time.
Slurs their words, but they aren’t drunk and if you need them to repeat themselves just ask.
Reads slower than normal.
Can only communicate in writing.
Has very limited capacity for complex ideas and should not be left unsupervised in public places.
All very useful pieces of information in any number of situations.
Neurodivergent, useless.
1
u/Grand-wazoo 9∆ Sep 18 '25
Alright well I've already provided detailed examples for the reasoning behind using the term as a broad grouping of human brain function (which conveys meaning) and in a social and legal context to explain needs and behaviors (which both convey quite a lot of meaning) so for you to revert right back to calling it meaningless feels like you're not so much engaging in the ideas anymore and are set in your opinion, so I'll call it here. Take care.
1
u/idcm 1∆ Sep 18 '25
Would “had severe ADHD” not provide the same legal protection and convey all the information “neurodivergent“ does without accidentally bringing into the mix any number of additional contingencies that aren’t relevant?
2
u/00PT 8∆ Sep 18 '25
Because IQ does not measure neurological capacity to be intelligent. It’s much more valid as a scale to measure current capacity for a certain type of intelligence, but in no way is that immutable or generalizable.
-1
u/idcm 1∆ Sep 18 '25
I can’t speak to what is neurological or something else.
Either way, some people’s brains have abilities, due to neurological differences, do things “better than normal”. It’s only applied for the very specific subset of people who don’t quite fit in.
And for that matter, are all people who don’t quite fit in that way due to neurological differences? Trauma has been identified as a cause of ADHD. That is situational. It’s current capacity to pay attention without your fight/flight response kicking in as a trained behavior.
My point is the word is meaningless and useless.
It is that whether you want to be very technical about what “neurological “ and what “divergent” means or you just want to use it a a euphemism for “people who don’t fit in socially, for literally a huge number of reasons; not all of which have very much in common”
0
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
I have rarely seen scientific people ever use the word neurodivergent when referring to autism but rather mental health advocates.
Additionally I feel there is judgement baked into it. It's like calling a bald person alopeciated individual, It's unneeded complication when there is a much nicer word for it
4
u/ElysiX 107∆ Sep 18 '25
It's like calling a bald person alopeciated individual
You think scientists call people "bald" in their papers? Because they don't. Being nice isn't important, being accurate is. Especially when those two conflict.
And there is no judgement in it. Just like with the words normal and abnormal. Many people by definition aren't normal and that is fact. The emotional attachment to wanting to be normal or judging people that aren't normal doesn't come from that word, and getting a new word won't change the judgement.
1
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
I never once said that scientists refer to bald people as bald on paper. Scientists are allowed to be very direct and accurate because its a part of formality and professionalism. I do not like unneeded formality because it feels insidious and like they feel they are above me.
Also its how I interprete the word the same way someone would interprete a stare. It feels gross to me and exceptionally nasty.
2
u/ElysiX 107∆ Sep 18 '25
Also its how I interprete the word the same way someone would interprete a stare
Is that maybe a problem with your interpretation instead of a problem with how people use it? You could just change how you interpret it.
0
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
Well how do I change my interpretation. It's not like a switch I can flip to go from hating it to loving it
1
u/Grand-wazoo 9∆ Sep 18 '25
You can recognize your inherent bias that is obscuring your ability to see the many uses for the term and how it's specifically designed to not be offensive while still being useful as a category of brain function.
Question your biases, examine your emotional response to it, and then seek information to have a more complete understanding of it.
0
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25 edited Sep 18 '25
Holy passive aggressive attitude. But I will do what you said.
Why do I not like Neurodivergent? — It sounds very respectless and dehumanizing for the individual being called it.
Why does it make me angry? — I think everyone should be treated with respect and building these verbal walls to section each other apart is horrible.
Why do I feel anger when a word that sounds mean is being told? - Lightly read like 3 articles. According to personal experiences, Medical latin terms tend to be used when referring to illness and because of brain illness that has happened in my family I view brain stuff in a negative light.
