Neurodiversity: Challenging Normality in Activism

By JK

This article explores the neurodiversity movement and existing ideas while proposing an organising model to better represent neurodivergent people, women, LGBTQ+ people, non-binary, and other oppressed communities within socialist and left-wing movements.

“Activism takes many forms but it often means navigating uncomfortable environments, adapting to challenging learning formats, and shouldering additional emotional labour”

As a starting point, neurodivergent refers to individuals whose neurocognitive functioning differs from what dominant societal standards define as "normal." This includes conditions such as autism, ADHD, OCD , dyspraxia and Parkinson's disease, among others.[1]

Activism takes many forms that are influenced by background and experiences. For me, being active has often meant navigating uncomfortable or painful sensory environments, learning activist scripts and other skills, adapting to challenging learning formats, and shouldering additional emotional labour to manage social interactions and hierarchies.

While activism often brings together marginalised people, it also comes with sacrifices. Staying silent about personal challenges, investing a lot of time and emotional labour, and overworking to sustain campaigns often fall on a small group of dedicated activists.  At times, activist spaces are influenced by traditional ways of organising including top down hierarchical command structure and authoritative leadership styles rooted in traditional, masculine norms of dominance, control, and, at times, political opportunism.

However, personal, organisational, and political aspects of activism are deeply interconnected, should be discussed more together and require collective efforts to transform how we organise.

“You Don’t Look Autistic”: Unmasking  Stereotypes

I am autistic with a formal “diagnosis”, which is the primary lens through which I approach this article, alongside my experiences as a woman living under capitalism. I acknowledge my privileges and that my perspective is shaped by a Western viewpoint. While I do not speak for all autistic or neurodivergent individuals, or for all women, I hope to contribute to this broader discussion.

It is also important to recognise the validity of those who are autistic without a diagnosis. Many face barriers such as prejudice within the medical system, financial constraints, and limited access to services. These challenges are often greater for people from marginalised backgrounds. Autistic people seeking gender-affirming care face additional difficulties if they have a diagnosis, and many women, trans, and non-binary people are diagnosed later in life due to outdated diagnostic criteria and cultural stigma.

Historically, autism diagnosis guidelines have been influenced by male-centred stereotypes, leading to many people being undiagnosed or misdiagnosed based on their gender, race, or class. Early research by Hans Asperger, whose complicity in the Nazi regime has been exposed, framed Asperger’s (now part of the autism spectrum) as a condition affecting "intelligent but troubled" boys from white privileged backgrounds. This narrow perspective excluded women/non-binary and people of colour from early diagnostic criteria, reinforcing the "male brain" theory. Until recently, the diagnosis ratio of males to females was approximately 4 to 1. However, this gap is changing, and we now know autism can present in different ways across people.[2]

“many women, trans, and non-binary people are diagnosed later in life due to outdated diagnostic criteria and cultural stigma”

Stereotypes, such as the belief that individuals with autism are unempathetic and possess a rude monotone voice, who are often mainly portrayed in technical fields, are harmful and contribute to misunderstandings. Even those who exhibit traits often considered "masculine" might be overlooked in the diagnostic process. Devon Price’s book Unmasking Autism gives voice to a diverse range of experiences, discusses the impact of masking autistic traits, and highlights the ableism faced by individuals who disclose their autism.

Research also indicates a connection between autism and being LGBTQ+. Both groups share a history of being subject to harmful practices, including behavioural therapies like Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA) and gay conversion therapy, both developed by Ole Ivar Lovaas, which have had long-term psychological effects.[3]

Moreover, labels like "high functioning" and "low functioning" oversimplify the experiences of autistic individuals. Functioning, often defined by capitalist standards of "normality," typically involves passing as a non-autistic person, such as maintaining employment, even while some may struggle with sensory issues, executive functioning challenges, or mental health concerns due to having to mask. Labels like "low functioning" can perpetuate stigma and isolation, causing the needs and abilities of autistic individuals to be overlooked 

[Trigger warning: the following section discusses suicide]

Alienation and Mental Health

Karl Marx's theory of alienation describes how people become alienated from their labour, the products of their work, other workers, and their sense of self under capitalism. In a competitive market, value is placed on the endless pursuit of profit and growth, rather than on the collective well-being of people. This includes nature, sensory environments, workplace requirements, and the necessary care and support systems.

