This paper explores different meanings of being social among autistic people who are employed at an autistic-separate workplace in Sweden. The analyses in this paper are based on data from fieldwork at an autistic workspace consisting of autistic people working with peer support directed at young autistic adults in Sweden. Two different forms of sociality, which take place in two different social environments, are highlighted: environments dominated by non-autistic people and those dominated by autistic people. Interest-based sociality includes the importance of having interest-based exchanges with one another, and having common interests and communication based on genuine interest in the topic being discussed. Socially based sociality is, rather, based on social group identification. The first is the dominant form of sociality among the participants, which they connect with being in an autistic space. The second may be viewed as a counter-dominant form of sociality among the participants, which they connect with being in spaces dominated by non-autistic people.

The aim of this article was to think with and elaborate on theories developed outside of autism research and the autistic community, and through this support the production of new autistic-led theories: theories and concepts based on autistic people's own embodied experiences and the social worlds we inhabit. The article consists of three different sections all of part of the overall umbrella, Being, knowing, and doing: Importing theoretical toolboxes for autism studies. In each section, we import useful concepts from elsewhere and tailor them to autism studies. Throughout, we mingle our own autoethnographic accounts and shared discourse in relation to research accounts and theories. Illustrating being, we explore and discuss the possibilities of critical realism in autism studies. Illustrating knowing, we explore and discuss the possibilities of standpoint theory in autism studies. Finally, illustrating doing, we explore and discuss the possibilities of neurocosmopolitics including epistemic (in)justice in autism studies. Our proposal here is for an epistemic shift toward neurodiverse collaboration. We are inviting nonautistic people to work with, not on, us, aiming at to make autism research more ethical, breaking down bureaucratic structures, and questioning poor theory and shoddy methodology. Acknowledging intersecting axes of oppression in which an individual seeks to renegotiate and reimagine what it means to belong also means to understand what needs changing in society, as it is and how we might do things differently. Community brief Why is this topic importantPeople are starting to realize that good autism research should include autistic people (as researchers, participants, co-designers, for example), which means working in neurodiverse teams (teams that include autistic and non-autistic people). So far, a lot of ideas that researchers have had about autistic people have said that they (we) are impaired, which is hurtful and can make it hard to work together. If we are going to create better research, and better spaces to do research in, we need to find new ideas and ways to work. It is important that these new ideas are based on how autistic people see themselves and the world around them (us). What is the purpose of this article?In this article, we (a group of neurodivergent researchers) look at how we can apply ideas about how knowledge is made, how we use knowledge, and how knowledge impacts people, to creating better autism research. We use ideas from philosophy and think about how they can help us to share our experiences with each other. What do the authors suggest?We start by exploring how a theory called 'critical realism' can be used to understand differing autistic experiences, by taking into account how our identities and experiences are shaped by different social environments and affect we think about the world. Next we apply standpoint theory, which looks at the importance of acknowledging the impact of a researchers own identity in research. Finally, we explore 'neurocosmopolitanism', which hopes for a future where our differences can be celebrated and accepted. We also think about 'epistemic injustice', where research that is done 'on' instead of 'with' leads to inaccurate or harmful knowledge about us. We argue that by applying ideas such as these to autism studies, we can create spaces where fair and just autism research is created. We argue that these ideas will help both autistic and non-autistic researchers to understand each other better, because they are based on what it is like to be autistic, and not what being autistic looks like to non-autistic people. What do the authors think should happen in the future?The authors think that more researchers should think about what they say about autistic people. Autistic people should be recognized as the people with the most knowledge about what it is like to be autistic. We think that this will create a kinder way of working for both autistic and non-autistic people and research will be more useful and ethical. How will this study help autistic people now and in future?This research will help autistic people in two ways. First, it will make sure that autistic people's ideas and experiences will be taken more seriously by non-autistic colleagues. Second, it will lead to better autism research, benefitting autistic people who are not just researchers. This is because the ideas will be more closely related to the experiences of autistic people, instead of outside interpretations of what it is like to be autistic.

