You're not "too stupid to be Autistic"

How intelligence as a concept is harming Autistic people

I'm Autistic, amongst various other identity labels, and have spent much of my life being praised for my intellectual ability and ability to communicate ideas and concepts. I have had IQ tests that show me to be in the top percentiles, and find many people respecting the things that I say and do.

For all intents and purposes, the popular discourse would suggest that I should not struggle. People often commonly cited my being Autistic as a defining factor in my intelligence. The truth, however, is that all of these things feed into a deeply ableist and exclusionary narrative that fails to account for the very real disability I experience, and excludes huge numbers of Autistic people from accessing a sense of Self-acceptance and pride.

In this article I would like to discuss why intelligence is a flawed concept and only serves to cause harm when applied to Autistic people and their understanding of themselves.

You're Not Stupid; You Need Access To Yourself

In my years of working with other Autistic people I have commonly heard them tell me that they are “too stupid” to be Autistic. This is something I find concerning not just because it presents a person who is struggling with finding acceptance on their life, but also because it is the surface feature of the harm that intelligence narratives are causing.

Intelligence as a concept is largely built on standards that have evolved out of colonial Europe, and have deep ties to the eugenics of the early 20th century. When you consider the ways that intelligence is measured around the world, it becomes clear that testing favours privileged cultures, features that are productive in the capitalist machine, and almost certainly aimed at the dominant neurocognitive performance.

To put it simply, if you are a person who is not from a western culture, able to conform to capitalist ideals, and neurodivergent, you are more likely to be identified as having below average intelligence.

To me, this presents a matter of access. When we talk about accommodating Autistic people in their environment, we tend to think in terms of physical spaces and barriers in the classroom or workplace. I would argue, however, that the concept of intelligence has become so widely accepted that we are effectively expecting Autistic people to conform to standards set by that as a concept, and not allowing them access to the skills their own mind has.

In simple terms, we are allowing Autistic people to believe they are stupid because we are holding them to a standard that was designed to marginalise them. We also have to consider that many Autistic people are multiply marginalised, further distancing them from the standards of capitalist intelligence.

Academic Skill Does Not Denote Ability

One of the common challenges that Autistic people face is the polarised experience created by the intrinsic connection between intelligence standards and academic standards.

For Autistic people with significant academic ability, it is common for their disability to be ignored. Many of us have lamented our former lives as the “gifted child” while acknowledging our deep struggle as Autistic adults.

For Autistic people who struggle with academic ability, they are commonly denied access to opportunities to thrive and be independent, with the assumption that they are incapable. If this sounds familiar, you may find it reflected in the misleading and harmful ideas of high and low functioning autism.

Sub-Typing Autistic People Creates Danger For All Of Us

In recent years there has been a great deal of discussion around the removal of autism sub-types with the release of the DSM-5 with some stating that this has effectively erased the experience of many Autistic people. I would argue however that the removal of sub-types creates safety.

When we start categorising Autistic people by the observable level of their disability, we have to consider the influence of privilege and power on those groupings. Sub-typing essentially sets the stage for the removal of certain groups from society, or even their total eradication. In particular I think about things said by Temple Grandin and Simon Baron-Cohen, both of whom have asserted that only Autistic people of high intellectual should be supported. In some cases there has been more than implicit assertion that those Autistic people who are perceived to be intellectually disabled should be removed from the gene pool. In other words, sub-typing allows for the emergence and empowerment of eugenics programmes.

Intelligence Measures Create Sub-Types

Whether overtly acknowledged or not, the measuring and grouping of Autistic people based on traditional testing of intellectual capability has been the basis of eugenics in our community for a long time. When we assert that Autistic people are intelligent because they are Autistic, not only do we erase those who can not score well on standardised testing, we also create a societal acceptance that intelligence denotes value.

That value forms the basis of how concepts like functioning labels have risen to everyday language, and has been used to justify the denial of rights that so many Autistic people experience.

Many Autistic people go undiagnosed because they believe their intelligence to be too low for an Autistic people. Alongside this is the risk that those who do score lower in IQ tests and similar will be isolated and targeted for marginalisation and removal.

All of this because western colonists wanted to identify those who benefit the economic system.

I assert that if Autistic people were encouraged to learn and problem-solve using their own personal strengths, and not the ones demanded by society at large; many more of us would be thriving, and fewer of us would feel “too stupid”.