Depictions of autism in media very rarely focus on anything other than what’s perceived as the upsides.
Like all other forms of entertainment and marketing, it’s not realistic, it’s designed to present something appealing to a mass audience.I’d say Tina Belcher is a fairly good depiction, and people love her character.
Yeah I commented that the best depictions I’ve seen of all these identities are usually kids cartoons, Bob’s Burgers is pretty family friendly and decent for the most part. The Marshmallow character is another. There’s an episode that kink shames Pesto for his adult baby diaper fetish though, or rather using the fact that Pesto is ashamed of it himself. Marshmallow has no shame about what they are. Overall it’s positive even with the few issues.
I think it’s also in the current day spirit of unquestioning inclusion. Producers can’t make a more nuanced or even unlikeable neurodivergent character because there would definitely be backlash for harping on a marginalized group. Even if the character is written with the best of intentions in mind
I don’t think that’s true. Tulip and Lake from Infinity Train both have huge personal issues and are trans-coded. It works because the plot is about those issues being addressed. Vee the nonbinary basilisk from Owl House is introduced committing identity theft against the main character, and that’s pretty bad, but then we learn she’s just a scared kid and now we like her. Hunter also has big autism vibes and starts off as a major villain working for fascists, but then we learn he’s a scared kid and we like him. It works because Owl House is about being understanding towards scared kids, actually. Luz (Bi, GNC, autistic) abandons her family and terrorises her peers and King (NPD) thinks of himself as an evil tyrant, but they’re just scared kids.
Downsides are presented as personality traits which are your own fault. Humans love to think that if something bad happens to you, then you either had it coming or you are going to come out victorious in the end. It makes them comfortable. Them - cowards, that is, and most humans are cowards, it’s not something new.
Well in past autism was only shown in extreme forms. Like non talking just have the actor twuxh and occasionally yell. So not showing the up side, but a mix oh the poor parents and inspiring disabilities
Well, there’s always Rainman.
I think there are similar stuffs with mental illness : in a media they serve to further the character’s progression. In reality those are often more disability aither because they are disabilities at their core or because they make you not fit with the crowds who react awfully to that.
In a book or a movie, the struggle a character face, even if well depicted, serve his progression. They also are often a Chekov’s gun, furthering the plot. While in reality it’s just a thing you have to deal with on a daily basis. It’s true with autism but also with so much other stuff. Think depression, depicted a lot, much better than autism, and most depressed character end up cured at the end of the story thanks to their accomplishment. Except it doesn’t work like that, you can very damn well save lives and remain depressed. Showing that would be realistic but wouldn’t make sense story wise and the narration would feel incomplete.
Well thats if you only look at the most popular media in the most immediate present day. Stop looking through a microscope! Its exciting to see so many awesome autistic characters with awesome upsides.
Flash news people like fiction not as a representation of reality but as a stylized, idealized versión of it, that’s why you see beautiful people, not fat, ugly or old. So it’s autistic quirky and not every day autistic.
I’m aware it’s an impopular opinion but that doesn’t make it less true. And you can gauge it by how popular it is.
Also romanticized… Mental illnesses…
Also it’s funny to hear about unfairness in media or Hollywood. Such as women are expected to be beautiful and not be over 30. There’s a lot you can say about it, but something about it makes me feel it’s deeply hypocritical.
Removed by mod
that’s why you see beautiful people, not fat, ugly or old
I frankly don’t usually agree with Hollywood ideas of “beautiful”. Which is also the reason I’m watching mainstream movies (and I’m not a cinema enthusiast, so mainstream is all I watch) less and less - those ideas are becoming even more narrow and specific over time. I’m feeling as if some subculture’s or even some little group’s idea of “cool” is being shoved down my throat, in appearances and writing and cinematographic language even.
In my personal opinion people I know are in average more beautiful than Hollywood faces active now.
I frankly don’t usually agree with Hollywood
I said fiction, not Hollywood. And yes you can have your own preferences, I’m not saying that you can’t, just that what we call mainstream is the representation of objective beauty.
those ideas are becoming even more narrow and specific over time
Depending on who you ask, somebody would tell you it’s the contrary.
just that what we call mainstream is the representation of objective beauty
Beauty can be only subjective by definition.
Nope, facial and body symmetry can determine if someone is considered universally beautiful.
And it’s not limited to humans, animals and plants can be considered universally beautiful.
