Autism

A typing mistake when using autoinput on a mobile doesn't really speak to one's language proficiency (especially when I noticed the error and fixed it half an hour before you childishly even pointed it out).

therefore mentioning both neurodevelopmental and neurological conditions in the same sentence

That's not what we're debating. Is your literacy that low or is this plain old avoidance?

What you said is "neurodevelopmental disorders and neurology are wholly different categories" or words to that effect. They're not.

Not "mentioning both in the same sentence".

Again, using the word "insist" the way I did was correct.

No, it really, really wasn't. And just because this is my third language doesn't make it better for you. It makes it worse, because youre getting schooled.

"Why did he insist on showing up when she was alone?"

Another one would be,

"Do you want to go to the store?"

"If you insist."

First one implies almost a stalking sort of action, but on a socially acceptable level. The second one could be replied to with "well I sort of fancy a drink, but it's not a must" (as in politely negating the "insist").

Me casually pointing out you're using language wrong and you taking extra special offense at wanting to be called extra special, because you think "neurodivergent" is categorically different from "neurodevelopmental" is not me insisting to insult you. It's just your ego being really weak and you perceiving a casual remark as insistence.

Unlike in that case, there's no proscriptively right answer, and the most correct answer will be defined by the author's intent. Who authored the bit you're insisting (see that's the correct way to use the word) has insistence? Oh, right, me.

Would you care to list any of the things you've perceived to be me insisting on an insult? No...? Quelle surprise.

when I'm objectively just criticising the things you've written

Yeah you're being soooooo objective. Not at all just have your feelings hurt because someone saw right through you and pointed out a mistake you made.

now you're basically politely calling me rtrded

You LITERALLY self-identified as "I would prefer being called neurodisabled", when clearly having somewhat functioning faculties (debatable but), and now you're strawmanning that I'm using ableist slurs when you literally literally chose to self-identify with the word I'm respectfully using (against my personal dislike of the term, because I've literally never seen it and read a lot of neurological literature due to my own disabilities).

Sure, it's a term used in medical journals, but that doesn't make it a diagnostic term. When I say medical, I mean in a diagnostic sense.

Ah yes, so I should've been able to read your mind when you said that "it's not even a real word, it was invented in the 90's", that you actually meant "neurodivergence isn't a diagnosis". Because fuck everything, and you just saying shit that's wrong doesn't matter, because you can just say you actually didn't even mean it and didn't even make a mistake but that it obviously means the correct thing, which is actually very different?

Mmm. Right. I can see that neurodisability showing through again, imo. Mind explaining better this disability you have so I don't say anything offensive about your psychological predisposition to ever admit you're wrong and avoid all the stupid shit you've happened to say?

No, "neurodivergent" isn't a diagnosis. Neither is "neurodevelopmental," "neurological", "psychological", "acute" "first-aid", "resuscitation", "suture" diagnoses either, but still they're every much commonly used in medicine, because they're kinds useful when doing it and talking about it.

entirely optional word

For you. But for anyone actually practicing neurology, no it is fucking not "optional". That's like saying that "acceleration" is an entirely optional word for physicists. That is ridiculous.

I've never heard someone use that word when giving me any of my diagnoses.

Yes? And I've never heard the word "suture" in any of my diagnosis. I still have a at least 50 scars of them on my body, left by actual medical professionals. Do you believe they could've been using the word even... even when I wasn't in the room...? :O

Yeah, yeah, coined vs created. You literally coin words by creating a new term based on old prefixes, roots, and suffixes. To say that a word is created is still accurate because you're still creating a term that never previously existed by mashing prefixes, roots, and suffixes together.

I genuinely mean no offense in this part, and I probably have to avoid mocking you for that, but is this the neurodisability of yours again?

You're saying "words are coined through the use prefixes, roots and suffixes. This wasn't coined, because it's created by using prefixes, roots, and suffixes" and you don't see how that's an utterly ridiculously contradictory thing to say? You genuinely don't see it? Uff, guess it's more serious than I thought.

It has been sometimes used to indicate that someone is "one of the good ones" and not like those "disabled guys." I've seen people use it in a similar manner to how people use the word "Asperger's."

I really don't give a flying fuck to your subjective experiences. In what way they use "aspergers"? Mockingly? Praisingly? The "he might be slightly socially awkward" (without an implication as to whether the person is bad or good.)

Perhaps you don't realise but those are subjective experiences of yours. You're just trying to avoid admitting to having made a language mistake. Especially after your insistent implication (repeated, stressed, angry, those are hallmarks of insistence, none of which my comments have :))) ) that I must be bad at English because it's not my first language. Must be kinda shameful to realise how badly you know languages.

If you qualify for a diagnosis that is categorised as a disability, you are disabled. Autism and ADHD, are by definition, disabling.

No, they're not. By definition, they're not. Disabled has actual fucking well-defined legal definitions, (most of which are different in different countries) . But no they're not by definition disabilities. You can actually have mild to severe autism and by no definition is all autism and ADHD disabling. THAT is fucking ableism and offensive af. Especially on c/autism

It's beyond pathetic going to edit your comments instead of admitting to having made semantical mistakes. "People forget its possible being mildly disabled". Depends on the context and country, again. But YOU are conflating a disorder with a disability. Neurodevelopmental disorders don't mean you're disabled even slightly. They can be disabling, but there is no implied necessary disablement. That's ableist as fuck.