#Autism and its $TAKE-HO£D€Rs

man carrying briefcase and fistful of money
Earlier this month, there was a conference on Autism research in Rotterdam, and out of that came some discussion of how to fundamentally change how we talk about Autism, as well as how we identify who’s playing what role in the discussion. There’s Autism Community (those of us on the Autism Spectrum), and there are Autism Stakeholders — researchers and clinicians who build their careers around studying us.

Cos (@autismage) on Twitter proposed

I'd call any #autism researcher or clinician a 'stakeholder', unless they're #ActuallyAutistic. have an #autistic relative/partner, or do participatory work with #autistic pple. Those exceptions are 'community'. Therapists (with same exceptions) are 'stakeholders'. Very simple
I’d call any #autism researcher or clinician a ‘stakeholder’, unless they’re #ActuallyAutistic. have an #autistic relative/partner, or do participatory work with #autistic pple. Those exceptions are ‘community’. Therapists (with same exceptions) are ‘stakeholders’. Very simple

And that got me thinking…
Of course it did.

At first, it seemed to me that anyone who’s Autistic would be a “stakeholder”, because we have a “stake” in the discussions, the research, the ongoing developments, and so forth. We’re directly impacted by them, and we stand to gain or lose, depending on how those develop.

I use the term “stakeholder” all the time at work when I talk about projects, and the meaning we have for it, is someone who is directly impacted by the outcomes of those projects. They’re invested. They’re affected. They have a lot to gain or lose from the results. Just like Autistic people who are deeply affected by all the developments in research and policy and public discourse.

We’re stakeholders, right?

Well, maybe…

Taking a closer look at the etymology of the word, it struck me that the original meaning of the word was the exact opposite of how I was hearing it used.

Folks on Wikipedia say:

Per Webster’s 3rd New International Dictionary 1: a person entrusted with the stakes of two or more persons betting against one another and charged with the duty of delivering the stakes to the winner 2: a person entrusted with the custody of property or money that is the subject of litigation or of contention between rival claimants in which the holder claims no right or property interest

So, the idea of a stakeholder has nothing (originally) to do with the actual stakes themselves. They’re basically an “escrow agent” of sorts, with no personal investment in what’s going on.

And then there’s the popular conception of stakeholder as “someone who holds a stake in the ground to claim territory”. That’s something I’ve heard a number of times in the course of meetings at work, and the spirit of it carries through, as though we were in the Wild West (per the NY Times🙂

… when Western land was made available to those who would work and live on it, a stake became a section of land marked off by stakes and claimed by the farmer. By extension, a grub stake was money advanced for food, or grub, as an investment or loan.

And here’s where it gets interesting to me, and it becomes more apparent to me that we really should differentiate between the Autism Community and Autism Stakeholders.

First, the idea that stakeholders don’t actually hold a direct interest in the Autism Community. True enough, I believe. They’re interested in us, and they make a career off us, earning a living thanks to our “puzzling” existence (sarcasm). They’re stake-holders, not invested parties with personal issues at stake.

And then there’s the second “Wild West” definition of stakeholders — which seems even more apropos to me, considering the colonialism at its core. The West was “opened” by displacing Indigenous peoples from their ancestral lands, and if you could get your hands on a stake, you could get a piece of the action. The DSM-V and other diagnostic tools pathologize and marginalize us, and they’re used to clear us out of the territory of our own lives in a very real way.  And then the “settlers” — people who have taken courses, completed degrees, and gotten certifications — have moved in to profit from our marginalization.

Just as Nestle moves into an area and commandeers all the potable water, then sells it back to the rightful inhabitants, so have the “Autism professionals” moved in on our lives, declared us “unfit”, and then devised all sorts of for-profit paths to “rehabilitate” us in the image they desire — as often as not using violence in its many forms to achieve the goal of “normalcy”.

If that’s not colonialism, I don’t know what is.

And in a very real sense, the people who are profiting from explaining our existence to the world — after they’ve completely confused everyone, to begin with — are stakeholders. In the financial sense. In the territorial sense.

So, yes, Cos — we should differentiate between the Autism Community and Autism stakeholders. That distinction is more than semantic. For some of us, it’s life and death.


2 thoughts on “#Autism and its $TAKE-HO£D€Rs

  1. Pingback: rnbn

  2. Pingback: #Autism and its $TAKE-HO£D€Rs – Just Under Your Radar – International Badass Activists

What do you think? Share your feedback - and feel free to share this post!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.