The sea and the starry sky, a sunset, the moon etc, if it moves emotion within you then it’s beautiful, and there are things that move the world entirely.
Nope, facial and body symmetry can determine if someone is considered universally beautiful.
Facial and body symmetry is ugly or at least scary. You’ve just never seen people with that.
Other than that - beauty is by definition your own opinion on whether something looks good or bad. If there’s a single person in the world who disagrees - then it’s not universal. If there is none, but there may be the next moment - then it’s not universal.
and there are things that move the world entirely
Nothing moves the world entirely. Majority vote doesn’t apply here and even the 3 (or up to 7, whatever) sigma rule doesn’t.
I respect your wrong opinion, have a nice day.
Take a sufficiently well-centered photo, leave only the left or the right half, and replace the other one with its mirrored version. Then honestly say whether what you see is beautiful or ugly.
If you know that, just walk around here trolling, then bon appetit and ignore my advice.
I don’t understand the confusion here. Yes, it’s interesting and entertaining to watch people on TV deal with issues that don’t affect me and that I don’t have to accommodate, and it’s not interesting, entertaining, or fun to watch my brother deal with those issues in real life, or that we have to walk on eggshells at family holidays so my brother in law doesn’t have a meltdown. Duh. It’s also entertainment to watch a show where an important character dies, but extremely difficult and uncomfortable when your actual friend loses a spouse or child.
Society loves things that are difficult on TV, and in real life society prefers things that are easy.
Yeah, but one thing useful to tell a good person from a bad one is that they are conscious of this at least when you point out their behavior of this kind to them. Sometimes people consider themselves good because they like watching and reading about people doing good things, and are in denial about the contrast with their own real actions. Or have the gall to behave as if the latter matters less.
Wednesday from The Adam’s Family and Eddie Munster are nuerodivergent?
Yeah. People have a tendency of labelling anyone that is depicted in TV shows as socially awkward as autistic. That’s why so many people on twitter who simp for Dahmer on twitter refer to his supposed autism despite the fact that he was subjected to multiple psychological evaluations and never was accessed as autism.
Neurodivergent is not a synonym for autistic
Wednesday was socially awkward, sure… But the Munsters? From what I remember, they were depicted the same as any other sitcom family of the time; except they were physically monsters. To be fair, though, I barely remember the show from when it was on Nick at Nite when I was a kid; I might be conflagrating memories.
You are showing your age here. Granted, kinda the person who made this fault because they just said Eddie and expected everyone to know which Eddie. They mean Eddie from stranger things.
Eddie from stranger things is neurodivergent?
A poster above stated neurodivergent wasn’t a synonym for autism, I’m pretty sure for a lot of people it is a synonym for “different”.
Eddie does represent a counter-culture that was prevalent at the time, for many that codes as “neurodivergent”.
How does counter culture have any relation to actual neurological conditions. I think that’s the questions people are asking. This whole post is insulting and stupid to actual neurodivergent people.
I was never defending the definition, just giving my perspective. But, to take the argument further (because this is the internet, and it’s made for doing just that), expressions of neurodivergence are often just ways of thinking atypical to the norm. A lot of counter-culture is based around that idea, people thinking in ways that go against the grain.
The difference, of course, comes from choice. Do people choose to think differently? Then most likely they don’t fall under neurodivergence. Whereas if they just think differently naturally, that is more likely to be true neurodivergence.
The problem is this is mostly pop-psychology. It’s not necessarily strictly defined in those terms. As with most things, especially when it comes to digital representation on the internet, people will grasp on to labels and seek to find role models to slap those labels on to boost their self image.
I understand language evolves and all that, but I think it’s a problem to change the meaning of a word like that without another word with the original meaning to take its place. If “neurodivergent” just means “different”, what word do we use in its place?
I dunno enough about stranger things to comment about thar but in general characters who are like socially awkward get labelled as autistic.
If you haven’t even seen the show, why are you defending the characterization? If you had seen the show, you would know Eddie Munson is not socially awkward, especially compared to most of the other main characters who actually are portrayed that way.
Miss.
I do think that having been a teenager in the 80s or 90s should be considered a form of neurodivergence, but i fail to see how eddie is different from the other main characters (the kids). They are not mainstream but i wouldn’t call them neurodivergent.
I never once got that impression. Seems like a stretch to me
Also outside of cosplaying who is “obsessing over” them?
“Why does everyone love that imaginary character so much,when they could have loved me instead? I do deserve it more, after all!”