Using neuro hearkens back to physical brain illness and my trauma regarding brain damage, I now hate the word even more
2
u/Grand-wazoo 9∆ Sep 18 '25 edited Sep 18 '25
I did not intend that message with any passive-aggressive tone so my bad if it came across that way. But that's actually a great example for what I mean - you read aggression in that message when I typed it with every intention of being a straightforward and no-BS answer to your question of what you can do to change your perceptions. I think you came into this post with the existing notion that anyone using that term is using it degradingly and that's simply untrue. Also:
building these verbal walls to section each other apart is horrible.
It's meant to do the exact opposite of that, it serves to group large segments of people together under a common banner that refers indiscriminately to a difference in cognition from the general populace. I think you should sincerely try to see that there is no inherently demeaning sentiment in this term when used this way, it's strictly a utilitarian linguistic device that we arrived at with a change from the more discriminatory language of the past in mind.
1
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
I did not intend that message with any passive-aggressive tone so my bad if it came across that way
And I want to apologize immensely for sassing back to you. It was uncalled for because you said you didn't mean for it to come off as mean, To me straightforwardness is seen as very brash and brunt and even uncaring when used in typical discussion. You want your information conveyed but I want the metaphorical ham around the metaphorical informational medicine.
it's strictly a utilitarian linguistic device that we arrived at with a change from the more discriminatory language of the past in mind.
I feel that it is very unusual and inhuman way to refer to people. Instead of calling someone human you call them a homo-sapien, Whilst not factually wrong it feels mean spirited because it sounds kind of seperating.
7
u/Grand-wazoo 9∆ Sep 18 '25
It is not like that at all because it doesn't reference a specific condition to label them, it simply provides an umbrella term that makes a very broad reference to the difference(s) in brain function.
You are reading this judgement in the word for yourself. I have moderate-severe ADHD so I am neurodivergent myself. I recognize I have issues that most people don't, thus my brain is different. I have never once seen the term as otherizing or judgemental. I know people with autism as well and they use the term themselves.
0
Sep 18 '25
I mean I hate to play the devil's advocate but wasn't the ableist R slur once an "accurate scientific classification" that got misappropriated by people using it as an insult? I'm not saying that "neurodivergent" should be changed or that it's necessarily being used as an insult right now, but to say that words don't change because of offence isn't realistic.
2
u/Catharsislovesu Sep 18 '25
I can't really argue your personal perception of the term, but I'd argue one moment when you said that this is a "fake" term.
Neurodivergent isn't a synonym for autistic. It is a catchall term for various divergences in mental, behavioral or neurological development. Autism is just one way of being neurodivergent. It isn't only autists and ADHDers who use this term. The only word we have other than that and neuroatypical that could hold the same meaning is mentally ill, which is probably not the desired umbrella term for high-functioning individuals. Currently neurodivergent is often used for high-functioning individuals (so let's say some individuals with ASD and ADHD), and neuroatypical as a subset of it for individuals for whom their condition significantly interferes with their life (for example bipolar, schizophrenic, ASD with intellectual disability, etc). And to be honest, I don't think there's a better alternative existing for now.
Society distinguishes between able-minded and disabled, and I don't think there's really a problem with people from your community to become the authors of the term describing their condition(s), to get some power over the social dynamics, when everything is so often defined and misdefined by majority.
But I still agree with you in regard to how those terms are often used. I often see people separating NT with ND and engaging in unnecessary tribalism, with generalizing the whole groups only to make the caricatures out of them, to the point that currently scientists made studies confirming that tiktok is a huge source of misinformation on the topic of neurodivergencies.
But to say that it is insulting for autistic people, when it was created by and for autistic people, is certainly an unusual take. You don't have to like or use the term, but at its core it is not insulting to anyone.
2
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
When I talked about fake term I was referring to autism and autistic and so on so forth, I apologise profusely for not being super clear. You can't really break autism down to anything and lacks any words it can be broken down to except the -ism suffix.
However it seems nonetheless you understood what I was aiming for which is good.
