Asperger's as the "new OCD"?

[Civet]

I'm not sure if this is the appropriate forum section for this, but talking to one of my friends he has told me that Asperger's is "The new OCD," meaning that people seem to be starting to use the term "Asperger's" not even as a self-diagnosis tool (though perhaps in some cases it is) but just as a way to describe their own quirky traits and make themselves seem more quirky. What I mean is like in the same way people will use "OCD" or "ADD" as an adjective to describe their behavior, such as "Yeah, I'm really OCD about keeping my pencils organized" or "Sorry, that was really ADD of me, but I totally missed what you just said."

I've noticed a few people talking about Asperger's in casual ways like this, I guess the first instance wasn't as casual but it was similar according to my friend when I told him about it, and unlikely to be serious. My brother was talking about his difficulty wrapping Christmas presents (and yeah, he does indeed do a really.. um "unique" job of this) and he said something like "I can't do anything like that, I'm so slow at everything, I think I must be autistic. Seriously, like I have Asperger's or something." I never thought this to be the case with him (though in retrospect he does indeed have several prominent traits of AS he seems to be too good socially to actually be autistic) so I told him I didn't really think so. The conversation continued a bit but then was redirected to other topics fairly quickly by my brother. I really wasn't sure what to make of this so I talked to my friend about it in greater detail (the one who has said Asperger's is like the "new OCD") and he said it sounded unlikely that he was serious and this is also when he first introduced the idea to me that more and more people are using the term "Asperger's" in casual conversation recently.

As another occurrence of this, I was at a friend/acquaintance's house last night and in response to something another friend said she made the comment "Well, I could be really Aspergers-y and not make eye-contact with you at all." I found it strange as it was totally unsolicited, and thinking on it it was very much like the way people tend to use "OCD" or "ADD." This friend does have a lot of AS traits and I've even wondered if she could have it especially because she is the one who shared the film "Mary and Max" on her facebook page, but I wouldn't be comfortable asking her. In any case it was a very strange way to use the term, I thought, and I wonder if others have encountered this before, as well, and if this phenomenon my friend talked about where people are now referring to Asperger's as though it were a personality trait is actually beginning to occur and what other's responses to this have been. To me it made me rather uncomfortable, and I didn't really know what to say.

[Sophist]

Well, everybody's a little Aspergers somehow aren't they?

[SomethingElse]

As much as I think it's silly for people to make comments like that if they're being serious, it makes sense for people to joke about having something just because they do something perfectly normal that can be a trait. Because obviously not everyone is a little bit Asperger's. There's no such thing. You either are, or you aren't. Simple as. Same as you're either Down's or you aren't, and you're either schizophrenic or you aren't, and you're either medically blind or you're not, and you either actually have ADHD/OCD/depression/whatever else you can be labelled with, or you don't. Close, but not quite? Then you're not. End of.

But people use disabilities or conditions all the time to describe simple or one-off behaviours.

"I didn't see you there, I swear I must be blind!"
"Sorry I didn't hear you, I think I'm going deaf!"
"Are you deaf, as well as stupid?"
"My mum shouted at me this morning, she's psychotic."
"Why do you fold your receipts up, are you OCD or something?"
"I always have to be doing something, I think I've got ADHD or something."
"So-and-so is dyslexic and they do *this*. So do I! I think I'm dyslexic!"

Even if none of those things could actually apply. Or even if the traits are the normal VERSION rather than the version related to the label. I get my directions confused, I mix up words sometimes, I forget to put the 'e' at the end of 'the', I have lots of TRAITS of dyslexia, but I am NOT dyslexic.

I think that, however, rather than people making jokes (which can sometimes be highly inappropriate and can sometimes be bearable), being labelled with something is almost fashionable (or people mistakenly believe that it will gain them attention, as one attention-seeker I know has managed to attempt to give off the impression that she's partially deaf, dyslexic, autistic, and has Raynaud's Syndrome (if that's what it's called, I forget) based on things other people she knows have, when EVIDENCE suggests otherwise on all counts). I, personally, find that even more annoying. Fair enough if you have real reason to believe it, but not when you're making stuff up or latching on to something with hardly any evidence to suggest it's so (or when you've NOT spent your whole life feeling abnormal and frightened, but, hey, maybe the fact you like maths means you're autistic! Despite the fact that everyone I know who are especially good at it are very much NT). It's sort of insulting. Already people often have it in their heads that if you have Asperger's things come easily to you, and I think it can potentially worsen this misunderstanding of the condition when people who have no knowledge of it throw about silly comments. On the other hand, of course, sometimes silly comments have no overall affect on things. Just depends on when and how it's used I guess.