They’re both, at their core, fish out of water stories. Akin to ‘someone from the East coast moved to the south and both people do things differently’.
People are projecting, otherwise.
They diverge from their neurons? Sounds very scientific, I’m going to assume it’s not just another fashion word people use to describe how very unique and special they are.
In general, I like all people more as a concept than in person.
Wait you think Wednesday is supposed to be neuro fucking divergent? The Addams family are macabre. They enjoy inflicting pain on themselves and others. They’re obviously creepy and quirky. They’re bizarre. They’re morbid. They’re antiheroes, maybe. They could even be argued to be sociopathic, sadistic, cruel, or just mean. But that’s their entire shtick, you absolute massive twat. They’re an antithesis of a typically-portrayed family, the one with the white picket fence and the golden lab. What they are not, nor has anyone involved with their creation ever claimed they were, is neurodivergent.
But sure, just randomly make something unrelated to you completely about you, cause that screams neurodivergent, not narcissism.
Honestly kinda hate it when the Addams family are portrayed as actual criminals. Kinda makes me root for the stepford wives who keep protesting their existence, which defeats the point.
You’ve just described a lot of autistic people though. And specifically in this era where characters are given an extra dash of “autistic-coded writing” yeah thats the popular consensus is that Wednesday represents an autistic character.
Ok so I’m not alone. I was also a little confused too when this whole “Wednesday is neurodivergent “ was suddenly posted out of no where. If I’m to understand it; the current annoyance is that there’s a bunch of idiots out there that can’t tell the difference between fact and fiction when it comes to relating to neurodiversity.
Adams family was written in 1930s https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Addams_Family which is a body of artwork on macabre entertainment and wasn’t intended for ‘a psychological take’ (disembodied hand should have been obvious and the earmark for absurdity) it’s as ridiculous as someone swooping in and giving their armchair analysis on Voldemort. Or identifying with the plight of ents in LOR.
Neurodivergent wasn’t coined until the 1990’s https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/symptoms/23154-neurodivergent
Could a person see something in it? Sure. Does that mean artistic intention? No. That’s 60 yrs to make such a connection. That’s absurd in and of itself.
It does seem it was taken a bit far on both sides though when you see people are actually writing thesis online about Wednesday adams and identifying with a fictional character but then get mad when someone else draws the comparison into a 2 dimensional definition to make the comment. So it’s more than just one side making the mistake here, seems it’s a communal decision without agreeing it was made on both sides.
Technically psychopathy is a form of neurodivergentcy
Tbf, personality disorders (ASPD) as you suggested would technically fall under ND, just not the type OP necessarily meant in the meme (assuming here of course)
They’re not disorders though, they’re just character traits. Liking the macabre isn’t a disorder.
Wasn’t making the claim myself, was referring to something they said regarding sociopathy.
My favourite character is Abed from Community. Wondering what other autistic people think of him?
I like Abed. In general he’s just a cool guy, but I think the portrayal despite on the surface seeming stereotypical actually has lots of depth. I especially like how he’s seen as “socially inept” but then knows more about the characters than they know about themselves.
Rewatching Community for like the 5th time, and I love Abed- especially how the show makes it clear he’s not always the easiest to deal with, and not just some freakishly-smart supergenius who’s always two steps ahead of everyone. He seems smart because he can read patterns in peoples’ behavior, but he’s otherwise just as human and imperfect as any of the others.
He’s shown to have a lot of insecurity about the gang sticking around, and expects them to eventually give up and abandon him because everyone gets sick of putting up with his quirks eventually. They never do, of course, but it’s something I relate to a lot. It sucks to deal with, but it’s nice to have a character to relate that to.
I like him in DuckTales and Mira Royal Detective.
Man knows his way of around a luxurious pair of socks.
AuDHD here, and I think he’s fantastic.
My favorite!
When did they say he was autistic? Lol he’s just a nerd. If that’s autistic then my whole family is autistic, which it isn’t.
I don’t think they ever directly name it in the show (I think they beat around the bush a few times), but I think the only way to code him more as autistic would be to tattoo it on his face.
Also, it’s well established that autism is highly heritable. You don’t have to be low functioning to be neurodivergent.
Now, I cannot stop imagining gangsta Abed with a tattoo on his forehead!!!
Very good chance your family is autistic especially if you have it which I am guessing you do given which community you are in. It’s genetic. It’s also very common for older generations to go undiagnosed.