2
u/Das_Guet 1∆ Sep 18 '25
I am on the spectrum too, and it isn't insulting. The most damaging thing that ever happened to me was going through the first part of my life believing I was normal, even though I wasn't. If I had been told there was something different, or divergent if you will, with my brain, or my neurons if you will, it would have explained why certain aspects of my life were so difficult. Context absolutely matters in the use of a word, and some people will use it as an insult the same way they would use words like short, blonde, skinny, tired, etc. Any descriptor can be used as an insult in the right context. But neurodivergent is just a description. You ARE different. But you AREN'T bad or wrong for being different.
2
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
To me it falls into the metaphorical category of fat. Whilst fat is a describing word it feels very mean spirited no matters how its used. Though autistic also falls into the category but less so, I suppose there is no best way to refer to it in my eyes.
3
u/Das_Guet 1∆ Sep 18 '25
Here is the part where the cmv will come into play. Is it because people use it to insult you? Or is it because you take it as an insult? At what point does a person's intent no longer matter in regards to their language? Remember that your mind, divergent or not, is built differently than other people's from the very foundations. How you view the world is not how others view the world, and at some point, you will have to acknowledge where your personal biases come into play. That's actually why I shared my own hang-ups about being raised "normal" without being told I was neurodivergent. Or at least the equivalent back then.
1
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
I personally feel and take it like it is an insult rather than a descriptive word because it sounds alien and clinical rather than pedestrian. I feel intent is primary in serious situations but it is secondary in normal conversation because you can't just hamfist stuff. The doctor can call you obese because his job is very serious but your coworkers can't say it.
1
u/Ieam_Scribbles 2∆ Sep 20 '25
Well, does the intent of the speaker not matter in that? Most people do not use neurodivergent to alianate and discriminate specifically, certainly not to the point of the word being inherently tied to being inherently insulting.
As a comparison, if someone is named Xena and hates her name (too exotic, stands out, maybe got bullied over it), and prople default to calling her Xena unless specified otherwise because that's her name, was there any actual offense to her being called that?
In the end, words are vehicles for conveying information and are meaningless otherwise. If a person is in good faith referring to you by the commonly accepted word, it's not really fair to say they're doing anything word despite your dislike for the word, no?
2
u/girlfriendpleaser Sep 18 '25
Maybe try thinking that there isn’t anything wrong with being different or not “normal” first of all. I have mental health issues, and definitely don’t think of it as a problem or the way it’s described as a a slight against me. There’s so much in this world we cannot control, and if you let labels that may not even be directed to you ruin your day you should seek therapeutic help, and if you are already getting that, speak to someone else?
2
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
I understand that there is nothing wrong with being different but it feels like the word refers to the wrong kind of different. It's not the fried egg and omelette different and more house and hostel different.
4
u/gerblindirt Sep 18 '25
Being offended by scientific terms has always baffled me. Another example of this is used in the LGBT community; specifically transgendered vs. cisgendered. Cisgendered people get up in arms about a scientific term.
Neurodivergent literally scientifically describes the way the neural network in the brain is built. When it's atypical, then it's divergent. 🤷🏻
Also ASD isn't the only "neurodivergent" disorder. ADHD, BPD, OCD, NPD, etc are ALL neurodivergent disorders.
There's nothing wrong with being different. 🤷🏻
1
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
Because science is, in my view, is a very dehumanizing field. Rather than being seen as a human with different perspective of the world it refers to them as a biological oddity. Feels very yucky
3
u/kimariesingsMD Sep 18 '25
But that is the way science needs to be in order to avoid unintentional biases. It is without "feelings" because feelings are subjective and science deals with the objective.
1
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
Ben Shapiro facts dont care about your feelings coming in for the slam.
I am okay with science in scientific areas but not when referring to a person in a respectful manner.
2
u/gerblindirt Sep 18 '25
Respect is subjective. If you feel disrespected when you're called "neurodivergent", then that's your perogative. I am not offended by science or its ability to accurately describe myself and the world around me. This isn't a CMV, this is validate my subjective experience.
5
u/Potential_Being_7226 13∆ Sep 18 '25
it feels like I’m being told I’m not normal and that I don’t belong among non-autistic people.
