Honestly? This is one of the most reactive discussions of an article i have seen on this site. I assume that suggests something about the concept of asperger's as it exists in the here and now. I haven't read the whole article, and obviously it has a slant, but i don't think it is underhanded writing. If anything of postmodernism or death of the author or critical theory has any merit at all, I don't think it's necessarily a propaganda hit piece to examine the context the diagnosis came from. Psychiatric sorts of labels are still fundamentally pretty nebulous post hoc categories to dump people in and not tests for the presence of a pathogen etc.

I have my own slant, so sure, i am agreeing with points that articulate my own feelings better than I have. But even if you disagree there has to be some mechanism for elevating a dialogue, and i think that's one.

In my own personal experience, people who had or fit the diagnostic model were socially isolated, basically unfulfilled and uncomfortable in some way, and i could see that by the way they engaged verbally and i was happy to engage back wherever i could. Sure; i don't actually want to talk about star wars novels or what snack foods someone ate 20 years ago at summer camp for two hours. But sometimes if you are socially isolated too, it can feel good just to know you gave someone else the chance to open up and be animated. That requires an investment though, and i can understand how tired a "normal" person would get of doing that essentially as charity.

But you guys sure could have been more charitable in the discussion here, and not so deeply polarized. My experience with mental health issues is that they polarize people kind of abusively. You guys are generally the smartest and most mature place i can go to lurk a discussion. I'm sad to see that personal stake being used against that comity and intellectual atmosphere.