Re-presenting Autism: The Construction of ‗NT Syndrome‘
Charlotte Brownlow

Abstract Autism is a widely researched area and much emphasis has been placed in research on the
differences between the autistic and non-autistic populations. Such research commonly draws on
proposed deficits within people with autism in order to explain differences. This paper seeks topresent an alternative understanding of differences and draws on writings of people with autism insuch a discussion. The construction of ‘Neurologically Typical syndrome’ (NT) will be presented as
an inverted construction of diagnosis, which serves to challenge the dominant position of ‘NTs’ and‘NT traits’ over autistic traits. It will be argued that such an alternative representation of people withand without autism has important implications for our construction of and understanding of autism.

Since its ‗discovery‘ by Kanner in 1943 and Asperger in 1944, autism has become a highly researched
area, receiving detailed scrutiny by professionals and academics alike. During this time, several key
ideas have become prominent in shaping our understanding of autism. These include the triad of
impairments1 which proposes three key features characteristic of autism—impairments in social
development, communication, and the display of rigid and repetitive behaviours. Other importantconcepts purport to explain the core difficulties faced y such a population. One hypothesis dominant
in such understanding is that of Theory of Mind (see, for example, Tager-Flusberg2; Baron-Cohen,
Leslie and Frith3). All of these understandings and explanations for autism have in common aparticular view of the autistic individual, one that in some way constructs the individual as ‗abnormal‘
on some measurement. In this paper, I seek to present an alternative construction of autism to this,
one that challenges the positioning of people with autism by drawing on understandings of autism that
invert dominant constructions of autism and present a syndrome of ‗Neurologically Typical‘ (‗NT‘) or
non-autistic as the deficit. Thus, this paper seeks to position discussions of autism not in terms ofneurological deficiency but in terms of neurodiversity and difference.

The ‘triad of impairments’
Until recently, descriptions of autism have largely been reported with reference to Wing‘s ‗triad of
impairments,‘ which has been influential in organising academic and professional conceptualisationsof autism. The key features of the triad largely echo the earlier work of Kanner4 and Asperger5 andplay an important role in shaping contemporary understandings of autism and focussing our gaze on
specific characteristics. By highlighting salient characteristics that can be considered evidence of

1

1L Wing, “The Autistic Spectrum,” Lancet, 350(9093) (1997): 1761–1767.

2

2H Tager-Flusberg, “A psychological approach to understanding the social and language impairments in
autism,” International Review of Psychiatry, 11 (1999): 325–334.

3

3S Baron-Cohen, AM Leslie and U Frith, “Does the autistic child have a “theory of mind”?,” Cognition, 21(1985): 37–46.

4

5

L Kanner, “Autistic disturbance of affective contact,” Nervous Child, 2 (1943): 217–250.

H Asperger, “„Autistic psychopathy‟ in childhood,” in Autism and Aspergers Syndrome, ed. and trans. U
Frith (Cambridge: Cambridge, 1991) 37–92.

autism, professionals can categorise individuals and identify those as requiring a special focus ofattention, as well as develop appropriate interventions with the goal of normalising behaviours.
Impairments in social interaction
Characteristics typically associated with impairment in social interaction with respect to people with
autism include an inappropriate use of eye contact and a failure to develop close relationships withothers, particularly a failure to develop friendships. This characteristic is often central in discussions
about people with autism, and a failure to operate in a social setting is frequently highlighted as afocus of intervention. Moreover, an important goal for many parents is that their children should
develop a friendship network.6 Given the strong emphasis placed on social skills in everyday
interactions and practices, such skills are considered to be something that the person with autism
should strive to achieve.
Impairments in communication
Communication difficulties are reported to range considerably amongst people with autism.
For example, some people with autism never develop speech, while others do develop speech but
experience problems with the pragmatics and social aspects of language.7 Frith notes that in contrast
to communication in face to face settings, written communication can often be highly sophisticated.8
This sophistication in communication through written means is reflected in postings by people with
autism to online discussion groups contributing data to this paper.
Impairments in imagination
Impairments in imagination are typically characterised in academic literature by rigid and repetitive
behaviours which may manifest in hand flapping, ritualised behaviours and an overly focussed
interest in a particular topic or object. Such characteristics frequently become presented ascharacteristics specifically of autism, with a ‗normal‘ child not expected to engage in such behaviours.