A lot of people who do research are also neurodivergent (such as being autistic or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder), but neurodivergent people do not always feel welcome in research spaces which are often shaped around neurotypical people. Some neurotypical researchers lack confidence in talking to neurodivergent people, and others feel like neurodivergent people might not be able to do good research about other people who are like them without being biased. We think it is important that all researchers are able to work well together, regardless of whether they are neurotypical, autistic, or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (or any other neurotype) – in truly ‘neurodiverse’ teams. In this article we talk about how to create better spaces for all researchers, where we feel valued for who we are and take each others’ needs into account. We do this using some approaches from other areas of research and talking about how they relate to our personal experiences of being neurodivergent researchers with our own personal stories. This article adds to a growing work on how we can work with people who are different from us, in more respectful and kind ways.

Building on work in feminist studies, queer studies and critical race theory, this volume challenges the universality of propositions about human nature, by questioning the boundaries between predominant neurotypes and ‘others’, including dyslexics, autistics and ADHDers.

This is the first work of its kind to bring cutting-edge research across disciplines to the concept of neurodiversity. It offers in-depth explorations of the themes of cure/prevention/eugenics; neurodivergent wellbeing; cross-neurotype communication; neurodiversity at work; and challenging brain-bound cognition. It analyses the role of neuro-normativity in theorising agency, and a proposal for a new alliance between the Hearing Voices Movement and neurodiversity. In doing so, we contribute to a cultural imperative to redefine what it means to be human. To this end, we propose a new field of enquiry that finds ways to support the inclusion of neurodivergent perspectives in knowledge production, and which questions the theoretical and mythological assumptions that produce the idea of the neurotypical.

Working at the crossroads between sociology, critical psychology, medical humanities, critical disability studies, and critical autism studies, and sharing theoretical ground with critical race studies and critical queer studies, the proposed new field – neurodiversity studies – will be of interest to people working in all these areas.

The article investigates letter writing as a way to explore neurodiverse collectives, neuromixed communication and neurodiverse research collaboration. From the perspective of neurodiversity studies and translation practice/studies, the article negotiates new perspectives of inherited images of neurological selves and others, such as the non-autistic as the 'typical' in contrast to the 'atypical' autistic person. Experimenting with autistic time, allowing different sensory modalities and different approaches to time, detail and narrative, the article challenges deficit approaches to autism. Through a letter writing practice the possibilities and challenges of subjectivity, cultural translation and writing as method are examined. The article suggests that 'counter narratives' are important sources of knowledge as they reclaim personhood from dehumanising perspectives. By performing neuromixed conversation and dialogue with theoretical concepts, and pen paling as play as a fruitful form for responsible cross-neurotype translation, the article illuminates challenges and opportunities in neurodiverse collective writing.

This paper explores young autistic adults' energy management in relation to work, leisure activities and social relationships. Energy management strategies serve as different ways for the young autistic adults to sustain their energy balance by trying to understand what increases or reduces their energy levels. In this way, energy can be understood as modes of autistic functionality where the informants' individual energy levels, the contexts in which they find themselves and the strategies they use to influence and form central parts of their everyday lives.

Autistic people have historically been described as incapable of developing a deeper sense of self-awareness, and autistic understandings of self-awareness have been largely disregarded. The aim of this study is to explore the way young autistic adults try to understand their functionality and who they are, or to develop their sense of self-awareness, in work and in private life contexts. In 12 qualitative interviews conducted with four autistic adults without learning difficulties, we identified a rich set of reflections on knowing and accepting oneself. The overarching theme of self-knowledge has three subthemes: learning from previous experiences, learning about oneself by securing the support of others, and understanding and accepting autistic functionality. The strategy of self-knowledge was used by these young adults to help them achieve functional lives in the work and private domains. Our results show that young autistic adults both actively explore and develop their self-awareness. We suggest that it is important for practitioners and employers working with autistic individuals to engage with their journeys of self-awareness as a vital part of understanding and supporting them.

In this article, we explore experiences of support and self-management amongst young autistic adults in the context of vocational support interventions in Sweden. We analyse how young autistic men use different strategies to manage their vocational work and the support they need to maintain, achieve and sustain their work performance. Data consist of eleven interviews with 4 autistic young adult men in different work environments where vocational support interventions are implemented to different degrees. One finding concludes that the interviewees are affected by and try to adapt to neurotypical norms and expectations about working life and adulthood. Although individualised coping strategies can be helpful, it is important for employers and formal support persons to understand and acknowledge that individual emotional and problem-solving coping strategies are demanding and need to be combined with adaptations in the working environment. Another finding concludes how work managers act as gatekeeper in the vocational support system the young autistic men aspire to access and in which they need to manage their work performance. Thus, social workers must provide structured and well-coordinated formal work support by both involving the autistic clients’ employers, work managers and informal networks.

