Skip to main content

My own personal neurotypicality

I reckon that what touched me the most about last week's lecture was the discussion we had on neurodiversity.  Though I could never put an exact word on this subject, I learned that this was, in fact, something I had thought about greatly in my life.  I have always felt immensely comfortable in our education system, for some reason it just worked for me. From what Erin explained in class, I seem like a perfect example of neurotypicality.
However, to me, this has always seemed so random. How could I be so comfortable in this world of school, readings and essays, yet members of my own family struggled so very much with the same elements? This made me think a lot about, of course, the ways we all learn very differently, although I did not yet have the right vocabulary to describe this situation.  Now that this class have given me some words to describe it, it was drawn to think to reflect on many questions; mainly, can we all learn the same things, albeit in different ways? Can there be limits or exception to what we can learn? Are their deficits one cannot overcome in order to learn?
My example comes from personal experience. I have a 28 years old cousin who's a non-verbal autistic. However, he has never learned to write. In my youth and still to this day, I felt somewhat confronted by this situation, wondering how his life would have been different had he been capable to write and therefore have a manner to make himself understood. This first class made me realise the issues of society in general in these fields. Contrary to what most doctors have told my family, maybe it is not my cousin who lack the capability to learn how to make himself understood, but rather society and medicine that still like the tools to be able to understand and communicate effectively with him.
In summary, if that was not already very clear, this first class gave me a lot to think about, and I felt that I needed a few days to ponder on it before I was able to put my thoughts in order to write this.

Comments

  1. It is indeed a terrible moment when we realize how we might contribute to the force of neurotypicality. In the autistic movement and the wider movement for neurodiversity, an important slogan is "presume competence." In underscoring that racism and neurotypicality are always and have always been interlinked, what we are trying to think through is this very question of who gets to set the conditions of existence.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Edouard Glissant - Poetics of Relation (some concepts)

Errantry (errance) 18- errantry does not proceed from renunciation nor from frustration regarding a supposedly deteriorated (deterritorialized) situation of origin; it is not a resolute act of rejection or an uncontrolled impulse of abandonment. - The thought of errantry is a poetics, which always infers that at some moment it is told. The tale of errantry is the tale of Relation. 21- The thinking of errancy conceives of totality but willingly renounces any claims to sum it up or possess it. 20- The thought of errantry is not apolitical nor is it inconsistent with the will to identity, which is, after all, nothing other than the search for a freedom within particular surroundings. Rhizomatic thought / rhizome 18- the rhizome- prompting the knowledge that identity is no longer completely within the root but also in Relation. Poetics of Relation 11- each and every identity is extended through a relationship with the Other 20- in the poetics of Relation, one who is erra...

Denise Ferreira da Silva 1 (life) ÷ 0 (blackness) = ∞ − ∞ or ∞ / ∞: On Matter Beyond the Equation of Value

Here are some notes on Denise's text for those interested. Central question: What if blackness referred to rare and obsolete definitions of  matter : respectively, “substance … of which something consists” and “substance without form”? How would this affect the question of value? What would become of the economic value of  things  if they were read as expressions of our modern grammar and its defining logic of obliteration? Would this expose how the  object  (of exchange, appreciation, and knowledge)—that is, the economic, the artistic, and the scientific thing—cannot be imagined without presupposing an ethical (self-determining) thing, which is its very condition of existence and the determination of value in general. On Blackness as disruptive force: activate blackness’s disruptive force, that is, its capacity to tear the veil of transparency (even if briefly) and disclose what lies at the limits of justice. when deployed as method, blackness fractur...

Fred Moten: "Blackness and Nonperformance"