Joseph Straus Autism And Culture Summary

In his essay "Autism and Culture," Joseph Straus discusses the recreation of the concept of autism as a cultural and social category rather than a medical one. He also discusses how, as autistic community has emerged, autistic people have begun to look for historical figures that could be identified as autistic. Straus calls this practice "extremely problematic" (Straus 464) because he feels that the concept of autism is a modern social construction and that classifying historical figures as autistic denies this. However, associating prominent historical figures with autism has the benefit of providing autistic communities with role models and a sense of community through their shared history. Attempting to diagnose historical figures with

While many historical figures are known or are speculated to have had romantic or sexual relationships with people of the same sex, scholars avoid applying terms such as gay or lesbian to them because the use of modern terminology falsely projects modern concepts of sexuality onto historical figures (Gibson, Alexander, and Meem xxi). When discussing the problems with labeling historical figures as autistic, Straus says "... to the extent that autism is a social and cultural phenomenon rather than (or in addition to) a medical diagnosis- the central contention of this essay- it simply did not exist, or at best, existed in an entirely different form" (464). Both scholars discussing sexual orientation and Straus assert that care should be taken to avoid implying false equivalencies between historical and modern identities. It is usually considered acceptable to refer to historical figures as homosexual, bisexual, or transgender and to discuss their same sex relations as related to modern lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer identities, whereas Straus suggests that in the case of autism "... the search for ancestors must either be abandoned or pursued in an appropriately tentative way"

The social model is favored by most disability activists over the medical model, which views disability as individual defects. While the social model is in many ways more helpful and empowering for disabled people than the medical model, claiming that autism is only a socially constructed category and thus that historical figures cannot be viewed as autistic denies the distinctive ways in which autistic people experience and interact with the world. Fundamental neurological differences can be recognized and accepted without viewing these differences as a deficit. Like in many situations, the practice of diagnosing historical figures as autistic should be examined with a mix of the medical and social models. The social model informs the way that historical figures are identified as autistic and their experiences as autistic people is recognized as different from the experiences of autistic people today, while the medical model describes the similarity between people who, while they are differently disabled because they live or lived in different societies, share the same neurological condition. Rather than being "abandoned," the practice of labeling historical