Utifrån egna erfarenheter av deltagarnära forskning resonerar vi i kapitlet om forskningsetik och forskaretik baserat på olika etiska dilemman och överväganden vi mött, olika betydelser av god forskningsetik och god forskning. Vi reflekterar över hur vi som forskare kan utveckla ett särskilt etiskt förhållningssätt som präglas av närhet och samarbete i en strävan att skapa kunskap som är praktiknära och samhällsrelevant. Vi har valt att utgå från tre forskningsprojekt. Två av projekten kretsar kring barn och unga. Det tredje fokuserar på hyresgästers upplevelser av bostadsförnyelse och hur boende organiserar sig i frågor som rör hemmet och boendet. Mot slutet av kapitlet resonerar vi om hur forskare ständigt bör reflektera över etik, i förhållande till sin roll som forskare och sina forskningspraktiker. Här diskuterar vi även fördelar med deltagarnära forskning som förespråka rhandling, teori, reflektion och praktik i forskningen.

In this paper we seek to restory what has been storied as “the problem of ADHD”. Informed by calls for a critical ADHD studies, we explore the possibilities of ADHD collective autoethnographic storytelling. Together we (en)counter narratives of ADHD. Within our collective writing space, from our ADHD/AuDHD bodyminds, we seek to re-story our ADHD/AuDHD. We map a field of critical ADHD research within social sciences and point out problems of outsider perspectives, stressing a need for insider perspectives. Our data consist of collective authoethnographic writings about ADHD. From the data we have explored our experiences of (En)Countering ADHD narratives, and a transition process which we refer to as from ”broken NT-scholars” to neurodivergent scholars, stressing the importance of ADHD:ers as independent as well as collective agents, and ADHD as epistemological standpoint within research.

Literature on attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has historically come from a cognitive deficit approach and lacked community authorship. In contrast, this article utilises a neurodiversity framework to explore ADHD as a cognitive difference through ADHDers’ experiences. Specifically, here we analyse collective autoethnographic writings from neurodivergent academic researchers writing to one other about their experiences of intensity and variable attention or interest-based attention. Through the process of collective writing, we started to rename and restory our experiences, which has enabled us to understand intensity and variable attention as a valuable facet of human diversity, with both strengths and challenges. This project offers an example of how community-based research can elucidate individual experiences as ADHD/AuDHD researchers, facilitate exploration of varied experiences with intensity and attention and increase self-awareness and ability to give and receive neuroaffirmative support.

Autism is conceptualized in much scientific literature as being associated with restricted and repetitive interests, characterized by an ‘empathy deficit’, and negatively impacting social communication. Meanwhile, ‘good and healthy’ sexuality is largely considered to be a social endeavor: asexuality and sexualities defined by acts rather than by partner gender—for example kink or BDSM—are broadly pathologized. Perhaps, therefore, first-hand autistic experiences of sexuality challenge existing assumptions about ‘good and healthy’ sexualities within couplehood. As a theoretical starting point to explore this potential, we revisit Gayle Rubin’s notion of ‘sex within the charmed circle’ to ask whether autistic sexuality can ever truly ‘fit’ within this (neurotypically defined) virtuous sexual arena. We further consider the ways in which the intersection of autism and sexuality is understood and experienced in first-hand autistic accounts of sexuality within a specific context, through analysis of a Swedish online discussion forum in which autistic people discuss sexuality. In doing so we seek both to better understand autistic sexual experience, and to track and deconstruct potentially restrictive assumptions of (non-autistic) couple sexuality more generally. We also consider ways in which assumptions of deficit concerning both non-normative sexualities and autism may have a deleterious effect on autistic people and on research more broadly, limiting theoretical and conceptual understandings of autism and autistic ways of (sexual) being by a default comparison to sexual and neurological norms. © 2020, The Author(s).

