A thing pathologizers often say, in response to mad pride and neurodiversity advocates who question pathologization, is "But it's only called a disorder if it causes functional impairment! We're not pathologizing harmless traits, only things that cause distress or functional impairment!"
Which would be fine (no, it wouldn't, but that can be a separate discussion), except that THEY define "functional impairment." They also define "distress."
Essentially their argument is "We don't pathologize people arbitrarily, we only pathologize people who don't live up to the standards that we ourselves created."
No comments:
Post a Comment