Functioning labels are often said to be more ostracizing. We have to call it something, and maybe it's necessary to alert mid-functioning NTs to whether or not we can speak with our mouth parts or perform ordinary tasks by ourselves, but high or low "functioning" just sounds like you either aren't affected by your handicap at all, or like you can't even think and perceive – "no, it doesn't," you (and I) might say, but it does to low-functioning NTs who are often the sort we are handed to help us with stuff.
There are some blogs by autistics who are what you'd call "low-functioning". They all object to functioning labels.
Haha, I like your use of "low-functioning NTs," omg.
Really brings home the point about how divisive the labels are.
Met some nonverbal autistic people yesterday. Seriously awesome. I don't think I would ever describe them as "low-functioning".
Sometimes it is useful to have a quicker way to distinguish people than listing all of their abilities and challenges. In those cases, I would think about what is relevant to the discussion. Is it that they are non-speaking that causes the most difficulty? That they need full-time care to make sure they don't hurt themselves because they have pica or forget what they're doing sometimes? Is it that they think 'concretely' and have trouble with abstract thought? Then
say someone who is non-speaking or needs full-time care or thinks concretely. And keep in mind that non-speaking doesn't mean nonverbal: they may use a letter board or AAC device or sign language. I don't understand how verbal has come to mean speaking, when verbal literally means related to
words...spoken or written. Some people just have trouble moving their mouth parts.
I'm still learning about what is good language to use, but usually find that giving someone's support needs is the fastest way to explain it and is generally both more
accurate than a functioning label
and covers what those labels were originally
intended to describe (=how independently you 'function') without the ableist implications.
Anyway. As for those with minimal support needs, sure, the aspie v. autie label may have captured a processing difference related to language delay, but language ability isn't really an indicator of anything but how you process language, and many autistic people develop language at a different pace than NTs due to learning and processing differences. For all practical purposes, these groups are capable of doing most of the same things (certainly I know or know of HFAs who have achieved way more than me or are incredible people in other, less socially valued ways, and the same can be said of my fellow aspies), and it's up to the individual's talent, drive, and the support they receive to determine how well "functioning" they will be in life.
So I don't believe in creating divisions between us, try to use language inclusive of all autistics, and call myself autistic unless someone is more interested in 'what kind of autistic' I am.
