neurodivergence can never be politically neutral
i'm sick of my neurodivergence being co-opted and commodified
Happy Neurodiversity Celebration Week - I guess?
Like most things, NCW has become corporate, taken from the community and used for financial gain by big companies. The same corporations that won’t employ a neurodivergent person because they can’t make eye contact or because they need additional support, or they don’t “look” professional or “normal” are the same corporations posting about the benefits of neurodivergent people and “celebrating” our productivity.
I recently saw a LinkedIn post headed ‘Can ND be politically neutral?’, going on to argue that it can, and is.
It was, of course, actually referring to whether it can be party political neutral, which, whilst I’d still argue it currently isn’t in the UK, is a very different question to political overall - and the difference is crucial.
It is fundamentally dangerous to attempt to separate neurodivergence from politics: firstly, because of the reality of the landscape for neurodivergent people at present, and secondly, because of the co-opting of neurodivergent and neurodivergence away from being the sociopolitical term that it is.
How could neurodivergence possibly be politically neutral in a society that demonises neurodivergent people of all forms? That makes getting any welfare support utterly impossible and is constantly cutting down the support we do get, and allowing the media and government to talk about us as scroungers or fakers or work-shy?
How could neurodivergence possibly be politically neutral in a society where saneism and ableism are baked in their very core, where community care is non-existent and we abandon neurodivergent, traumatised, and distressed people at every turn? Where psychiatric units are traumatising individuals through excessive restraint, seclusion, and violence?
How could neurodivergence possibly be politically neutral in a society where neurodivergent people of all kinds are simply written-off, where neurodivergent people are more likely to be houseless and more likely to end up in the criminal justice system? Where children are being left without any support and kicked out of school without an alternative found, where health & social care is becoming more and more stretched every single day, where more and more families can’t pay for food or bills because there is no support for carers?
Understanding ‘neurodivergent’
Neurodivergent was coined by Kassiane Asasumasu in 2000, to mean a brain that diverges from how society believes a brain should function. Kassiane very loudly includes any type of divergence through this, including neurodevelopmental neurodivergence, mental ill-health, acquired neurodivergence including PTSD or traumatic brain injuries, and conditions like epilepsy, dementia, Parkinsons, or MS.
You will often see endless posts of people ‘deciding’ that mental health conditions don’t count, or that they believe personality disorders don’t count, or PTSD isn’t neurodivergent enough, or that MS or epilepsy is nothing like neurodivergence. They’re wrong, and I also never understand why they believe they get to decide.
Neurodivergent is a term separate (though intertwined) to neurodiversity, which is largely attributed to Judy Singer in 1998, but last year a group of leading autistic and neurodivergent academics released a letter showing the original roots of the term coming from more grassroots origins across the early version of the community12.
Neurodivergent therefore refers to the ways in which a person diverges from neuronormativity: the norms, standards, and concepts of “functioning” that are built, maintained and enforced by society.3
Neuronormativity is inherently political: it is rooted in white supremacy and colonialism, as well as trans- and queer-phobia, and misogyny, amongst other systems. It is based within enforcing a standard way of being so that we do not defy the system, so that we engage nicely within capitalism and do not attempt to rock the boat.
In the past few years, neurodivergent has been removed from it’s origins as a sociopolitical identity and been reinforced as part of the diagnostic system - although not diagnosed itself, the term has become heavily intertwined with state confirmation of an individual, rather than an identity that can be claimed by individuals without any diagnosis or specific label for their experience, to reject the norms and expectations of society and to push for a complete move to how we perceive neurodivergence as a society.
To attempt to make neurodivergence ‘politically neutral’, we lose these roots and co-opt the causes and needs put forward by these terms. This is not a medical label, it is a reclamation and a paradigm shift. To be neurodivergent but to not ask for the shift to the neurodiversity paradigm or to be neurodivergent but to believe in disorder and deficit language is simply not aligned and not the root of the concept4.
Disability Justice, Ableism, and Saneism
Neurodivergence as a sociopolitical identity is inherently linked to concepts about, and the strive for, disability justice - because neuronormativity is explicitly linked with and based on ableism and saneism.