‘Neurodiversity’
There has emerged an alternative representation of autism in more recent writings, as a form of‗neurodiversity.‘ This alternative representation of autism was first coined by Judy Singer and seeks
to present autism as a difference rather than a deficit. Such a representation has common links withwider disability literature such as the social model. This model makes the important distinction
between an individual‘s impairment, in terms of biological impairment, and disability, which issociety‘s lack of accommodation of the impairment. An individual can therefore be considered‗disabled‘ because of a lack of accommodation of his or her difference within a society. Disability is
not seen as an individual attribute but something created through social exchanges and social
practices. While the social model of disability was initially conceived of with reference to people withphysical impairments, there were later applications of the model to people with intellectual andsensory impairments.9

6

C Brownlow, The construction of the Autistic Individual: Investigations in Online Discussion Groups(unpublished PhD Thesis, 2007).
7

8

9

SE Folstein, “Autism,” International Review of Psychiatry, 11 (1999): 269–277.
U Frith, Autism: Explaining the Enigma, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 2003).

C Barnes and G Mercer, eds., Exploring the Divide: Illness and Disability (Leeds: The Disability Press,
1996).

Several writers, such as Hughes and Paterson10 and Goodley,11 have questioned the reliance of themodel on a biological source of impairment and call for an examination of the construction of‗impairment.‘ In developing a discursive focus, Rapley argues that what counts as ‗impairment‘ isculturally relative and so, too, are responses to it and asserts that by conceiving of impairment anddisability as two separate entities, there is a risk of oversimplifying the issues through the use of
dichotomous terms.12 Therefore, in our conceptions of ‗disability,‘ we should not exclude the ways inwhich it is a cultural, moral and discursive formation as well as theorising about marginalisation ineconomic and social terms, as would be the focus of more traditional approaches within the social
model of disability.
Such a focus on the constructed nature of impairment has also been developed more recently withinsome of the autism literature, such as the work of Hacking,13 Grinker, and Osteen. While notnecessarily located specifically within the social model of disability, this new body of work seeks toquestion the representations of autism and its constructed nature. Grinker, for example, notes that insome cultures, autism still exists without a name, and in such societies, members do not necessarily
see as pathological the symptoms that are crafted together to form the diagnosis ‗autism.‘14 Suchwriters call for a more individualistic examination of autism, one that reflects and respects individual
differences. However, Osteen reflects on the representations of people with autism, particularly interms of autistic authors, and notes that such individuals are in a potentially difficult position in trying
to represent themselves as not only uniquely autistic but also similar to other non-autistic individuals.
Osteen argues that texts by writers with autism may send mixed messages to people with autism inthat they have written books and thereby showing an enabling vision of autism, but that the focus of
the text should be on their ‗recovery‘ or ‗emergence‘ from autism.15
The question of terminology used to refer to people with autism and the notion of autism as aspectrum is one frequently debated within literature, particularly the relationship between autism andAspergers syndrome.16,17 Grinker comments that there are no easy answers concerning the question as
to whether the term ‗autism‘ should be more or less inclusive and argues that taking ‗autism‘ as alarge category incorporating a range of individuals can be good for advocacy and for increasingawareness. However, Grinker also warns that such large categorisations may lead to masking
variations and a loss of individual voices and recognition of needs.
The terminology used throughout this paper draws on writings of people with autism who havecontributed to the discussion groups providing data for this research. These groups have used the term
‗AS‘ to refer to the autism spectrum, which includes people with both a diagnosis of autism andAsperger syndrome. The terminology that I have used to refer to the non-autistic population has also
10

B Hughes and K Paterson, “The Social Model of Disability and the Disappearing Body: Towards a
Sociology of Impairment,” Disability and Society, 12(3) (1997): 325–340.
11

D Goodley, “„Learning Difficulties,‟ the Social Model of Disability and Impairment: Challenging
Epistemologies,” Disability and Society, 16(2) (2001): 207–231.
12

M Rapley, The Social Construction of Intellectual Disability (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2004).
13

I Hacking, The Social Construction of What? (Cambridge Massachusetts and London England: First
Harvard University Press, 1999).
14
15

RR Grinker, Unstrange Minds: Remapping the world of autism (New York: Basic Books, 2007).
M Osteen, ed., Autism and Representation (London: Routledge 2008).

16

E McLaughlin-Cheng, “Asperger syndrome and autism: A literature review and meta-analysis,” Focus on
Autism and other Developmental Disabilities, 13(4) (1998): 234–245.
17

B Kugler, “The differentiation between autism and Asperger syndrome,” Autism 2(1) (1998): 11–32.

been taken from the writings of people with autism, and such a population is referred to as‗neurologically typical‘ or ‗NT‘. Dekker traces the origins of the term ‗NT‘ to a self-advocacy
organisation run by people with autism called Autism Network International and notes that in order toavoid having to use the term ‗normal‘ to refer to people without autism, the founders of Autism
Network International coined the new term of neurologically typical to refer to people without
neurological conditions such as autism.18 The use of NT is now commonplace within the autism
community online and is a term widely recognised by people with autism, parents and some
professionals working within the field of autism.
Methodology
The data contributing to this paper forms part of a larger scale research project examining theconstruction of autism in online discussion groups. The focus is primarily on online sources throughthe analysis of web pages and contributions to online asynchronous discussion lists. There is an
emerging literature that proposes the positive engagement with internet technologies by people with
autism and the possibilities to develop more empowering identities online.19,20,21
Following approval from a university ethics committee, two online discussion groups that were
owned by people with autism and whose key contributors were people with autism were approachedand permission sought for the researcher to join the groups as a silent member for a period of threemonths. Following approval from the list owner, I wrote an introductory post to the group, identifying
my position as an NT researcher and requesting permission to join the groups as a silent member.
Other than this introductory post and a post to announce the end of my membership, no further
postings were made on the lists. Therefore, the data collected reflects ‗natural‘ interactions between
members on the lists without specific interaction from a researcher posing questions. In order toprotect individuals, each contributor was individually contacted to request permission to use quotes
from his or her postings as examples in a write up, and all contributors were given the option to be
known by a pseudonym. All quotes that appear in this paper are reported verbatim.
In order to examine the negotiated constructions of autism, the posts were analysed using discourse
analysis informed by Edley22 and Potter and Wetherell.23 The analysis was further developed throughthe scrutiny of web pages discussing autism from an advocacy perspective. The following discussions
present material from two websites. Such websites are typically developed and maintained byindividuals identifying themselves as autistic. In this paper, I have referred to them in the same way as
any other academic source, reflecting my belief that they contribute important knowledge equal to thatof more traditionally recognised ‗experts‘ in the field of autism who are typically NTs.

18

M Dekker, “On our own terms: Emerging Autistic Culture,” available at: http://autisticculture.com/index.php?page=articles (2000),
accessed March 7, 2008.
19

H Blume, “Autistics are communicating in cyberspace,” available at: http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/techcol/063097techcol.html (1997), accessed January 22, 2008.
20

MJ Ward and RN Meyer, “Self-determination for people with developmental disabilities and autism: Two self-advocates‟ perspectives,”
Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 14 (1999): 133–140.
21

C Brownlow and L O‟Dell, “Constructing an autistic identity: AS voices online,” Mental Retardation, 44 (5) (2006): 315–321.

22

N Edley, ―Analysing Masculinity: Interpretative Repertoires, Ideological Dilemmas and Subject Positions,‖ Discourse as Data: A guidefor analysis, ed. M Wetherell, S Taylor, and SJ Yates (London: Sage, 2001), 189–228.
23

J Potter and M Wetherell, Discourse and Social Psychology: Beyond Attitudes and Behaviour (London: Sage, 1987).