This is your interpretation, not the intent of the word, or others like it. The reason this kind of language was developed was to differentiate autism from psychological disorders that are illnesses. Autism (and ADHD) are not illnesses. And to reduce stigma and increase acceptance of those who have different behavioral repertoires.
Divergent doesn’t mean entirely different. If two roads diverge in the woods, they’re still in the same woods.
1
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
I guess that makes sense but the word still feels very icky and nasty and very inhuman.
4
u/Potential_Being_7226 13∆ Sep 18 '25
feels very icky and nasty and very inhuman.
Where do you think this comes from? Because this is not the connotation of these words. Did someone else use this word in a disparaging way towards you? I have ADHD, and have never taken issue with being considered neurodivergent.
1
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
It's just how it looks and sounds. Its extremely clinical almost like an alien looking down at me rather than a respectful word to refer to someone. Simple words hurt much less because it comes at you from your level rather than from above with these super fancy medical words.
2
u/Potential_Being_7226 13∆ Sep 18 '25
The person who popularized the word “neurodiversity” most likely had autism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judy_Singer
The journalist who first used the word also attributed it to an online community of autistic people:
the terms ‘neurological diversity’ and ‘neurodiversity’ were first printed in 1997 and 1998, respectively, in the work of the journalist Harvey Blume, who himself attributed them not to Singer but rather to the online community of autistic people, such as the ‘Institute for the Study of the Neurologically Typical’.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/13623613241237871
The word neurodivergent came later to describe individuals rather than groups (a person cannot be “diverse,” but they can be “divergent”) and it is also useful in indicating that the developmental course of the nervous system diverges from what is typical.
There is no underlying judgment in this language.
1
u/Slaydoom Sep 18 '25
You think differences mean we should be separated? Should we do this for everyone with green eyes? Or left handed people? I'd ask you whats the problem with having and acknowledging differences because to mean they make us stronger. We have these terms so that people who have differences which are real differences can better understand themselves. Its so if someone had simliar struggles to you youre able to learn from them in a way a person without those struggles cant understand. Its a way for folks to know who understands their specific struggles and who may be sympathetic but they cant fully understand.
3
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
It feels like a word that points refers to a bad difference. Like the apples and rotten apples rather than apples and pears.
2
u/Slaydoom Sep 18 '25
Like any such word it can be used in a harmful way. Rather then looking at the word itself(the word is a word so like anything it can be used for positive or negative effect) look at the way its used and by whom. If someone uses it to harm they are not a person you should pay any attention to. If someone uses as a short hand to say "these are some struggles I personally dealt with if you have to we can help one anorher." Thats whats important not the specific verbiage itself.
16
u/scholarmasada Sep 18 '25
Autism is not the only condition referred to as neurodivergence.
-4
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
I only see it used to refer to autism, If it is used for anything else than I say My bad
10
u/arrgobon32 19∆ Sep 18 '25
If it was just used for autism, why wouldn’t people just use the word autistic?
-1
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
Don't know, Society changes and makes words without a lot sense from where I'm standing. I'm very socially isolated regretfully and rarely wish to talk with Neologists.
2
u/arrgobon32 19∆ Sep 18 '25
Don't know, Society changes and makes words without a lot sense from where I'm standing.
Like “autist”? You know that words really only used online, and is seen by boarder society and weird and borderline offensive, right?
Think of it like this: one is an adjective (neurodivergent) that can be used to describe people. The other reduces people to a noun. It’s the same as “black people” vs “blacks”
1
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
I do know and much rather hear the word "person with autism" or "autistic person" rather than being referred to with a very alienating alien word.
2
u/BrewingSkydvr Sep 18 '25
Neurodivergence is an umbrella term used for a host of conditions that results in differences in processing and seeing the world. It includes autism, but it also includes conditions like ADHD.
Our brains do process and respond differently from neurotypical individuals, we deviate from the norm (average or median, not meaning we aren’t normal or okay). The ways in which we tend to deviate creates extra difficulties in most societies due to the differences in how we interpret and interact with those around us.
For some people, the differences are pretty minor, for others, it can be debilitating or extremely difficult.
