“Weaponized Autism”
Deconstructing a misappropriated term
This is a Rachael Maddow-style article. Not because it is brilliant — as I think she is, but because the lede is buried. However, I would appeal to my dear reader that you please wade through this piece. I do have a point to make.
In the movie Being There, Chance the Gardener (Peter Sellers) lives a sheltered life in the home of an unknown person— perhaps his father. As the audience, we are not privy to the information about who the old man is that Chance lives with. We can assume the man is well-to-do because he is the only person Chance has had constant contact with, and Chance presents outwardly as stoic and aristocratic. But we do know Chance has never left his house for his entire life, and his only companions have been the radio, television, and the little garden that he tends in Washington, D.C. He has never interacted with people except his housekeeper. When the old man dies, Chance is evicted, the housekeeper abandons him, and he cannot relate to reality on the outside because he has been in the comfort of his bedroom watching television all of his life.
Through a comedy of errors, Chance ends up being hit by a limousine of the wife of a conservative business mogul (Shirley MacLaine) who has ties to the President of the United States. Chance takes on the moniker of ‘Chauncey Gardner’ because Shirley MacLaine hears this when he tells her his name. The couple takes Chance in, and he impresses them through his ‘authenticity’ (there’s that annoying 2023 buzzword). They think Chance is this brilliant, erudite, sophisticated businessman who has been put out to pasture when, in reality, Chance never says anything along these lines. He merely reflects back on what is given to him, the way Imago couples learn to do. The President meets him, and as Chance talks about tending his own garden while living at the old man’s home, the President is mesmerized, believing that Chance is actually talking about the booms and busts of economic cycles in the form of an analogy.
President “Bobby” : Mr. Gardner, do you agree with Ben, or do you think that we can stimulate growth through temporary incentives?
[Long pause]
Chance the Gardener : As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden.
President “Bobby” : In the garden.
Chance the Gardener : Yes. In the garden, growth has it seasons. First comes spring and summer, but then we have fall and winter. And then we get spring and summer again.
President “Bobby” : Spring and summer.
Chance the Gardener : Yes.
President “Bobby” : Then fall and winter.
Chance the Gardener : Yes.
Benjamin Rand : I think what our insightful young friend is saying is that we welcome the inevitable seasons of nature, but we’re upset by the seasons of our economy.
Chance the Gardener : Yes! There will be growth in the spring!
Benjamin Rand : Hmm!
Chance the Gardener : Hmm!
President “Bobby” : Hm. Well, Mr. Gardner, I must admit that is one of the most refreshing and optimistic statements I’ve heard in a very, very long time.
[Benjamin Rand applauds]
President “Bobby” : I admire your good, solid sense. That’s precisely what we lack on Capitol Hill.
Soon, Chance unwittingly gains significant political influence that spirals out of control into a scale of complete implausibility. At the end of the movie, it is alluded that he will be the next President of the United States as he literally walks on water — fade to black. Granted, Chance does not know the metaplot. As far as he is concerned, he is still simply a reclusive gardener. He is unaware that he is an important person when the movie ends.
Though Jerzy Kosiński wrote Being There as a biting political satire of the times, he also tapped into an archetype, whether he knew it or not. Chance is a mirror through which people see themselves. He fits the archetype of The Holy Fool.
The Holy Fool
The Holy Fool permeates popular culture. Forrest Gump, Josh Baskin (again Tom Hanks) in Big, Prince Myshkin from Dostoevsky’s The Idiot, etc. Andy Kaufman was a living Holy Fool. Not a fool for Christ but a fool for art itself.
The Holy Fool can be seen in several distinct guises throughout history. In the Eastern Orthodox Church, a mixture of people broke with tradition and acted eccentric, erratic, ‘irrational,’ and insane, which was interpreted by the community as a form of spiritual practice. Some of these people were purposefully trying to display their humility, piety, and devotion to Christ and the church — and for them, it was not an act or a mental illness. Matthew 18:2–5. likely influenced their intentions to ‘become like a child’ to enter the Kingdom of Heaven and they acted this way out of a religious impulse. But many of these ‘holy fools’ probably did have what would today be considered a diagnosable condition, such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, autism, etc. Be that as it may, the community saw them as suffering for Christ because they displayed extreme asceticism, self-denial, and incomparable devotion. The Holy Fools of their day threatened the existing social order by challenging church hierarchy through their unconventional behavior, yet they were also revered for their piety and unpredictability. Some “Chance the Gardeners” were considered seriously pious men and even saints in the Church, such as St. Basil the Blessed, St. Xenia, St. Symeon, and Isidora the Simple.