In the current research climate, in which many autistic and autism communities are increasingly calling for a move towards collaborative forms of research, we consider how a loosely formed epistemological community may serve to challenge 'business as usual' in the academy. Mindful of the need to move beyond theory, we use this experience to concretely consider how knowledge about autism and neurotypicality can be meaningfully (co)-produced, and made available both to the research community and also to autistic and autism communities. Here, we use our own co-production of this article to explore how autistic experience may trouble normative meanings of academic knowledge production. We also consider the limits and possibilities of a neurodiverse research collaboration to reflect on ways in which a loose epistemological space may serve to contribute to knowledge about both autism and neurotypicality, adding to debate around collaborative research.

This article is an investigation of neurodivergent reading practices. It is a collectively written paper where the focus is as much on an autoethnographic exploration of our autistic readings of autism/autistic fiction as it is on the read texts themselves. The reading experiences described come primarily from Yoon Ha Lee's Dragon Pearl (2019) and Dahlia Donovan's The Grasmere Cottage Mystery (2018), which we experience as opposite each other in how they depict their neurodivergent characters and speak to us as autistic readers. Through the article, we describe a formation of neurodivergent (critical) collective readings of autism/autistic fiction. The article contributes to an academic and activistic discourse around neurodivergent reader responses and power relations between neurodivergent and neurotypical readers and authors.

This paper is a neuroqueer reading of the novel A Room Called Earth (2020) by Madeleine Ryan. In the paper, we explore and theorise a neuroqueer reading practice. Ryan’s novel depicts a neurodivergent experience of life and the world, through a neurodivergent literary form and style. Reading as neurodivergents, the content and the form melt together–it is more than ‘literary style’, it is a way of existing. This reading, and our writing about our reading, is not neutral. It is an engaged and personal reading, where we let our reading subjects fuse with the text. Important in our neuroqueer reading practice is the context of reading and writing. In the article, we explore how sharing our readings in a neurodivergent collective opens up an understanding of the world, the text, and ourselves, which works both as a healing process and sharing of experiences of sensory desires. We argue that the neurodivergent experience is different when experiences as a collective rather than individual experience–the feelings of reading, becomes when shared, something more and other. Earthlove is, through our reading, an experience of sensory/textual desire, and neurodivergent collective acts of love and self-love. Reading it feels like love. 

The concept of neurodiversity usually refers to perceived variations seen in cognitive, affectual, and sensory functioning differing from the majority of the general population or ‘predominant neurotype’, more usually known as the ‘neurotypical’ population. Authors are working at the crossroads between sociology, critical psychology, critical medical humanities, disability studies, and critical autism studies to expand each of these fields, but also to define a new field of enquiry: neurodiversity studies. Meanings of neurodiversity also gain force from political movements in different national and global contexts, which are commonly associated with the autistic self-advocacy or ‘autism rights’ movements. Ideas formulated within the neurodiversity movements have also impacted the reformulation of other social categories such as gender and sexual subjectivities, meanings of citizenship, and of the redistributive aims of the welfare state. This chapter serves as an intervention in methodological discussions around neurodiverse collective knowledge production.

In this chapter, the editors put forward their concluding thoughts on the development of neurodiversity within academic fields and summarise some of the perspectives advanced in this book, along with our own. The neurodiversity paradigm(s) can be seen as one of three perspectives; as lived experiences that informs ways of producing knowledge, of ways of looking and talking back to power – of ‘queering’ the cognitive normative gaze – and finally as an ethical stance. There may be tensions between ‘affirming’ lived experiences and ‘queering’; but both kinds of work are important, since we need to represent neurodivergent experiences and challenge cognitive norms.

Somewhere along the way, neurodiversity in an academic context has, up to a point, become coextensive with critical autism studies. We want to stress the importance of unpicking this, given that this orientation only addresses a limited range of neurodivergent experiences. We argued that it is essential for neurodiversity studies to consider all neurodivergent differences and not to exclude types of neurodivergence that are seen as less culturally palatable.

