The plan of the human form is one, yet no two human beings are precisely alike in their physical characteristics. Human nature is one in its constituents and its grand lines, but no two human beings are precisely alike in their temperament, characteristics and psychological substance.

-Sri Aurobindo, The Ideal of Human Unity XVII

Diversity is one of the fundamental laws of nature. However, time and again history is witness to the subjugation of diverse populations by dominant cultures and societies. Colonialism and westernization has oppressed, and continues to oppress, individuals who do not fit in with the traditionally defined characteristics of a ‘proper human’: people who are European, white, male middle-class, Christian, able-bodied, thin and heterosexual, thereby qualifying as moral and worthy. The rest are inferior and hence systemically relegated to the dungeons of discrimination and oppression. However, the 20th century saw a resurgence of these diverse groups who rebelled to reclaim their rights and identities as witnessed in the social movements for women and queer populations. The 21st century is now witnessing another larger social movement where the struggle for disability rights is at the forefront and with it comes specifically the autistic led neurodiversity movement. Neurodiversity, a word first coined by Judy Singer (an autistic Australian sociologist) in 1998, attempts to capture the array of human makeups found in the human species.

What is neurodiversity?

Neurodiversity proposes that mental health conditions such as autism, behavioural disorders, learning disabilities, and others are the result of normal and natural brain variations in the human genome rather than some innate flaws requiring a cure. This is a biological fact that explains the infinite variation in neurocognitive functioning of the human brain and how it differs from those considered to be neurotypical. Neurotypicals are individuals who use the normative standards of function, communication, and expression. Individuals that identify as neurodivergent exhibit a cluster of behaviors or signs that leads to a label or diagnosis. They utilize differing styles and methods of learning, communication, relationships and interactions with the world that opposes the norm. It can also apply to individuals who don't have a diagnosis but can intuitively sense that there is something innately different about them. The umbrella term of neurodiversity refers to the neural variations in the human brain and everyone comes under that— both neurodivergents and neurotypicals. The only difference is that neurotypical styles of being are privileged and are considered to be the norm; pushing the neurodivergents in the throes of pathology and systemic injustices.

The myth of the normal child: Evolution and history

In the last century the cultural and social forces of the West have created and perpetuated certain neurotypical norms leading to ‘cognitive othering’ of individuals that do not meet them. The norms for what is considered to be a normal child has existed only for about 100 years. Some prominent events that played a role in defining what is normal included but not limited to were compulsory schooling, mass recruitment of young males during World War One and selective breeding of people by the Nazi Germany. This led to creation of formal norms and expectations by educators, psychologists, psychiatrists and doctors that assigned individuals to the fate of being normal or abnormal. The abnormal were deemed dangerous and a burden to the society, outcasts who frowned upon. Slowly these concepts of normalcy spread outside the US and Europe through practices of colonialism and discourses of modernity. These norms started gaining traction over other neurologically diverse traits. These traits got medicalized, feared, and abhorred. The idea of a normal child started permeating through all areas such as parenting, education, social work, and medicine. And now, these ideas have festered and grown for a 100 years to occupy a central meaning in defining our ways of being with the world on a collective level.

The neurodiversity movement

The rise of the neurodiversity movement was an attempt to move away from the dehumanizing and pathologizing models of describing varied human conditions. The movement, built on the social model of disability, retraces the ideological and epistemological connotations of what it really means to be normal and what forces take part in defining it. Is there really a standard of the normal human brain? At what point do we know that the human brain has transcended to pathology? The ambiguity of the definition of normal is challenged by the fact that these conditions come with their own strengths and weaknesses that add value to human evolution and society. This is shown in the extreme creativity displayed by individuals with ADHD and bipolar, excellent skills of systems and memory among people with autism and visual-spatial gifts in people with dyslexia. The fact that these variations still exist in our genes points to the fact that these are essential variations that lay at the bedrock of progress of human civilization. So why do we still pathologize and alienate such individuals? Currently, almost 15-20% of the population identifies as neurodivergent. Evidentially, the standard for a “normal” or “healthy” human brain doesn't exist just like there is no one valid “race, gender or sexuality”. The classification instead reflects the cultural stereotypes and prejudices rooted in history that have no valid scientific basis and continue to oppress the ones who identify as such.

The social dynamics around neurodiversity are similar to the dynamics that manifest around other types of human diversity, such as power and oppression. This disallows neurodivergent folks from thriving in areas such as employment, education, healthcare, criminal justice, accessibility of services, social exclusion along with lack of representation in media and academics. For example the different social engagement styles of people with autism are subjected to biases in interviews and social skills performance reviews affecting their ability to gain employment or access certain spaces.

Embracing neurodiversity

History, language, culture, context and power deeply determine what gets framed to be normal and wrong. These ideals have corrupted our ideas of what is a normal human being; pathologizing and alienating individuals who don't fit in. Neurodiversity can mean several things to different people. For many it is an attempt to create an ‘ecological society’, ideating that neurodiversity is similar to biodiversity. All diverse species are essential for survival and the same is true for neurodivergent individuals. Diversity itself is the norm and instead of eliminating and curing them, the effort should be geared towards celebrating and including these differences in dominant discourses.

Neurodiversity thus seeks to politicize neurodivergence. It aims to decenter the dominant westernized ideas of the normal human brain and advocates for depathologizing of all different ways of being. It helps us reimagine a world that will alter how we relate with neurological others on a personal level and reform the vocabulary of our scientific discourses. It allows us to build spaces and discourses that foster a shared understanding of our sense of being in the world, altering our relationships on a personal and collective level.

Namisha Chamaria