We can trace the Holy Fool concept back even further to Shamanism cross-culturally. In some Siberian cultures and various Native American tribes, individuals who experienced visions or heard voices (symptoms that might be classified as schizophrenic in modern psychiatry) were sometimes thought to have unique spiritual insights or connections. They were trained as shamans; spiritual leaders believed to have the ability to communicate with the spirit world, heal the sick, and guide souls. The same can also be said in some African Tribal Societies. In ancient Greece and Rome, there was a belief that madness could be a form of divine possession or a gift from the gods. For example, the Oracle of Delphi was believed to deliver prophecies in a frenzy that modern scholars have sometimes likened to a psychotic state with the theory that it was produced by inhaling a mixture of ethylene and ethane. The tradition continues today with ‘channelers’ who claim to let spiritual entities occupy their bodies to deliver us insight from a metaphysical source. The channelers claim to be unaware of what is happening while the channel uses their body as a vehicle. There is probably a mixture of fraud, mental illness, and genuine belief among the channelers themselves that they are being used as a vehicle for spirit.
And of course, let’s not forget the 1800s, when ‘freak shows’ didn’t only display people with an outward physical difference but also would display “mental marvels,” prodigies, and other savant skills driven by a public fascination and morbid curiosity of the Victorian public.
This brings us now to weaponized autism.
Weaponized autism
Weaponized autism is the Holy Fool revisited, only much, much more toxic. But I do not think some autistics see it that way.
When I have conversations with autistic people about this concept, some autistic people are amused and find it humorous.
“It’s so messed up, it’s funny.”
“It’s about time people saw us in a positive light. We’ve gotten called a lot of worse things. Why not something like ‘weaponized autist’ for a change?”
“If they love us, they will learn to fear us.”
“Weaponized Autism is basically using autistic people's gifts to do amazing things.”
With total respect, I could not disagree more. I love you all, but we see things differently on this one.
As you can tell from the comments quoted above, this term did not originate inside the neurodiversity community. It was a term appropriated to us by neurotypicals with political motives. That alone should be a huge red flag. Where is the “nothing about us, without us” attitude when we need it?
This subject made it onto my radar screen when I was made aware that John Robison had co-written a paper about this subject with several other leading academics. I’m not in love with every author who contributed to this article, but I respected John’s work enough to give it a good read. And I’m glad I did.
Weaponized autism is a term frequently used on extremist platforms like 4chan and 8chan (now 8kun). It is used to describe autistic people as masters-of-technology who are devoid of social skills, perhaps a bit like Sheldon Cooper. Except weaponized autists are apparently at our best when our capacities can be used for revenge. As quoted in the paper from a neurotypical…
The greatest weapon on Earth is the weaponization of the depressed and emotionally vulnerable. Is Weaponized Autism not a piractical suicide delivery device? Can Social Media be used to find and manipulate useful idiots? Sadly yes.
Here are some other quotes that the article uncovered from neurotypical admirers…
So few really appreciate the pure raw POWER of weaponized Autism! It’s reach is limitless, it’s power isinfinite (sic).
And.
Weaponized autism is a wonder to behold to us regular people. You guys are thermonuclear. Thank you for never giving up on anything! Who’d have thought the heroes of the day would be the weaponized autists of 4chan?
And.
WEAPONIZED AUTISM!!! :D Now we know the evolutionary purpose for autism: highly focused warriors who relentlessly pursue the enemy.
And.
…we need weaponized autists to spread #pizzagate times 10, but more convincing.
Our top kek priests are in development of a new kind of weapon…Never underestimate autism and the boredom of a couple of unwashed NEETS.
And.
BOOM!!!!! Shitposting has now reached fully weaponized autistic levels!!!! Saturday is April Fools Day and I suggest we make use of it. I want every Gabber, Alt-Right and conspiracy theorist dropping round and round of weaponized autism on the enemy via social media.
Thanks for all the love and hero worship, fellas, but I think I will pass.
And as one autistic person who adopted this term said…
actually that makes sense. thanks m8 that’s why I don’t have anyone, no one deserve to be paired up with the pure weaponized autism that I am :D I’m okay with this, I’m a living weapon :D
And another autistic person said…
Im ugly, and none of those other things. My extremely dense weaponized autism is as bad as radioactive waste for womens’ health.
“Weaponized autism” has even crossed the divide into the “incel” community. Anyone who thinks that “weaponized autism,” which did not originate within the autism community, is funny should read the link above about the connection to incels.
This term has been around since the early 2010s, and how it developed is easy to comprehend when you look at a confluence of factors. Popular culture’s depiction of autism has played an enormous role, including portraying autistic people as savants with shows like The Good Doctor, Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory, Max from Parenthood, the movie about Temple Grandin, Simon from Mercury Rising, Jerry Espenson from Boston Legal, Roman J. Israel, Esq., Adam, etc. But there’s just one problem with these one-dimensional caricatures: Only one in ten autistic people are savants. Higher than the general population, yes, but not representative of us as a whole.
And then, too, there’s no doubt autistic individuals can display enormous strengths in certain areas. Our hyperfocus, truthtelling, cut-through-the-bs, skills in mathematics, science, language, logic, and extraordinary knowledge of specialized subject areas seem to convey certain superpowers in autistic individuals. I suspect this is why Elon Musk chose to self-disclose his diagnosis. It feeds into the narrative of his savant-like capabilities and superpowers as an autistic individual.