In this chapter we will explore autistic writing processes from a neurodiversity perspective informed by a social-cognitive model of autism. The analyses in this chapter is based on two data sources: a) eleven narratives written by autistic people about their writing processes (we are among these writers ourselves) and b) authors’ analytical reflections about our own writing processes during the process of writing the chapter. The data has been analysed alongside autistic autism theories – theories developed by autistic researchers about autism; principally a cognitive theory of autistic thinking styles (Seng, 2019) and a social theory of autistic sociality in autistic spaces (Sinclair, 2010). The chapter aims both at analysing different autistic writing processes in themselves, and at contributing to the development of methods for supporting autistic writing collectives both inside and outside of academia. We argue for the importance of challenging the stereotype of autistic loners, rather stressing the importance of autistic togetherness.

This article examines the role of a civil society organisation that offers parental support to migrant parents with regard to meanings of parenthood and citizenship. It is based on the results of an action research study of a civil society organisation. The material consists of notes from participatory work in a local centre for children, youth and their parents, and of interviews with professionals, a project manager of the local organisation, and a public servant and a social worker who both work for the district council. Additional material is taken from notes of study visits to organisations working with the same target group. The results highlight four central themes. The first two themes, difficult parents in a precarious place and a place with a future?, revolves around parental needs in relation to place, the suburb. The third theme, civic parenting practices, focuses on parenting practices as civic practices. The fourth theme, gendering parent citizens, discusses the gendered meanings of the parent citizen as both an object and an agent of integration.

The paper explores how disabled girls with Personal Assistants (PA:s) in a Swedish context constitute themselves as subjects in relation to intersecting meanings of age, gender, space, time and disability. The results illuminate the importance of social spaces and social relationships for the girls’ forming their sense of selves. Similar to ablebodied girls, disabled girls’ transition into adulthood can be viewed as a yoyo-transitions, entering and exiting different adult positions several times. Unlike ablebodied girls, they enter adult positions not commonly associated with youths, such as work leadership positions in relation to adult employees, such as the adult PA. This implies that they to some extent manage their own process of becoming an adult. Our findings stress the importance of recognition and awareness of disabled girls transition to adulthood as different not pathological to nondisabled girls’, where consideration is taken both to individual needs and preferences of female assistance users.

• All girls need to develop their sense of themselves to become women
• Disabled girls with personal assistants find it difficult to live ordinary lives as girls without the support of external personal assistants
• With the help of personal assistants disabled girls can participate in the places and with the people they choose themselves
• The relationship with the personal assistant put demands on the disabled girl to become a woman faster than abledbodied girls, in the same time it can hinder the girl’s development into a woman
• It is important for practioners and policymakers to recognize the dual role of personal assistants in disabled girls lives

Sensory experience is subject to considerable political and normative pressure, often felt, but rarely theorised. Taking as a starting point Simmel’s conceptualisation of the stranger, whose ‘position as a full-fledged member (of society) involves both being outside it and confronting it’, we propose neurodivergence as a form of Simmelian sensory stranger-hood, phenomenologically, spatially, and temporally situated as a tool for critical exploration of expressions of – and discourse around – cognitive normate sensory experience. We therefore consider neurodivergent experience less as an object of study than as a perspective. Here, the writers take the collective experiences of their own ‘bodyminds’ as a source of data. This chapter therefore consists of an auto-ethnographic project with a triple aim. First, we use this exploration to consider sensory normativity, and how this may affect the ways in which neurodivergent people are able to construct themselves and their identities. Second, we propose a reading within which the ‘sensory stranger’ provides a valuable epistemic asset whose potential exceeds the ‘particularity’ of neurodivergent experience. Finally, we are interested in considering the conditions and circumstances under which neurodiverse writing methods may be emancipatory.

Children’s invisibility, non-participation or limited participation can be associated with social workers’ experiences of losing focus of the child in their work, while at the same time navigating organisational and legal demands where a child perspective is strongly promoted. This article sheds light on social workers’ experiences of workingwith a child perspective and with children’s participation. Six in-depth interviews were conducted with professionals from social services and ngo s and from different child welfare services in Sweden. Our findings indicate that losing focus of the child is a common phenomenon that relates to the dominance of adult-centred practice and that child-centred methods need to be developed. Social workers from NGOs described having better opportunities for working in a child-centred way. Losing focus of the child mirrors the subordinated position of child-centred practice, proving that a child perspective and children’s participation are still inadequately anchored in social work practice.