“people become alienated from their labour, the products of their work, other workers, and their sense of self under capitalism”

The impact of these pressures is particularly evident in the mental health challenges faced by autistic people. Research has shown that autistic people are at a significantly higher risk of suicide and self-harm.  A study outlined how this can arise from the need to mask autistic traits, inadequate support, and internalised feelings of being a burden, among other reasons. Additionally, there is a notable lack of research on mental health at the intersections of autism with non-binary, LGBTQ+, and racial and ethnic identities. However, it is well established that autistic people and those in the LGBTQ+ community face disproportionately high rates of mental health challenges and suicide risk.[4]

Feelings of alienation extend to the workplace. Society prioritises profit over well-being, valuing people primarily for their productivity. Those who meet the standards of the "productive worker" are often exploited for their surplus labor, which refers to the value they create beyond what they are paid for. In contrast, people who cannot meet these standards due to disability, illness, mental health issues, or other reasons are labeled as burdens on society and relegated to the “surplus population.” The state establishes institutions to determine who is “deserving” and “undeserving,” while the media reinforces the state’s narrative that frames these individuals as attempting to exploit the system.[5]

Currently, autistic adults face disproportionately low employment rates. In Ireland, only 16% of autistic individuals are in full-time employment, and 32% engage in some form of paid work.[6] Janine Booth, an autistic trade union activist, explores the experiences of autistic workers in her book Autism Equality in the Workplace.[7] Booth highlights that the focus should not be on changing autistic people to fit existing workplaces but rather on transforming workplaces and organise to give voice to autistic people.

The goal should not be to make autistic people fit better into systems designed to exploit us. Instead, we need to transform workplaces and build grassroots trade union activism that gives a voice to  autistic people and others disability workers. Alongside this, we need care and support systems that benefit everyone, designed for solidarity, not profit, and rooted in care for people and the planet, rather than exploitation.

Neurodiversity Movement 

“The pathology paradigm says there is a single “normal” way for brains to be configured, rather than seeing neurodivergence as a natural and healthy part of human diversity”

The term "neurodivergent" was coined by Kassiane Asasumasu in 2000, while the concept of “neurodiversity,” referring to variation in neurocognitive function, was coined by the autistic-run group ‘InLv’ in 1996. The broader idea of neurological diversity was widely discussed in many autistic spaces during the 1990s, without a sole owner.[8] This neurodivergent movement gained traction with the rise of the internet, which allowed autistic people to connect with one another, share their experiences, and challenge the prevailing narratives that pathologised differences in neurological functioning.  

Nick Walker published the essay "Throw Away the Master's Tools” in 2012. Walker defines the pathology paradigm as the belief that there is a single "normal" way for brains to be configured and function, and that any deviation from this norm is inherently wrong. In contrast, the neurodiversity paradigm views neurodivergence as a natural and healthy part of human diversity, akin to variations in ethnicity or gender.  Walker argues that there is no "normal" or "right" mind, asserting that the social dynamics surrounding neurodiversity are similar to those of other forms of social inequality and power relations. She argues that this  paradigm shift must occur within both individual consciousness and broader culture.  This articulation and shift from the pathology paradigm to the neurodiversity paradigm, was very influential in the neurodiversity movement and broader discussion.[9]

More recently, Robert Chapman's book, Empire of Normality, offers a deep Marxist historical analysis of the development of the “Empire of Normality” alongside the rise of capitalism.

In their work, Chapman examines how the prevailing understandings of normality and neurodivergence in society are shaped by the changing material relations of capitalism. They consider the intersecting oppressions of gender, race, and class, positioning neurodivergence at the centre. One of Chapman’s insights is that "since the pathology paradigm, and the way it naturalises increasingly restricted conceptions of normality, grew precisely to mirror the needs of the capitalist economy, these material conditions must be changed, not just our thinking." This calls for a shift beyond just changing attitudes and thoughts, but a change to the "deeper structures of society".[10]

Unity in Collective Care and Action

There is inspiration to be taken from the neurodiversity movement in understanding the value of everyone, regardless of their neurocognitive function, and that it does not mean anyone is broken or less. As Chapman notes, "[i]t takes all kinds of minds for society to function," and I would extend this to be true for activist organisations, particularly socialist and anti-capitalist ones. I am also influenced by Penny Duggan’s article on feminist organising.[11]

Typically, collective organising is discussed a lot within non-hierarchical spaces, not as much in organisations with a central leadership. However, there are issues with a lack of structure, as highlighted in ‘The Tyranny of  Structurelessness’.[12]

I set out a definition of collective organising to frame debate on this in existing activist spaces. Those who are marginalised or lack power often question internal functioning, while those with power may dismiss these concerns as distractions from the "real" struggles or immediate crises.