Analysis
Repositioning the ‗triad of impairments‘
Social interaction
While a sense of the importance of social interaction and a desire for emotional closeness without theresources to achieve it was reflected in some postings to the discussion groups by people with autism,
the immersing of a person with autism into the social world was not necessarily a goal of allcontributors who identified themselves as autistic. For example:
If you are Adult with Autism Diagnosis you have to have experience with medicine.
Applied Behaviour Analysis is a way to bring you completely into the social world
and I do not want to go. I want to stay in my world and just visit the social world.
RonaldTherefore, while social interaction is cited as an issue for both people with autism and parents andprofessionals, there is some conflict in the implications and interpretations of this, highlighting thecomplexity of the issue. When considered solely within the professional discourse of academic texts,
a failure to interact socially can be highlighted as a fundamental problem requiring professional
interventions. The dominant non-autistic, neurologically typical society values social skills, both in aworking environment that relies on social networking and with regards to developing a basis for
personal friendships. Thus, parents of people with autism and professionals frequently cite social
interaction as a suitable point for professional intervention.
However, the discourses of some people with autism challenge such an assertion. Whileacknowledging that social interaction may be a key issue for people with autism, they resist theconstruction that it is people with autism who necessarily have to change in order to become moresocial. The shift in attention for behavioural change is placed on a difference in abilities to operate ina social world for autistic people and a difficulty in operating in a non-social world for non-autistic
people. For example:
When I was a kid the comforting quiet around me was scary to the social ones.
RonaldThe experience of difference with social interaction is considered to be a key feature that defines
people with autism, but different discourses surround the understanding and implications of this.
Communication
As previously highlighted, communication in written forms can be highly sophisticated by people
with autism. This sophistication in communication through written means is reflected in the postingsby people with autism to online discussion lists. The postings reflect interesting and insightfulcomments, frequently dealing with complex issues which are discussed in sophisticated ways without
the need for a reliance on non-verbal cues to guide behaviour.
While acknowledging some of the challenges faced by people with autism with respect tocommunication, some contributors to the lists rejected the idea that autistic communication is inferior
or lacking. This is reflected in contributions to the discussion lists that examine the communicativeinteractions of neurologically typical individuals and position such exchanges as ‗illogical.‘ For
example:Humans, even NTs, possess the linguistic ability to express concepts, ideas, and emotions
verbally and with clarity, but the NT brain seems incapable of actually doing so. They rely
heavily on the animalistic means of body language. It‘s primitive and unnecessary, I think.

Further, NTs can‘t seem to express thoughts completely. They use an irritating form of verbal
shorthand, where significant gaps are left to be filled by the listener. It‘s absurd!
Archie.
This quote questions some common assumptions surrounding the traits of autism and, specifically,
impairments in communication and social interaction. Here the much researched ‗impairments insocial interaction‘ commonly associated with people with autism are positioned as a consequence of
the illogical behaviour of NTs.
While there is a strong focus in professional and academic literature on the inability of people with
autism to communicate, there is a competing conceptualisation of people with autism communicating
in a more direct manner, where no ‗reading between the lines‘ is necessary. The predominance of a
non-autistic society, however, ensures that face to face communication, which uses non-verbal as wellas verbal cues, is the benchmark of communicative abilities. Communication online removes the useof non-verbal cues and has been cited by Dekker as highly suited to the communicative styles ofpeople with autism because of their tendency to be direct, to expect literal meanings and not to rely on
non-verbal cues to supplement words—all areas that have been highlighted as challenging for nonautistic people interacting online.24
Imaginative skills
The position that rigid and focused behaviours should necessarily be considered problematic is alsoquestioned on the discussion lists. Equally, repetitive behaviour is presented as evident amongst the
non-autistic population, but this is largely regarded in wider society as unproblematic. For example:
They often have the pastime of watching TV soap operas with repetitive storylines
where they perceive unbelievable storylines but still insisting on watching all the same.
EdwardThus, challenges are made on the discussion lists to the representation of impairment of imagination
as the sole property of people with autism by focussing attention on the repetitive behaviours ofpeople without autism. Such a focus on the ‗strange‘ behaviours of the non-autistic population
contributes to the construction of ‗NT syndrome.‘
The construction of ‗NT syndrome‘In focusing more attention on the construction of NT syndrome, the idea of a clinical and criticalexamination of NTs as a population ripe for study was raised by one of the contributors to the online
discussion lists as cited in Brownlow and O‘Dell. Edward, for example, presented a summary of what
he terms ‗NT strangeness.‘ In his posting, he presented a lengthy and sophisticated reflection on thelifestyles of NTs, which were considered strange by people with autism, as well as a ‗beginner‘sguide‘ to understanding such strange behaviour. In presenting such a commentary, the criticalexamination falls on the population of NTs rather than people with autism, challenging the
traditionally powerful end of the dualism.
Edward presents his commentary in several key areas singled out as depicting strange behaviour
among NTs. At several points in the commentary, autistic traits are implicitly highlighted as being
superior to NT ways. For example:
A good number of them also immense themselves in sports, such as watching people
kick a durable rubber sphere around a green grass field towards one of the two ―goalposts‖.
They seem to delight in such passive participation even though this does not
24

J Suler, “Psychological Dynamics of Online Synchronous Conversations in Text-Driven Chat Environments,”
available at: www.rider.edu/users/suler/psycyber/psycyber.html (1997), accessed May 17, 2002.

contribute to their intellectual ability that they can use in other areas.
EdwardEdward is questioning the usefulness of such behaviours, not only identified as strange by him but
also as something in which people with autism would not engage having no obvious intellectual
purpose. Further reflections on the ‗primitive‘ ways of NTs are presented when commenting on social
hierarchies. For example:
NTs often play a game of comparison with each other. They compare theirprocessions, qualifications, status, influence or whatever material items they take a
fancy to with each other. Like preening peacocks, these games often end with NTs
establishing some kind of ―pecking order‖ where the person with the most of thecompared item stays at the top with the second-most person below him or her and soon.
Often, some of these NTs ―bluff‖ their way to a higher level in the social
hierarchy via some deceit that comes at considerable cost to themselves...Theirlogic justifies this because they value their place in the social hierarchy more
highly than their own finanical problems. Again, in nature, you can see some ofsuch behaviour with animals wanting to attract more mates to propagate theirgenes, and thus a study of animal mating behaviour and evolution will greatly aid
your survival in NT society.
EdwardThe final area depicted as strange by Edward concerns communication and information networks. For
example:My most amazing discovery lies with the fact that NTs often execute frequent queries(i.e. gossip) over their social network systems that try to discover more data aboutother nodes and networks.
Like the CIA, they keep a huge mental database and inventory of who does what,
who goes where, and everything you can think about a person‘s relationships withanother... Carrying the CIA analogy further, they often have a rather good ability inproviding misinformation, especially if such misinformation can please others.
Apparently, some of them do this under perceived duress that the other person willtake offense at their words and reduce their relationship strength. This comes at a costbecause they have to maintain a [sic] internal database of misinformation which theymust look up on demand at very rapid speeds.
EdwardThe traditional impairments in communications highlighted by professionals as associated with autism
are questioned and inverted in order to present the NT communicative styles as those that are illogicaland impaired, serving to challenge professional constructions of autism.
An inverted construction of diagnosis
An important discussion strand featured on the two websites selected for analysis is a challenge todominant ideas concerning what is normal and abnormal and what behaviour is singled out for aclinical diagnosis. The ideas presented in the websites challenge dominant academic thinking byconstructing NT ways as those that should fall under the clinical gaze, and they are presented in a way
echoing some traditional literature about autism. For example:
Definition of NT: ―Neurotypical syndrome is a neurobiological disorder characterised
by preoccupation with social concerns, delusions of superiority, and obsession with
conformity...Neurotypical individuals often assume that their experience of the world
is either the only one, or the only correct one...NT is believed to be genetic in origin.
Autopsies have shown the brain of the neurotypical is typically smaller than that of anautistic individual and may have overdeveloped areas related to social behaviour.‖How common is it?: ―Tragically, as many as 9625 out of every 10,000 individuals
may be neurotypical...There is no known cure for Neurotypical Syndrome. However,many NTs have learned to compensate for their disabilities and interact normally with
autistic persons.‖
Institute for the Study of the Neurologically Typical25
Similarly, one website reflects on neurotypicality, parodying the influential triad of
impairments to create a syndrome of NT:
Neurotypicality is a pervasive developmental condition, probably present since birth,in which the affected person sees the world in a very strange manner. It is a puzzle; anenigma that traps those so affected in a lifelong struggle for social status andrecognition. Neurotypical individuals almost invariably show a triad of impairments,
consisting of inability to think independently of the social group, marked impairment
in the ability to think logically or critically, and inability to form special interests(other than in social activity).26
The writer of the above text identifies himself as autistic with an ‗official‘ diagnosis, yet he isreflecting, in sophisticated ways, on the concepts of NT and AS, a capacity that would be questionedby traditional theory of mind. The importance of the construction of groups of people as forming
distinct clinical populations is reflected upon by Klein in his examination of the construction ofautism as a clinical entity and the resonance this has for an individual. For example:
Can you imagine what it would be like if, every time that one of your own kind wasborn, the parents of that child typically responded in shock and horror, as if a terrible
tragedy had happened? That is typically what happens when a parent finds out that
their child is one of my kind... in other words, that the child is autistic...The message
here is perfectly clear: Being autistic is like a prison sentence. Being autistic issomething so horrible that it should be soft-pedalled, like an inoperable malignant
brain tumour.
It does not end there. These parents, in an attempt to reverse the tragedy that is thebirth of one of my kind, immediately begin investigating all sorts of therapies,
training programs, nutritional supplements, special diets, and drugs, in the interest of―fixing‖ their poor, damaged child. Can you imagine what it would be like if
expectations of you were so low that it was considered heroic to teach you the mostbasic of self-care skills?..If a normal kid improves, it is development; if one of mykind improves, it HAS to be the result of some heroic action from a normal person.
(Caps in original)
Such a nuanced discussion of NTs and the impacts of diagnostic isolation of people with autism arefurther investigated in parallels of diagnostic categorisation for the syndrome of NT. For example, thefollowing is a summarised version of the DSN-IV classification of Neurotypic Disorder:‗DSN-IV (The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of ‗Normal‘ Disorders)‘ 666.00
Neurotypic Disorder
The essential features constitute a severe form of Invasive Developmental Disorder, with
25

Institute for the Study of the Neurologically Typical, available at: http://isnt.autistics.org/index.html(1998), accessed March 7, 2008.
26

F Klein, “Understanding Neurotypicality,” available at: http://home.att.net/∼ascaris1/neurotypicality.htm(2002), accessed March 7, 2008.

onset in infancy or childhood.
A.

Qualitative impairment in independent social interaction
e.g. extreme or abnormal seeking of comfort at times of distressB.

Qualitative impairment in verbal and non-verbal communication and imaginative playe.g. blatant overuse of all modes of communication, such as communicative babbling,facial expression, gesture, mime, or spoken language. Excessive imaginative irrelevant
activity, such as playacting of adult role, fantasy characters, or animals, lack of interest incomputers or other logical fulfilling pastimes.

C.

Markedly restricted repertoire of activities and interests
e.g. persistent lack of awareness or inability to perceive parts of objects, or has an
attachment to unusual objects (e.g. insists on driving around in a BMW, wearing Rolex
watches, carrying a cellular phone or briefcase). Unreasonable insistence on sameness inothers in precise detail, e.g. insisting that exactly the same social behaviour always befollowed when shopping.

D.

Onset during infancy or childhood
Institute for the Study of the Neurologically TypicalThe diagnostic identification of NTs is supplemented by advice concerning intervention strategies,
which could be adopted for use with NT children in order to make them less NT and more ‗normal.‘ Itis to this second theme of discussions that my focus will now turn.
Interventions with ‗neurologically typicals‘
Several aspects of the websites focused on intervention strategies for use with NT children,
designed to reduce the occurrence of NT ways. For example:
What to do if you suspect your child has NT
Nowadays due to diagnostic advances, early intervention and carefully tailoredbehavioural management techniques, there is no reason why your child can not growinto an independent social being, develop a TOOM (Theory of Others Minds), and intime, even develop some special interests and abilities to contribute to society...Rote
drills such as Applied Behaviour Analysis with their easily understood regimen of
repetitiveness and punishment will do wonders with common NT behaviours such as
lying, teasing and faddishness.
Institute for the Study of the Neurologically TypicalIn addition to such satirical examinations of interventions, there are also comments concerningintervention programmes designed for people with autism. Klein states:
The biggest problem with most programs designed to assist autistic children is, as far
as I can tell, that they were designed by NTs, and for NTs.... They are, after all, theones that will be paying the considerable bill for these programs, and it is their wishes
that are catered to with regard to goals of that program...The goal should be to help
the autistic child develop in a way that will make a relatively decent life possible, notto make him into an NT clone. That‘s not real; a cat trained to fetch and wag his tailwhen happy is a trained cat, not a dog.
Klein further comments that:
While there are a lot of resources that aim to educate normal people about how
autistics think, there really are no resources at all that serve to explain to autistics how
normal people think.

This sophisticated analysis on NT behaviours serves to challenge several constructions regarding the(in)abilities of people with autism, making important political statements concerning the positioningof people with autism in an NT-dominated society.

Discussion
The traditionally dominant ‗triad of impairments‘ construction of autism can be questioned throughalternative constructions of autism presented in the on-line discussions above. The impairments
identified in professional and academic literature are questioned and re-framed not as inabilities andimpairments but as positive attributes of people with autism, skills in which the non-autistic
population are identified as lacking. A re-positioning of autism and neurologically typicals is evident
within these arguments.
The two websites singled out here as examples present eloquent and challenging arguments
concerning the unusual behaviour of neurologically typicals, which can consequently be marked out
for special interest. Such a commentary enables an examination of an alternative construction ofautism by examining the traits traditionally associated with autism considered to be impairments in
the individual and investigating these by positioning them against the equally impaired portrayal of
NT traits, which are generally accepted by wider society as the norm. Such debates raise issues
concerning the valuing of diversity and the celebration of neurodiversity—a position in which one
half of the dualism is seen as not necessarily better than the other, with both having positive andimportant contributions. In making such political reframings of the construction of autism,
NT characteristics are sometimes presented in a negative manner. However, it is important
to move away from the binary categorisations of ‗otherness‘ if a rich picture of difference is to beembraced and, instead, move towards a reframing of difference in terms of ‗neurodiversity‘.
A position of ‗neurodiversity‘ is reflected in the emergence on the internet of a social movement of
individuals who identify themselves as ‗different‘ from NTs and advocate not only for more
understanding and tolerance of autistic differences, but also an understanding of autism as‗neurodiversity.‘ While initially conceived by people with autism, the concept of neurodiversity has
been taken up by several other groups in their reframing of deficit and difference, and there has been acall for ‗neurodiversity‘ to be recognised and to sit alongside the more familiar categories of gender,class and race.27 A position drawing on neurodiversity is therefore not about binary opposites and theprioritising of one group of classified individuals over another, but rather about embracing a wide
range of neurological makeups, autistic being one of them.
In contrast to this position, traditional approaches to autism typically share a common focus of theperson with autism as in some way ‗impaired,‘ and therefore requiring professional intervention inorder to elicit a change to become more reflective of NT characteristics. Recently, there has been achallenge to deficit driven models of autism,28 drawing upon the wider disability movement‘salternative view of disability: the social model of disability (see, for example, Oliver29). In suchdebates, disability is re-constructed as a social rather than an individual phenomenon. There has also
been discussions concerning the application of the social model of disability specifically to autism,
and the guiding gaze of disability studies questions the disabling taken for granted assumptions that
NT ways are ‗the norm.‘
27

J Singer, “Why can´t you be normal for once in your life?‟ From a „problem with no name‟ to theemergence of a new category of difference,” Disability Discourse, ed. M Corker and S French (Buckingham:
Open University Press, 1999), p. 59–67.
28

H Molloy and LVasil, “The Social Construction of Asperger Syndrome: The pathologising of difference?”
Disability and Society, 17 (6) (2002): 659–669.
29

M Oliver, The Politics of Disablement (Basingstoke: MacMillan 1990).

For example, Billington has provided a fresh examination of therapeutic intervention with people with
autism, highlighting the dependence of interventions on the ‗triad of impairments‘ and proposing thata rigid adherence to such a triad can reflect in an inability of services to meet the needs of people with
autism and their families. Due to the reliance of the models on the impairments of people with autism
and not the differences of such a group, the experiences of individuals are largely lost in thetherapeutic exchanges.
Billington argues that such individual experiences and accounts can be an important resource forprofessionals and highlights the need for such voices to be heard and respected within professional
discourse and the need for professional practice to focus on the assets rather than deficits of people
with autism by engaging in a new way of talking about and conceptualising autism. The onus ofchange is placed not just upon the person with autism but also on the wider social network, including
parents and professionals.30
However, in research surrounding autism, NTs are generally accorded a powerful position in guiding
the research processes and prioritising areas to be focused upon. My research is in contrast to this,following a model of valuing diversity whereby the skills of people with autism are presented anddrawing upon positive constructions of autism rather than prioritising NT characteristics andcomparing people with autism against such a benchmark. Indeed, in several parts of the website
commentaries, AS characteristics are prioritised over NT characteristics. Such commentaries present
important challenges to some academic constructions of autism by questioning some of the perceived
competencies of such a labelled group.
The ideas raised here have important implications for possible constructions and understandings ofautism. Such eloquent discussion points made by people who identify themselves as autistic pose
potential challenges to representations of people with autism as unable to communicate and consider
complex arguments that arguably draw on a theory of mind. The benchmark of NT traits asrepresentative of ‗normality‘ serves as a reflection of power relations operating within society. Suchdiscussions highlight the need to place a gaze on the dominant majority as well as looking for‗abnormalities‘ within the minority autistic group. In embracing alternative representations of autism,
the concept of neurodiversity can be celebrated and constructions of autism as a deficit can be
resisted, presenting autism as a difference that is equal to the more dominant NT traits valued insociety. This, in turn, raises a range of possibilities for individuals with autism with respect to identity
construction and their role and position within their society.
References
Asperger, H. ―‗Autistic psychopathy‘ in childhood.‖ In Autism and Aspergers Syndrome, ed. andtrans, U Frith (Cambridge: Cambridge, 1991): 37–92.
Barnes, C. and G Mercer, eds. Exploring the Divide: Illness and Disability (Leeds: The Disability
Press, 1996).
Baron-Cohen, S., A M Leslie and U Frith ―Does the autistic child have a ―theory of mind‖?‖Cognition, 21 (1985): 37–46.
Billington, T. ―Working with autistic children and young people: sense, experience and the challenges
for services, policies and practices.‖ Disability and Society, 21(1) (2006): 1–13.