This article is a palimpsest emerging as part of a project of collective autoethnographic writing on the theme of sexuality. It draws on the intensification of friendly writing, friendly as in friends with benefits. We write as autistic and neuroqueer subjects, writing until our textualities becomes sexualities. We write until the text becomes a room – call it Earth or call it Body, call it Brain or call it Heart – in which one could crack meanings―but these are not the most important ones. Instead of meanings and positions, we want to write about movements in time. The time it takes to read a body that is never a body of your own but a part of a tiny orchestra. The time it takes to formulate a voice that speaks through mutism. This peculiar collection of letters works with our writing subjects as moments of memories. Reliving sexual moments – renaming sexual moments as sexual moments. Writing becomes an act of embodied and embrained tension and fusing. Maybe the text will revive in your hands—by reading it, you will write another version with us, of you. We are sensory strangers fucking through texts. Come play with us.

People with cognitive disabilities are commonly positioned as risky sexual subjects. This article discusses the discursive production of sexual normates in the form of desirable and normative able-minded sexual subjects, in scientific research on the sexuality and cognitive disabilities of younger and older individuals (in particular those with dementia). We identify three interrelated discourses: regulating sexuality; fostering sexuality; and preserving sexuality. The first of these, regulation, pathologises sexuality of people with cognitive disabilities as faulty and in need of restriction. The second discourse, fostering, is more affirmative and argues for educating for a 'healthy' sexuality of people with cognitive disabilities, to mitigate risks of abuse. This discourse is more salient with younger people. The third discourse, preservation, in contrast, is more visible with older people with dementia and affirms sexuality so long as it is consistent with a 'genuine' or 'authentic' sexuality of the past. In conclusion, scientific research reinforces the cultural ideal of the rational and autonomous individual (and as such the mature/adult) capable of making independent decisions and engaging in healthy, good sex, based on stable sexual identities. Findings demonstrate how age intersects with cognitive ableism to intensify the cultural anxiety that exists around the sexualities of people with cognitive disabilities.

Neurodevelopmental classifications and the collective idea of neurodivergence can be seen as a ‘moving target’. In our understanding, this means that it responds to the needs of society as well as potentially infinite neurological differences between humans. Therefore, rather than assume that neurodiversity exists according to the existing clinical categories of autism and related conditions (that are often centred around autism as the exemplary kind of neurodivergence), we leave the possibility open that there are other forms of difference that have yet to be defined. In the paper we explore how neurodiversity has been described as a collective property of brains, as we try to negotiate between us what it is to be human and how we can work together to ensure our flourishing and to alleviate suffering. We consider implications of this understanding of neurodiversity for autism research, and propose that we unpick the analogy between neurodiversity and biodiversity.

PURPOSE: In this paper, we explore and contrast the Swedish state and NGO arguments for initiating two changes in national educational degree objectives in Swedish teacher education: one regarding sex and cohabitation education, and the other regarding support for pupils with ʻneuropsychiatric difficultiesʼ such as autism and ADHD (here referred to as neurodivergent pupils).

APPROACH: Using critical policy analysis, we compare the arguments from the government as well as responding bodies for introducing the two objectives, with a focus on neurodivergent pupils.

RESULTS: Our findings suggest that discourses concerning sex and cohabitation education for all pupils and support for pupils with ʻneuropsychiatric difficultiesʼ respectively derive from different educational ideologies and reproduce different ideas about pupils as active citizens versus passive objects of interventions. The objective of sex and cohabitation education is framed within a norm critical discourse putting forward reflexivity and identity, and where pupils are active subjects to be involved in the process. In contrast, neurodivergence is framed within a deficit approach as neurobiological, individual impairment, and a special educational problem that should be managed by professionals. It is seen as a risk for school failure, where neurodivergent pupils are passive objects of professional discovery and support.

CONCLUSION: In a Swedish educational policy landscape, stressing the importance of educating pupils in line with ideas of children as right-bearers, our exploration illustrates how ʻall pupilsʼ versus neurodivergent pupils, within teacher education, are positioned as belonging to different categories of citizens: as active subjects of rights, versus passive subjects of care. This perception of neurodivergence, we argue, hampers progress towards embracing neurodivergence as a social category, and neurodivergent pupils as political subjects.