[Sophist]

I would have to definitively disagree with you, Benji, as far as "you're Asperger's or you aren't". There are traits which autistics have which are more severe than those with AS and that is also reflected in a similar neuroanatomy: the minicolumnar phenotype is more extreme in autistics than it is in Asperger's, but related. And that phenotype is something that is held in common by the entire human race, it's simply by degree. Once it gets to such an extreme, the traits know as "autism" arise. But we are very much related to what makes the human brain human in the first place. The neuroanatomy lies on a spectrum, therefore it's little surprise the behavioral traits often do as well. So, yes, everybody's a little bit Asperger's because it's a fluid continuum, not something that's particularly comparable to Down's, although Down's does have its own continuum because of the nature of the chromosomal abnormalities. Schizophrenia is harder to pin down because it's so poorly defined, but there are definitely continuum-like traits that occur in sz which are reflected to a lesser degree in the general population.

For most people their autistic-like traits don't impinge upon their lives, therefore they do not receive an ASC diagnosis. For those whose traits do, they may.

[SomethingElse]

That's kind of my point, though. Everyone has traits of dyslexia, but no one would say, "Everyone's a little bit dyslexic." If everyone's 'a little bit Asperger's', then what's Asperger's? Nothing. It's just a continuation of NT-ness. There comes a point when the traits are considered abnormal, by severity (however you want to define it, be it in 'quality' or 'quantity' or however else you might think of), and when you reach that point you are *label*. Up until that point, you're not. Obviously it's subjective, in the same way you can debate whether there are differences between AS and HFA and what they are, as there are people who see it as purely a continuation and who also think that the diagnostic criteria should be more lax to allow for people who are 'sort of kind of maybe autistic, but can't get a diagnosis'. People see things differently, and to me it is black and white. Within the spectrum it's all various shades of grey, but when you're outside of it, you're outside, regardless of whether you have those traits. I'm sure that lots of gay/straight people would be kind of annoyed to be told that everyone is a little bit straight/gay (flipped around on purpose).

I personally find it a little offensive for the term to be used so flippantly. I am currently in such a lucky situation that it's easy to avoid making myself anxious or causing myself pain through sensory hypersensitivity, etc., and I feel I have to 'admit' that. But to me there is always a strong difference between me and other people, even if it's just the knowledge that in future the fact I am autistic might impede of my ability to do something that others take for granted. It just seems sort of silly to say that there's no black and white with it, it's all grey. Everyone's a little bit autistic, just people with Asperger's are a little moreso and people who are diagnosed with severe autism are lots more autistic than the average person? If this was truly the case, the world would be far more autistic-friendly. I like things to be definite, and if something is made definite (criteria creating a cut off point, for example) then to me that's quite important.

Even with the argument that everyone's a little bit lots-of-things (and I'm not denying that this is the case, I'm well aware that non-autistic people can still have autistic traits, and autistics have NT traits, and you don't necessarily have to be diagnosed or even diagnosable with ADHD/OCD/depression etc. to have traits of all of those things) it still makes describing people as such sort of pointless/meaningless.

[Civet]

I feel like I am more on Benji's side with this, though I don't know if I think the line is quite as defined as Benji is saying it is, simply because there is no absolute concrete way of diagnosing ASDs at this point, and even when (if) there is one there is going to be a question of where that line is drawn, because as Sophist said, everyone does have Asperger's traits to some degree or another, and I feel like it may be hard to define exactly where Asperger's ends and NT begins, and even then the line drawn may be somewhat arbitrary and open to interpretation from person to person. I think maybe what is most useful is for people to be defined by what works for them, as in the example of the gay-straight continuum. Certainly many people who consider themselves straight, for example, may have at some time or another been attracted to a member of the same sex. Some might consider that to be bisexual, but if the instances are so few or that they are attracted to members of the same sex but have no real desire to be in a relationship with them, they can probably effectively consider themselves "straight" if that is what works for them. I guess this would be similar to the definition of level of impairment, frequency of traits, and amount of traits in the autism vs. NT argument. I feel like the degree to which the traits affect a person (and the degree to which the traits are exclusively "autistic" and not attributed to some other disorder) can define for each individual whether they are truly on the autistic spectrum or just have a lot of autistic traits but don't quite meet the criteria to actually be considered as such. I'm not saying self-diagnosis is key, here, as there do seem to be a lot of people not thoroughly researching the disorder or just kind of claiming they have AS because it's supposedly "cool," but in the diagnostic process I feel like whether the label really means something and "makes sense" for a person is something that should be considered, particularly in cases where they may appear to be borderline AS/NT.

