I did, but that may be because I have an English accent...

yay! A happy ending! :D

Yup #80. So a pretty irrelevant FML. OP could find another way of getting attention. First he had us all laughing at his unfortunate incident and then tells us there's nothing to it. What a tease!

Regardless of where you're from, everyone has an accent of some kind. Yours is just a Californian accent. And I have found that accent can create confusion around words with 'R' since it is a rhotic accent. Like 'horror' and '*****' can often get mixed up. With this in mind it might be a good idea to choose words that are safer to avoid confusion such as 'Do you draw?'

Um hi I actually am autistic and generally we prefer "autistic person" in fact, since otherwise it sounds like our neurology is a Bad Thing that should be shoved to the side — it's not a disability, if anything it's like our brain's OS. So that's what we'd encourage non-autistic people to use as well.

I've always said things like "a person with disabilities" rather than "a disabled person" because I like recognizing the person before the disability. I'm sure that's why OP says it like he/she (I forgot to look at the gender) does.

That's nice, OP. But I agree with the guy who corrected your term. I have many disabilities, so I prefer "disabled kid", to "kid with disabilities" for that makes me feel more flawed. But if it was like deaf, that do it your way.

Glad it worked out, OP, and put me on 86 and 89's side. I'm a Type I diabetic and former English teacher. Relevant to both is the fact that for me, "diabetic" is a descriptor, just like "blond" or "blue-eyed." You'd be more apt to describe me as "the blond woman" or "the blue-eyed woman" than "the woman with blond hair" or "the woman with blue eyes"...the first two roll off the tongue far more easily and, therefore, are linguistically preferable. In my mind, "diabetic" (or "autistic") is simply an adjective that could describe me. It's not the only one, but I don't mind if it's the one that comes to other people's minds first.

86- I also have autism but please do NOT speak for me. When you use the word "We" in regards to a group of people, you are making an assumption that that is how everyone feels. I prefer to be addressed as a person, not a diagnosis.

Oh, and 85, props for addressing the "I don't have an accent" bit. It always amuses and irritates me when people insist that, even though they clearly don't sound like every other native speaker of their language!

I think how one is addressed really depends on that person clearly. I have severe nerve damage in my lower right side that causes me some great challenges, and would be ticked if someone called me a disabled woman rather than a woman with a physical disability. I am most certainly not disabled just playing life on challenge mode thank you. How someone is addressed is really personal preference.

As a special education teacher, we always use person first language like you described. However, I have heard from some in the Autism community that "Autistic" and not "individual with Autism" is preferred. I think it depends on the setting and the individual.

I've been diagnosed as having high functioning autism, specifically Aspergers Syndrome. I don't like people using the "person with" phrasing because that makes it seem like my neurological differences are an accessory in the same way my glasses are. I prefer to say I'm "on the Autism spectrum." Or simply use the informal AS terms such as Aspie. It's different from individual to individual, but for those Autism spectrum dwellers who dislike the implication that having autism is a disease rather than a difference, I don't see much use of the "person with x" language.

91, just as you pointed out to 86 that they don't speak for the autistic community, you don't speak for the autistic community either.

106, Reread 91's comment. She said she (as in only herself) prefers to be addressed as a person. She didn't say "we" prefer it.

Well, I support autism and my brother is a boy with autism