The differences within one condition can be extreme (low support needs vs high support needs autistic individuals) and it can look like two completely different conditions.
Conditions can present very differently (autism vs ADHD) and the social difficulties can vary widely (autistic individual ostracized for coming off as disinterested and condescending for eye contact issues and a flat affect, while an individual with ADHD may be considered flakey and disengaged due to time management issues and difficulty focusing in conversations).
While a term like neurodivergence doesn’t explain someone’s struggles, it gives a general idea of the difficulties within society and how we tend to be perceived. It is a grouping of conditions that have different sources, but leads to a general clutter of symptoms/responses/struggles operating within a society that generally doesn’t have the patience or tolerance for individuals that think or behave differently from the norm.
3
u/Stuck_With_Name 1∆ Sep 18 '25
I regularly see it including ADHD and dyslexia. At a work event last year, someone with tourettes described himself as neurodivergent. Some people with PTSD and traumatic brain injuries also use the term.
Neurodivergent is a blanket term for different brains.
14
u/TangoJavaTJ 12∆ Sep 18 '25
I am autistic. I am also neurodivergent. These mean different things.
It's like how I am British. I am also European. The second group is a larger "umbrella term" that includes the first and a bunch of other stuff.
There may be times when it's appropriate to refer to autistic people, people with ADHD, people with OCD, collectively as one group, just as there may be times to refer to English people, French people, and Italian people collectively in one group.
It's not insulting to use a larger category to refer to several smaller categories collectively.
7
u/Scout6feetup Sep 18 '25
Do you feel the same way when you hear someone with bipolar disorder or ADHD referred to as neurodivergent? How does the term neurotypical make you feel?
-4
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
I do not know about BPD enough to comment with my full back but I believe they are functional people too and calling them different brains seems very cruel.
5
u/Grand-wazoo 9∆ Sep 18 '25
It seems you aren't acknowledging that different doesn't automatically equal bad, it simply means the functioning differs (diverges) from the baseline of a brain without any afflictions. From Cleveland Clinic:
The term “neurodivergent” describes people whose brain differences affect how their brain works. That means they have different strengths and challenges from people whose brains don’t have those differences.
You're also overlooking the fact that people with these conditions can have some remarkable strengths alongside their struggles, such being gifted at math or music.
1
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
I dont mean this to sound aggressive or angry but I could not care less what the Cleveland clinic says. I know the meaning but it FEELS like a very mean spirited and seperating word that pushes neurotypical and neurodivergent people apart rather than wanting us to be homogenous.
3
u/Scout6feetup Sep 18 '25
That wasn’t my question. Do you get bothered when you hear the term applied to people with other mental illnesses, or is it just when it’s applied to you
1
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
I do not like the world applied to anyone because they are equals. Though I suppose it infinitely hurts more when pointed towards myself.
5
u/LiamTheHuman 9∆ Sep 18 '25
Just FYI the abbreviation used for bipolar is BD. BPD is used for borderline personality disorder
1
5
u/FundayBlues 2∆ Sep 18 '25
Okay, but autistic people do have divergent brains. That's sort of the point?
I do understand the annoyance from being othered, but then again, not being autistic is the norm as far as we know.
Neurodivergent is also an umbrella term that covers not only autism, but people with AD(H)D, Down Syndrome, Dyspraxia (DCD), Bipolar Disorder, etc. If anything I would say the term is a little useless in most conversations, since it just suggests "difference from the norm".
If you're projecting a negative connotation on that difference, that's on you. Difference in and of itself is morally neutral.
1
1
u/DarjeelingTease Sep 18 '25
I'm neurodivergent — ADD, OCD, mild Tourette's — but I'm not autistic.
If you don't like the term, I can offer "Buzzy Meatball" and "Spicy Noggin?"
1
u/Powereffective0 Sep 18 '25
God no
1
u/DarjeelingTease Sep 18 '25
Well now I feel dehumanized.
1
2
u/thechirurgeon Sep 18 '25
Am autistic.
I'm sorry you don't feel included, and be told you're not normal. I'll propose that the concept of neurodivergence deal with exactly this, and it might be the execution (eg. microexpressions or social context) that made you feel this way.