That having been said, I do think saying "everyone is a little bit Asperger's" doesn't really make sense. I can see saying "everyone has some Asperger's traits," however. I guess it's like saying "everyone's a little bit introverted." It's just not true. But what would be true is that everyone has some moments that they want to be alone, or that they need quiet. That doesn't make them introverts, however, it just means that they have traits of or occasionally experience traits of introversion, which I'd guess is likely true of just about anyone.

Already people often have it in their heads that if you have Asperger's things come easily to you, and I think it can potentially worsen this misunderstanding of the condition when people who have no knowledge of it throw about silly comments. On the other hand, of course, sometimes silly comments have no overall affect on things. Just depends on when and how it's used I guess.

I find that particularly strange as having AS by definition means being impaired and thus things *won't* come easily. These people are probably thinking of savant-like abilities and things like that that are so popularized by the media.

Silly comments sometimes don't do harm but other times I think they can be harmful, because enough silly misinformed comments changes public opinion and public view. A friend on LJ was actually just writing about this issue and saying how it worried her because it made her feel like if people did not take autism or Asperger's seriously then people who really needed support and benefits (as she does) could be at risk of losing them. On a more individual level it also can cause people to make assumptions about what one can and can't do, which can lead to misunderstandings, fights, and stress on both sides.

[goddessoflubbock]

I've had much the opposite experience in that people don't seem to know what asperger's is. I was talking to my nurse the other day and she had never heard of it, despite being young and having children of her own.

I hate when people use diagnosable conditions they don't likely have as an excuse for some behavior or gaffe.

[Civet]

I think it's the younger "internet generation" that seems to be talking about Asperger's most. There seem to be articles on pop culture websites and things like that that talk about all of the "fake aspies" (ie people who claim to have Asperger's but have nothing of the kind) on the web.

I do think now that the friend/acquaintance I mentioned probably either has Asperger's or at least thinks she does as she's mentioned it twice more since the first time. Though she hasn't come right out and said "I have Asperger's" she said (in reference to herself) "it would be like an Asperger's person talking to an Autistic person" and at another time, "Do *all* my friends have Asperger's?!" I just laughed at the first remark. At the second one I said "there are definitely traits" but didn't know what to say beyond that. Many of my friends do have rather prominent Asperger's type traits (some more so than others) whether they actually have Asperger's or not. In hindsight I have wondered if 1. She's trying to hint to me that she has AS and 2. If she's trying to determine if I do, as well.

[SomethingElse]

I've also noticed a trend for people comparing themselves to characters on TV that have strong Asperger traits (even if it's completely OTT for the sake of comedy) because it's becoming 'cool' to be quirky and geeky. Even if they actually have nothing in common with that character at all. Almost as though by virtue of the fact THEY'VE said it, other people will just believe it.

I have a friend who is *nothing* like Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory (and I know that he's not actually labelled with Asperger's, and it would be inappropriate for him to be labelled because of the nature of the programme, but he has very OTT traits) but for some reason likes to think she does (and I do think that's purely down to the geeky quirky thing becoming a bit more of a coveted trait?). Which I find insanely annoying, especially because by virtue of the fact it's a comedy show and what he says is ultimately quite true, even people who don't have the same thinking pattern as an autistic person (or as the fictional character Sheldon) would agree with what he says! But that doesn't mean that they'd think that way or act that way.

[Side note: The other day I was watching it with R and a LOT of what he was saying and doing resonated with me (as things I've said and done rather than me thinking, "That's true, as it goes!"), to the point that I ended up jokingly saying, "YES! That's exactly right! I think maybe I'm a little bit like Sheldon sometimes." I wasn't taking it that seriously, I assumed that although I can relate to things he does and says, no one else would see any similarities because I hardly saw any myself (because I am well aware he's a character and so quite extreme for comedy value). But R said, "I was thinking that you're a lot like Sheldon a lot of the time, but I didn't want to say anything in case it offended you!" ]

It's the same as people calling themselves 'weird'. I don't know many genuinely weird people, tbh. I don't think of myself as particularly weird, either, and it's only OTHER PEOPLE calling me weird that has ever made me feel weird (because it's a weird feeling to think you're being 'normal' and other people say you're not, isn't it?). And if you say, "Why are you weird then? What do you mean you don't react like other people?" they can't answer.