They never said autistic, but there were a couple of times when other characters were talking about him or he was talking about himself that it was clear that they were talking about something more than quirkiness. Maybe you didn’t watch every episode, or you missed the euphemisms that people use to talk about neurodivergence because you don’t hear them as much.
I’m pretty sure from episode one they explicitly state he’s on the spectrum
That’s okay. They prefer nondivergent characters more than their real counterparts as well. We really just should all develop catch phrases like Hidily Ho, Neighborino! or Your pitiful rebellion is no match for the power of the dark side.
I don’t believe any of these characters are meant to be coded autistic. People just like wacky characters who say things without filtering themselves because we aren’t actually able to do those things and get away with it in normal society.
I casually do that in my daily life. I just don’t feel like teaching myself how to act normal. Life is tough this way and people definitely don’t like it. I’m sure they’re just jealous.
I recently made some fellow ND friends and I can’t honestly say that I don’t blame the normies.
I mean to be fair a lot of characters like that get popular because a lot of autistic people identify with them and there are a lot of autistic people in fandom spaces.
I’m not with “coding”. It’s like a backronym, the characters are written, the actor and director interpret them, we see them and apply our own interpretation. Our interpretation tries to reverse engineer all of that and then put the character into a known box. Helluva game of telephone.
A character written to be autistic (or have gay affections, or whatever else) is not “coded”, they’re written to be gay or autistic.
Now, that’s not to say that writers, directors, and actors don’t all have biases and may have chosen certain traits knowingly or unconsciously and applied them to a character. There are definitely characters that do appear to have non-normative traits like BBT’s Sheldon, but the show left his character hanging. I can imagine why. If they said he was ASD the ASD community would vilify the show with “That’s not who we are!!!” and “Don’t mock people with ASD!” Justifiably.
But the wiki on the show says this:
Co-creator Bill Prady has stated that Sheldon’s character was neither conceived nor developed with regard to Asperger’s, although Parsons has said that in his opinion, Sheldon “couldn’t display more traits” of Asperger’s syndrome.
The ASD community would be right. There’s no bigger insult than being connected with Big Bang Theory
Big Bang Theory is nerdface.
It can become a caricature of stereotypes rather than a “real” person who is one of these things because the show makes it their primary trait. It’s like designing a gay character in the 00s, especially realty shows, it was like “this person is the gay character, they have to look very gay, what do gay people look like? They’re silly and talk gay and get overly emotional, there’s our gay character.” The racialized character can be even more overtly offensive for obvious reasons. When it comes to neurodiverse its the same, it’s always a primary trait that is very intentionally crafted to be “quirky” or whatever.
Funny enough I think it’s actually kids cartoons that depict these characters in the most realistic way,
People used to tell me that I reminded them of Sheldon from tbbt as though that was a compliment.
I get that often on my tours. I hate it every time and it’s increasingly difficult to hide it.
Of course they do. It is fine when they can simply watch without having any personal skin in the game.
Similarly, everyone loves characters more than real people.
i feel like a lot of these characters produce a weird type of voyeurism. It’s like bringing out a fictional version of a real person to gawk at. Not as bad as the modern “freak show” nature of channels like TLC were they parade out people with issues that are different from the norm. EG my 600 pound life, the ones where they follow people with OCD, etc. However still, kinda, getting to a point where it’s basically using neurodivergence as a trope, or archetype maybe, to entertain the normies, so to speak.
I don’t know, it just weirds me out. It would probably be better if there was more realistic, and positive (without making their condition something that makes them some sort of like super heroesque character) portrayals. Though, any type of divergence, illness, etc. that affects behavior is, still, portrayed very poorly, over all, in the media.
It is probably about time that we have autistic characters by autistic people for an autistic audience
Literally every character in The Owl House is autistic coded and it’s amazing
Removed by mod
Yeah, developing a personality beyond ‘i am neurodivergent’ would be a good start.
“I am neurodivergent” is like those question marks or boxes instead of unicode symbols. The actual string would be that “developed personality” which you don’t understand, and another person is informing you the asshole that you don’t understand it in the last way available - telling you that they are neurodivergent.
I’ve noticed that all people sometimes whine and all people are sometimes narcissistic.
See, those you called “whiny narcissists” may be compassionate to you when your turn to feel miserable comes. While people like you likely won’t.
So it’s the difference between having proper upbringing and empathy and lacking them.