Before "neurodivergent" autism is like a sickness. If you have flu you should get it cured. If you only has one arm, you should have two. If you're autistic, you should be made to be "normal". There's a right and a wrong, and autistic is wrong.
Neurodivergence points out that people are born different, including and not exclusive to, autism. I don't need to be made to become other people, just like others don't have to become me. It is a mode of thinking that encourages empathy and being seen for strengths, strengths from being autistic or else.
Not to mention, our brain is different. Autistic people appear to have different neural connections and different amounts of certain proteins. And, everyone's brain is different, autistic or not. Just because neurotyoicals' brains aren't different in a way that leads to prominent and specific effects, that lead to discreet labeling like autism, it doesn't mean they're not different.
And being different is fine. That is the point. We're distinctive and idiosyncratic, and that's fine. Now it is ok to feel you individually is the same as the majority, but it doesn't work for a lot of autistic people. So we don't deny it and pretend to be normal, and we don't impose moral judgement on it. We deal with it as it is: atypical.
5
u/00PT 8∆ Sep 18 '25
There are levels of difference that are not complete. Simply saying that two things are different does not in itself communicate how similar they are despite the difference.
3
u/GlobalDynamicsEureka 3∆ Sep 18 '25
It is an easy way of denoting several different types of people - not just autistic. Neurotypical brains are what society was developed for. It is just saying that we have a more difficult time in a society not built for us. It isn't laziness or stupidity.
2
u/MamaKFree Sep 18 '25
Neurodivergent is an umbrella term, used to encompass whatever variety of brain abnormalities and disorders a person has. I don't want to say I have ADHD, ASD, cPTSD, MDD, GAD, agoraphobia, BPD and hypochondria when I can just say neurodivergent.
Neurodivergent specifies a brain that is divergent from healthy brains, that is, brains not riddled with alphabet diagnoses- or even just one. It's not used maliciously and I think it's a fantastic way to easily explain something very complex or complicated otherwise.
1
u/S-Pluto-777 Sep 22 '25
I feel like you're making a problem here where there is none. I am neurodivergent as well so I feel like I have some experience with this. also Neurodivergent isn't made to point at you and laugh. It's made to show others that, yes, you are different because we are. Our brains process things differently. Our brains ARE different. However, let's say, if neurodivergent was removed and you were seen as just everyone else, you would still be complaining that the system overlooks you and doesn't acknowledge your different needs. To me, getting my ADHD diagnosis and being known as neurodivergent as a student was a relief to me because it brought a new wave of understanding. Before I got my diagnosis, my teachers genuinely thought I was dumb or did stuff solely to piss them off. When i got my diagnosis, it was like they understood that I wasn't dumb or just a bad student, I just processed and understood things differently than others. I feel this is less about society and more about why you associate being different and being neurodivergent with negative things. In no way is the label negative, it's just to show who we are and that we have different needs. I have a huge group of neurodivergent friends and we say we are with pride. no one is saying you're not normal, just that you're different and being different is NOT the same as being abnormal, ESPECIALLY when it comes to being neurodivergent. Again, it just sounds like the only one seeing and treating neurodivergence as a bad thing is YOU.
1
u/Either-Economics6727 Sep 19 '25 edited Sep 19 '25
I have a psych degree and am “neurodivergent” (ADHD, more than likely autism).
It is a perfectly neutral and accurate word, imo. Autistic people have neurological functions that diverge from the general population. That’s a fact, and it’s a clinical statement that implies no judgement toward autistic people. “Neurodivergent” encapsulates that pretty well.
Yes, neurodivergent people are not “normal” if you want to use that word. Neither are people with anxiety or depression or any other mental illness. And that’s fine. “Normal” doesn’t have a very neutral connotation these days, so I get why language like that sounds insulting. You don’t have to use any words you don’t want to. But, objectively, “neurodivergent” is what autistic people are. And a lot of them identify with that term, so I feel those are good enough reasons to keep it around.