Definition

Collective organising involves activists coming together on an agreed political platform  to recognise and value the different minds, backgrounds, and experiences that influence strategies and intervene in struggles effectively. At meetings, we are all equal and debating ideas is not only a political process but can inform the best strategies and build the organisation long term.  

“Collective organising involves activists coming together on an agreed political platform to recognise and value the different minds, backgrounds, and experiences that influence strategies and intervene in struggles effectively.”

Activist spaces and organisations can reflect the ideologies and power dynamics present in society. It is important to reflect on and challenge these within day to day activities, organisations and movements. This includes addressing issues like communication, knowledge, social capital, organising (planning, meeting format, advance notice, procedures etc), accessibility, and unconscious biases related to gender, disability or other oppressions. Removing barriers to participation, and empowering unheard voices to organise and challenge these barriers together, should be encouraged and facilitated. 

Tasks should be distributed fairly, acknowledging varying capacities due to personal circumstances, caregiving, or disabilities. Different learning and education needs should also be supported as part of the collective process.

Leadership is not about a top-down command structure or one-way decision-making. This must also be avoided in broader community work, where power dynamics are present between experienced activists and the communities they organise with. Leadership should avoid gatekeeping decisions, roles, topics, or areas of work, and must resist any form of tokenism or typecasting of activists.

Leadership, whether individual or collective, must be accountable, transparent, and informed by the experiences and insights of activists and the people in our workplaces and other struggles. Structured forums for feedback, debate, and reflection should be used as part of an ongoing lively democratic organisation. The goal is not to dictate to others, or stomp out minority voices, but to build  leadership within organisations and communities.

The care of activists is not a personal responsibility but a collective. Whether it involves mental health, childcare at events, accessibility, or other barriers, we should act and use our voices in solidarity. We should recognise  that the personal is always political and that boundaries must be respected.

The practice of collective care should replace the language and traditions of bureaucratic sacrifice. This must be reflected in our structures, communication, how we support activists, and openness to creative organising methods. 

Final Thoughts 

For me, neurodivergent liberation is inseparable from the fight to build strong, democratic socialist organisations and broader movements online, in trade unions, housing struggles, resistance to the far right and other campaigns. It is about creating  spaces where activists, whether neurodivergent, women, LGBTQ+, or non-binary etc, can collectively organise and challenge internal functioning of activist spaces, build organisations and inform the struggles they are part of. 

“The neurodiversity movement, including wider demands around disability and care are not side issues; they are part of our class consciousness on how we organise, challenge oppression, build solidarity and movements.”

How we organise is not an abstract question separated from the political project. It determines decision making, whose voices are heard, how strategies are formed, and whether we build movements and leaders, or burnout activists for short term campaign gains. 

The neurodiversity movement, including wider demands around disability and care are not side issues; they are part of our class consciousness on how we organise, challenge oppression, build solidarity and movements.

Notes

1.Nick Walker, ‘Neuroqueer Heresies: Notes on the Politics of Neurodiversity’ (Weird Books for Weird People, 2021).

2.Devon Price, ‘Unmasking Autism: The Power of Embracing Our Hidden Neurodiversity ’ (Monoray, 2022).

3.Jodie Hare, ‘Autism Is Not a Disease’ (Verso, 2024).

4.Anne V. Kirby et al‘ Are Autistic Females at Greater Risk of Suicide’, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/aur.3120, Wiley Online Library, vol. 17, Issue 5 pp. 898-905.

5.DCU Study,9/05/2024,https://tinyurl.com/2s3zx289

6.Robert Chapman, ‘Empire of Normality: Neurodiversity and Capitalism’, (Pluto Press 2023).

7.Janine Booth, ‘Autism Equality in the Workplace: Removing Barriers and Challenging Discrimination’, (Jessica Kingsley 2016).

8.Martijn “McDutchie” Dekker’s blog, ‘A correction on the original of the term neurodiversity ’, 13/07/2023,https://www.inlv.org/2023/07/13/neurodiversity-origin.html 

9.Nick Walker, ‘Neuroqueer Heresies: Notes on the Politics of Neurodiversity’ (Weird Books for Weird People, 2021).

10. Robert Chapman, ‘Empire of Normality: Neurodiversity and Capitalism’, pg5, pg137 (Pluto Press 2023).

11.Penny Duggan, The feminist challenge to traditional political organisations, 21/11/2023, https://internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article3186

12. Jo Freeman(first published in 1972), https://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm