I don’t think that’s a good analogy at all. Via the power of social media, we are all on the autism spectrum. Everyone, neurotypical or no, shares some traits that can be deemed autistic. There’s no particular metric or attribute you can point to that rules it out. Meanwhile, it’s pretty easy (in my experience) to figure out who you’re sexually attracted to. Nobody has to tell you.
That’s totally fair; I was under no illusion that it was. That doesn’t make it a good analogy. Anyone who is active on social media and has an ounce of introspection would have reason to question whether or not they might fall somewhere on the autism spectrum. Indeed, in many online spaces, embracing non-neurotypical status is seen as positive, and participants have a social incentive to espouse autistic traits.
Whereas straight people (the group referred to by the analogy) do not, I believe (this is obviously just conjecture, and not at all scientific), generally have cause to question their sexuality, nor are they socially incentivized to do so, unless their peer group is unusually weighted toward non cis/het individuals.
I would argue that your “is active on social media and has an ounce of introspection” applies just as well to the gay/straight spectrum as the neurodivergence spectrum.
I don’t think that’s a good analogy at all. Via the power of social media, we are all on the autism spectrum. Everyone, neurotypical or no, shares some traits that can be deemed autistic. There’s no particular metric or attribute you can point to that rules it out. Meanwhile, it’s pretty easy (in my experience) to figure out who you’re sexually attracted to. Nobody has to tell you.
Your experience (of figuring out who you’re attracted to) isn’t the universal experience
That’s totally fair; I was under no illusion that it was. That doesn’t make it a good analogy. Anyone who is active on social media and has an ounce of introspection would have reason to question whether or not they might fall somewhere on the autism spectrum. Indeed, in many online spaces, embracing non-neurotypical status is seen as positive, and participants have a social incentive to espouse autistic traits.
Whereas straight people (the group referred to by the analogy) do not, I believe (this is obviously just conjecture, and not at all scientific), generally have cause to question their sexuality, nor are they socially incentivized to do so, unless their peer group is unusually weighted toward non cis/het individuals.
I would argue that your “is active on social media and has an ounce of introspection” applies just as well to the gay/straight spectrum as the neurodivergence spectrum.
Yeah, you’re right. I guess it’s just a matter of where one falls on the Kinsey scale. But again, that also undercuts the original analogy.