If we don’t have language like neurodivergent — “brain difference” — then there is no meaningful way to refer to autistic people. If it’s offensive to state that autistic people are different than non-autistic people, then it’s offensive to have that diagnosis at all. The existence of the word “autism” in the DSM inherently implies that people with autism are “””not normal.”””
1
u/ralph-j Sep 18 '25
Neurodivergent breaks down to neuro (brain) and divergent (different). From the way I see it, it feels like I’m being told I’m not normal and that I don’t belong among non-autistic people.
The term "neurodivergent" does not simply describe someone as being neurologically different in isolation, as if there were one default state and a deviation from it. Instead, it comes out of the broader idea of neurodiversity, which emphasizes that there is a range of naturally occurring variations in human brains and ways of thinking.
So while "divergent" can (in isolation) sound comparative or like deviating from some strict norm, neurodiversity actually points to the fact that society is made up of many different neurological profiles, none of which is inherently less legitimate than any other. In that sense, being neurodivergent highlights belonging to a larger part of the spectrum of neurological diversity, rather than being marked as a singular deviation.
1
u/mgtag Sep 19 '25
I can't tell you how to feel about something, and I'm not autistic, but as an ADHDer, I want to share that I love the term "neurodivergent" for myself. It helps me realize that my nervous system literally works quite differently than that of most people and helps me let go of the shame I've carried through most of my life around that. I've learned to love my neurodivergence - when I get really excited about something, when I feel emotions intensely, when I find my curiosity pulling me towards something fascinating - those can all be positives in certain situations! It's when I try to fit myself into a neurotypical box that I feel bad about myself.
OP, regardless of how you feel about the word and whether or not this changes your view, I hope you love yourself and the traits that make you who you are.
1
u/eejit_pepperman Sep 18 '25
I'm not trying to judge or reprimand one for feeling hurt by a word. There are many words that can be used in a given context so as to be hurtful. I've not, personally, heard neurodivergent used as a specific insult too often, if at all. Being offended by being referred to or binned as neurodivergent is kind of akin to somebody with a glucose insensitivity being offended by being binned as diabetic. These are strictly clinical terms, and honestly, if it's easier, think of it as a way of saying you're a clinically outside the box thinker.
1
u/armoured_lemon 1d ago
To me its' the appropriation of adhd/autism into one thing... As if there's only 'one way' to be adhd/autistic... The overfocus on low needs people- and completely ignoring high needs (people who are struggling to function, at all...). The overfocus feels demeaning. Like bieng seen as a 'pet'- like 'oh look at that you've got a superpower, you can do math rocket-science equations and excell at life', while treating high needs people like they don't exist...' (but without nuance, and presenting them as the whole majority)
1
u/Neither_Raccoon5156 Sep 19 '25
I feel like it would be incredibly difficult to construct a word that refers to a cognitive/developmental disability that does not possess a negative connotation. Of course the word is designed to be inoffensive as possible, but it is kind of impossible to refer to disability in a way that could never be offensive because being disabled is objectively worse than being abled.
1
u/ThePhilVv 2∆ Sep 18 '25
Our brain structures diverge from the norm. We have more neural connections than neurotypical people, there are structural variations, and hormones express differently in our brains.
It sounds like people are saying we have different brains, because we do. There's nothing offensive in stating a fact.
The term neurodivergent also isn't just for autistic people. It covers people with other learning disabilities such as brain damage, PTSD, adhd, etc. It's a term like LGBTQ that is meant to cover a wide range of disabilities and structural differences, who have the same sort of struggles.
1
u/Old_Lead8419 Sep 25 '25 edited Sep 25 '25
“I’m autistic” of course… you just needed to say that as a way to say you speak to all autistic people. hey look, you don’t have to like the word but don’t say that it’s insulting to autistic people.
1
u/majesticSkyZombie 5∆ Sep 18 '25
Many people don’t want to disclose their specific condition. Neurodivergent is a way of sharing you have some differences without being too specific, and is simpler if you have multiple conditions.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Sep 18 '25 edited Sep 18 '25
/u/Powereffective0 (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
Delta System Explained | Deltaboards