Neurodivergence and the neurodiversity paradigm are linked to many - if not all - of the 10 principles of disability justice5, but to just pull out a few of these to show the ways in which this links to a lack of political neutrality:
Intersectionality: when we discuss neurodivergence we must acknowledge the way we ‘do not live single issue lives’ (Audre Lorde) - that white supremacy and colonialism, and all other systems, are unable to be separated from our existence as neurodivergent people because these are what actually underscore our society, and particularly for us, ideas of ‘functioning’ and neuronormative ideals and expectations.
Recognising Wholeness: the concept of inherent worth outside ideas of productivity or commodification - that we have experiences, worth, history, life outside of our ability to work or be commodified by capitalism. Our divergence is not made for those purposes, it is our own.
Collective Access: going ‘beyond able-bodied and minded normativity to be in community with each other’. We cannot do this when neurodivergence is separated away from its nature as sociopolitical - because we cannot actually push against concepts like neuronormativity without the shift and commitments it needs to occur.
Collective Liberation: this principle says that ‘no body or mind can be left behind’ - when discussing neurodivergence, we must include all forms and people, including but not limited to traits and types often left behind like hearing voices or having hallucinations, psychosis, acquired neurodivergence (particularly in older individuals), and those often seen as ‘physical’ only (such as epilepsy or a TBI, which change how you function within neuronormativity).
Where do we even go from here?
We’re now at a stage where lots of people are rejecting the term and claiming ones like “neurospicy” or “neurocomplex” or any number of other euphemisms in an effort to separate themselves - mostly not because neurodivergent has been co-opted by businesses, but because there is a complete lack of understanding of divergence not being something which says there is one “normal” way of being that we are not, but to acknowledge the divergence from alignment with how society is built.
People keep asking if neurodivergent is too broad, not descriptive enough, or gives a lack of context, but that’s the point. It isn’t one thing, it isn’t a diagnosis, it is a sociopolitical concept.
We must also ask: has the co-opting of neurodivergent by corporations and capitalism also gone too far? Is it something that could even be reclaimed or understood now?
Dr Nick Walker said “the two paradigms, the pathology paradigm and the neurodiversity paradigm, are as fundamentally incompatible as, say, homophobia and the gay rights movement”6, and society is trying to make neurodivergence and state certification one and the same in a way that can never really align.
For me, we have work to do to shift back to the true meaning, both when it comes to the way we are being sold, packaged up by people who only mean autism or ADHD and only mean our supposed “strengths” or “superpowers”, but also when it comes to it becoming a medicalised term - because they simply cannot work together.
Thank you so much for reading this edition of Untangling with Charli Clement! You can support me to keep writing through becoming a paid or free subscriber, or buying me a coffee.
A short reading list for you… 📖
Empire of Normality by Robert Chapman
We’re All Neurodiverse by Sonny Jane Wise
Neuroqueer Heresies by Nick Walker
Mad World by Micha Frazer-Carroll
How to be You by Ellie Middleton
Radical Intimacy by Sophie K Rosa
Autism Is Not A Disease by Jodie Hare
References and notes ✍🏻
Botha, M. et al. (2024) ‘The neurodiversity concept was developed collectively: An overdue correction on the origins of neurodiversity theory’, Autism, 28(6), pp. 1591–1594. doi:10.1177/13623613241237871.
This is especially important context after Judy Singer came out as explicitly transphobic a couple of years ago, which harms many neurodivergent individuals.
Here I would direct you to the incredible work of Sonny Jane Wise: their book We’re All Neurodiverse, as well as the free resources available on their website on these topics.
The neurodiversity paradigm was coined by Dr Nick Walker. You can read some of the essays from Nick’s book Neuroqueer Heresies on their website, including this one introducing the neurodiversity paradigm itself - but I recommend the book in its entirety.
Walker, N., and Raymaker, D. (2021) ‘Toward a Neuroqueer Future: An Interview with Nick Walker.’ Autism in Adulthood: Challenges and Management, 3(1), pp. 5-10. doi:10.1089/aut.2020.29014.njw
Great piece. Thank you!