The debate over whether to use person-first language (PFL) (e.g., person with autism) or identity-first language (IFL) (e.g., autistic person) has been ongoing within the autism community, and while many identify with and use PFL, the majority seem to identify with and use IFL.

I’d like to end this debate by pointing out one simple thing: it’s a red herring!

In other words, it should not be a discussion of one versus the other (as the argument posits). This fallacy derails the conversation from listening to and respecting autists’ individual identities to being centered around a black-and-white ultimatum: only one of these identities is acceptable because they are mutually exclusive.

Since discovering i am autistic and exploring actually autistic thoughts on language-use and identity, i have personally gravitated toward an identification with IFL, due to my tendency to avoid possessive language (e.g., i have a cold) which is ubiquitous in English and has come to read as self-centered and narrow-minded to me (though i have never entertained the idea of forcing this rhetoric on any-one else).

But after ruminating on the person-first phraseology that pertains to me personally (e.g., person with autism; person with disabilities; person with depression; etc.), i no longer maintain a preference for either PFL or IFL, because implying i have these things, implies — as does IFL — (1) that they will always be a part of me and (2) that they are integral to who i am as a person.

Autistic (adj.) person describes me accurately. I am autistic (i.e., i am affected by autism), and i am a person.

Person with autism (n.) also describes me accurately. I am a person, and i have autism (i.e., i have a developmental disability).

Ergo, that i am able to use the dictionary definitions of these two phrases to demonstrate their compatibility (as opposed to their mutual exclusion) allows for me to understand that using autism as a noun is not necessarily to: (1) denounce autism as fundamental to one’s identity; (2) denounce IFL; or (3) de-identify as autistic.

While IFL was my first love, i now also identify as a person with autism (in addition to an autistic person) because i do have autism in the sense that i do have a developmental disability.

So now you know how to use this language to refer to me: either/or! both!

But because other autists do prefer one language over the other (e.g., here; here; and here), i and others (e.g., here; here; and here) consider current best-practice to be to default to (a) one’s own language of choice when discussing/writing on autism, and, (b) when you are unsure, asking for and respecting others’ language of choice.

Autistic is not a bad word, just as autism is not; disabled is not a bad word, just as disability is not.

And that’s the bottom line.

❁

Thoughts? Leave a comment; start a conversation! Thank you for reading.