[Civet]

I wish it had been "cool" to be quirky and geeky when I was in Jr. High and High School, that would have made things quite a bit easier for me!

I've never watched Big Bang Theory, I think I saw about five minutes of an episode and it was slightly painful to watch as I am a big geek and all of my friends are geeks and seeing such a ridiculous parody of geek culture was a bit excruciating. I may give it another chance, though, as a lot of people really seem to like it. I've seen a lot of articles saying Sheldon has Asperger's.

When someone says they are like a character they may not necessarily mean they are exactly like them but that they have a lot of similarities. I say I am like Rei Ayanami in a lot of ways (though I am less so than I used to be as I've improved on my social skills and am less reclusive than I once was, and also less depressed). However, if people met me they wouldn't necessarily think I am exactly like her even though I can relate to her in a lot of ways. There are sometimes characters that have an uncanny resemblance to actual people (for me the star of the MTV Cartoon Daria is almost disturbingly similar to me and I've been told so by others, as well, heh), but I think this is less common. More often people relate to traits of a character rather than the character in its entirety. Recently my friend (the one who has been mentioning AS a lot) told me I am like a female Michael Cera, which was a little insulting to me, actually

Of course, people saying they are like a character that they are really nothing like at all is a bit strange. I don't know if that is the case with your friend or not as I don't know her nor do I know much about Sheldon.

I don't like being told I'm weird I think because it brings me back to the days when I was criticized a lot or tortured/made fun of because of my "weirdness." I ultimately kind of figured out that I am "weird" by getting that kind of reaction from other people, it's not something I ever decided or declared of myself. I accept that I am "different" now and I am ok with it, but to me "weird" still has a very negative connotation and I don't particularly like to hear it in relation to myself, it makes me feel bad and very self conscious.

[SomethingElse]

I think that the point is it's become 'cool' to be 'weird' rather than that it's actually become COOL to be WEIRD. So I don't think school would be much different now. I still get shouted at in the street, etc.

Yes, my friend compares herself to Sheldon as if they are actually very alike, which is what I find odd. I relate to a lot of characters but wouldn't necessarily mention it as being significant (unless someone else notices the similarity as with Sheldon and more recently Brick and the father in the new sitcom 'The Middle' or whatever it's called, and Stitch from Lilo and Stitch, etc.). Most comparisons I don't mind so much. One person said that I reminded them of Holden Caulfield and I did find that a little insulting.

Most words for me I don't have very negative connotations for, because lots of people have used them in a nice way as well as a negative way. For example, I've been called weird by a lot of people who seemed to like me a fair bit (my ex, for example, and a guy at work when I worked in a shop who I thought I was managing to be quite normal around, but then one day he just stared at me with a strange look on his face and said, "You're know what, you're really WEIRD." I asked what I'd done and he said I hadn't actually done anything, I was just weird. He definitely seemed to mean it in pure unbias seriousness (and possible being quite baffled by it, himself) rather than it being a joke/insult/compliment. My ex also used to call me things like 'Freak' and 'Retard', which he meant in an endearing way, but of course everyone else would assume that he was being abusive (again, he seemed to almost delight in my oddness, up until a point where he himself became very popular in school and accepted by all the typically normal and 'cool' people, and then I think he became more embarrassed by it). But because I've never had those sorts of words used EXCLUSIVELY in a negative way, I don't mind the words themselves (although I dislike the word 'retard'), but it might depend on the person saying it or whether the way it is said is obviosuly mean (or if I can't tell how it's meant and then I might be worried about how it is meant).

I tend to favour the word 'eccentric', though, as that seems more descriptive and doesn't sound very negative.

[goddessoflubbock]

I've noticed more characters on TV recently being given definite traits without coming out and saying it.

I just started watching a new show "Rizzoli and Isles" with Angie Harmon, and the Isles character does autopsies, etc. At first it seemed to me Isles was just very pedantic, she loves neurobiology and her answers are always way over the top and very polysyllabic. But then they've started adding in traits like poor social skills, making her seem more aspiesh, ala Bones.

[Sophist]

Maybe they're all trying to write in the Bones Syndrome and don't realize it's AS.

[goddessoflubbock]

Maybe they're all trying to write in the Bones Syndrome and don't realize it's AS.

So it's AS, not BS?

[Sophist]

It may be BS too.