30

T Billington, “Working with autistic children and young people: sense, experience and the challenges forservices, policies and practices,” Disability and Society, 21(1) (2006): 1–13.

Blume, H. ―Autistics are communicating in cyberspace.‖
http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/techcol/063097techcol.html.
Brownlow, C. The construction of the Autistic Individual: Investigations in Online Discussion Groups(unpublished PhD Thesis, 2007).
Brownlow, C. and L O‘Dell. ―Constructing an autistic identity: AS voices online.‖ Mental
Retardation, 44(5) (2006): 315–321.
Dekker, M. ―On our own terms: Emerging Autistic Culture.‖ http://autisticculture.com/index.php?
page=articles.
Edley, N. ―Analysing Masculinity: Interpretative Repertoires, Ideological Dilemmas and Subject
Positions.‖ In Discourse as Data. A guide for analysis, eds. M Wetherell, S Taylor, and SJ Yates(London: Sage 2001): 189–228.
Folstein, SE. ―Autism.‖ International Review of Psychiatry, 11 (1999): 269–277.
Frith, U. Autism. Explaining the Enigma, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 2003).
Goodley, D. ―‗Learning Difficulties,‘ the Social Model of Disability and Impairment: Challenging
Epistemologies.‖ Disability and Society, 16(2) (2001): 207–231.
Grinker, RR. Unstrange Minds: Remapping the world of autism (New York: Basic Books, 2007).
Hacking, I. The Social Construction of What? (Cambridge Massachusetts and London England: First
Harvard University Press, 1999).
Hughes, B. and K Paterson. ―The Social Model of Disability and the Disappearing Body: Towards a
Sociology of Impairment.‖ Disability and Society, 12(3) (1997): 325–340.
Institute for the Study of the Neurologically Typical. http://isnt.autistics.org/index.html.
Kanner, L. ―Autistic disturbance of affective contact.‖ Nervous Child, 2 (1943): 217–250.
Klein, F. ―Understanding Neurotypicality.‖ http://home.att.net/∼ascaris1/neurotypicality.htm.
Kugler, B. ―The differentiation between autism and Asperger syndrome.‖ Autism 2(1) (1998): 11–32.
McLaughlin-Cheng, E. ―Asperger syndrome and autism: A literature review and meta-analysis.‖
Focus on Autism and other Developmental Disabilities, 13(4) (1998): 234–245.
Molloy, H. and L Vasil. ―The Social Construction of Asperger Syndrome: The pathologising ofdifference?‖ Disability and Society, 17 (6) (2002): 659–669.
Oliver, M. The Politics of Disablement (Basingstoke: MacMillan, 1990).
Osteen, M., ed. Autism and Representation (London: Routledge, 2008).
Potter, J. and M Wetherell. Discourse and Social Psychology: Beyond Attitudes and Behaviour(London: Sage, 1987).
Rapley, M. The Social Construction of Intellectual Disability (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2004).

Singer, J. ―Why can´t you be normal for once in your life?‘ From a ‗problem with no name‘ to theemergence of a new category of difference,‖ in Disability Discourse, eds. M Corker and S French(Buckingham: Open University Press, 1999): 59–67.
Suler, J. ―Psychological Dynamics of Online Synchronous Conversations in Text-Driven Chat
Environments.‖ www.rider.edu/users/suler/psycyber/psycyber.html.
Tager-Flusberg, H. ―A psychological approach to understanding the social and language impairments
in autism.‖ International Review of Psychiatry, 11 (1999): 325–334.
Ward, MJ and RN Meyer. ―Self-determination for people with developmental disabilities and autism:
Two self-advocates‘ perspectives.‖ Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 14(1999): 133– 140.
Wing, L. ―The Autistic Spectrum.‖ Lancet, 350(9093) (1997): 1761–1767.