Semantics
by NMSilber
There are those who believe that assigning labels like “high functioning” or “low functioning” to individuals on the autism spectrum is no more problematic than assigning them to, say, a microwave. I am not one of them. I have been lucky enough (not really) to discuss this subject with others in the past who have very kindly (patronizingly) taken time to explain (lecture) me in great deal why exactly I am thinking about this all wrong. While the reasons that they have given for why I am misunderstanding (disagreeing in much too logical a way) have been varied, I tend to hear one comment again and again. Apparently, I am “worrying too much about semantics.” To those who have made this observation, I am deeply touched that you are so concerned about my mental health. Your generous offer to think for me is appreciated, as thinking does take up a lot of my time, but I actually rather enjoy it. Perhaps it’s time we discuss “semantics” a little further.
As everyone (who has ever actually looked up the word) knows, “semantics” has more than one meaning. According to Merriam-Webster, one definition is “the language used … to achieve a desired effect on an audience…” Let’s consider the words “high” and “low.” If there were just some way to get an idea of what effect those words might have on audience. Maybe if we knew what other words were considered to be similar? I have an idea! Let’s break out the thesaurus! (I just love the thesaurus.) According to Thesaurus.com the following words are synonyms for the word “high” : elevated, lofty, tremendous, uplifted, and upraised. In contrast, the following words are synonymous with the word “low”: below, beneath, inferior, lesser, and small. High=elevated and uplifted. Low=beneath and inferior. Uh oh. Does anyone else think that maybe the effect of those words could actually be, well, really bad?
They are just words though right? How could using a simple term negatively impact on a person’s life? Well, the answer is a whole lot when the words are “inferior” and “beneath.” Calling me a pessimist, but I think that implying, that someone is inferior, or better yet actually labeling them as such, does not exactly set them up for success. In fact, it might even open the door for a lot of people, especially those who don’t get into thinking all that much, to do things like devalue people. And then all kinds of bad stuff happens, abuse, neglect, limited opportunities, lack of access to education and employment. I could go on all night.
Generally these terms are tossed around by people who apparently have never taken a moment to consider what it might feel like to be so labeled (people who really do lack empathy.) I have seen some people on the spectrum themselves use these labels on occasion though. For some reason, it seems that they are always those who consider themselves of the more “elevated” and “uplifted” variety. I wonder why. Well, I have news for you folks, the term “high functioning” is as patronizing as “low functioning” is insulting and both set Autistic people up to be misunderstood and under or inappropriately supported. I am “worried about semantics” alright and for good reason.
Extemporary Sanity 
As the parent of an autistic child I have always found those labels disturbing as well. In particular,in the educational setting it always seemed like an opportunity for teachers and other professionals to underestimate what my son was capable of learning because he is non-verbal or “low functioning”. Or to have expectations without regard for sensory issues for the kids who are “High functioning”.
I would like some alternative words to describe the differences of people on the spectrum. Do you have any other suggestions on what proper words we could use?
My suggestion would be to refer to us as individuals, by name. E.g. “Her name is TG and she’s Autistic. His name is Joe Blow and he’s Autistic, too.” If it’s necessary to talk about the symptoms, then do so specific to the individual. I don’t think there are any alternative “catch-all” phrases, as our experiences and abilities are too varied.
I really enjoyed this blog and I learned something from it while being amused. I will not be using the low and high language ever again!
Agreed. To say nothing of, I know many Autistics whose ability wo functions varies widely over time, so that realistically, no “blanket” label can be given….we are all unique individuals. Once someone is yclept “high” (services are forever denied) or “low” (The assumption is that they can do nothing, even think), their individual reality is denied. Of course perhaps that is what the socalled experts or society intend to do…..and this will probably be discussed in a Once and Future Blog.
Have to admite I didn’t see a problem with these labels. (other than them being labels) I took them literally, converting them to numbers, giving them a value. Now that it was explained I agree that they could and have been taken in this way. This is a problem, but just like everyone else, I hear a lot of yelling and whining but no solutions. No one is going to come up with solutions for us when they dont even see a problem. They dont take us seriously now. if all we show them is whining, crying and bickering with one another they will have less reason to listen or take us seriously in the future.
I was asking my friends on FB if “high functioning” ever meant anything other than “more like an NT.” I really don’t think so, and it’s gotten to the point where I can sort of tell where a person is on his or her journey to political awareness if he or she attributes any sort of concrete function label to self or others. “Severe” and “mild” labels for autism is another one — where the disease model is in the forefront.
I agree with you that semantics is extremely important. Words matter. How we use them matters. How we refer to ourselves matters. And how other people refer to us matters. How can it not?