And then, too, there is a perfect online storm with autistic people who are simply lonely and looking to make connections online. To quote Robison et al. again…
Exposure to online hate propaganda is common among Internet users, especially young people (Oksanen et al., 2014). Individual risk of exposure to this type of messaging rises with increased online activity, decreased attachment to family, and experiences of bullying both online and offline (Oksanen et al., 2014), all of which may be more common for autistic people (Cappadocia et al., 2012; Kuo, 2014; Sofronoff et al., 2011). This trend is expected to grow as hate groups increasingly recruit for their movements in online platforms (Perry & Olsson, 2009). The combination of these trends greatly amplifies the risk for certain autistic people to become involved with hate-based groups, which comes with additional risks of engaging in offline behaviours that are potentially harmful to themselves and others.
While not well studied or documented in academic literature (our search of available literature uncovered only one source exploring this — see Lovett (2019) for an exploration of alt-right recruitment tactics), journalistic reports have indicated that hate groups are working online to actively seek and engage autistic people for recruitment (Borrell, 2020; DEO, 2017; Schroeder 2019). Autism advocacy groups and community service organizations have begun to voice similar concerns and are calling for an organized response that is based on evidence and informed by autistic people (Autism Against Fascism, (no date); Braune 2020).
Clarifying a few things
Let’s get a few things straight.
This article is not about political preferences. I know mine, and you know yours. Some autistic individuals are MAGA supporters. But MAGA or non-MAGA, that is not actually what this article is all about. If there were a group of Bernie Sanders supporters culturally appropriating autism for nefarious reasons, I would be against it. While I could not vehemently disagree with MAGA more about their movement and what it stands for, it is their right to believe whatever they want if we truly desire to advocate for autonomy and self-determination.
And this article is not about diminishing the strengths of autistic people. We should be a proud group of people. The talents and skills we have at our disposal are unique and simply incredible. These gifts are not to be diminished, nor is it the intention of the author to reduce them.
So, what is this article about?
Well, I don’t like to see our population get used. And when we let others coin terms out of whole cloth on our behalf, and then we find it amusing, I am afraid that is what is happening. Remember what we all learned in school about when someone is laughing at us or with us.
Holy Fools were, at least theoretically, used for the good. They were viewed for their innocence and simplicity in trying to be “fools for Christ” or vessels of love through God. Whether the Shamans were mediators between worlds, possessed by spirits, or were schizophrenic, it almost doesn’t matter. They had a positive role to play in society. They were considered social outsiders who the society looked to uplift the community.
But what do those who glorify weaponized autism love about it?
That it promotes vengeance.
Interestingly, the reference to the risk of being on their “bad side” enables the weaponization: it is this implied potential for retaliation along with technical skills that makes autistic people useful to the movement…This “weapon” can be used to advance the interests of the alt-right, including harming their enemies, opponents, or people they see as undesirable.
While I can understand how some autistic people might find this subject amusing, I think we need to ask ourselves if we want to allow outside forces to coopt our branding. Do we want certain people to use our “meltdowns” combined with the technical skills some of us possess to harm our enemies and opponents or people we see as undesirable? Because based on the vast majority of autistic people I have met throughout my lifetime, I do not believe that this is who we are. By and large, we embrace love, not hate, despite whatever side of the political aisle we may position ourselves on. Again, I may disagree with every ounce of my being regarding those on the other side, but I would defend your right to believe it. As Evelyn Beatrice Hall said, and yes, it remains true…
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
And as I discussed in my article on 'Is Autism a Superpower,' the idea of framing autism as a set of 'superpowers' is a narrative that, while well-intentioned, can be problematic and misleading. I explored how this perspective, often embraced in popular culture and media, risks simplifying the complex nature of the autism spectrum. It tends to glorify specific abilities at the expense of overshadowing the daily challenges faced by many autistic individuals. I argued that this narrative could create unrealistic expectations and pressure for those on the spectrum to exhibit extraordinary talents, potentially leading to feelings of inadequacy among those who do not fit this mold.
Well, isn’t this precisely what we are doing when we embrace the weaponized autism narrative, only much more toxicly?
There is nothing wrong with having pride in one's neurodivergence or even a mental illness — mad pride. Pride, despite being considered a sin in the religious vernacular, can be pretty healthy for off-setting low self-esteem and feelings of inadequacy. But let that pride be intrinsic to your values and the values of your particular community. Be who you want to be politically. But don’t be okay with being used by others.
And one last point. Autistic people can end up in the criminal justice system, even though we are more likely to be victims of crime than perpetrators. It concerns me, however, that autistic people would be glorified because some individuals have been able to hack into government databases, and a few have committed mass shootings. These tragic facts should not feed into and reinforce a narrative that we did not create in the first place with the coining of the term “weaponized autism.”
Wrapping it up
The narrative journey from ancient “Holy Fools” to modern-day autistic individuals, tragically coined as “weaponized autism,” is more than a cultural evolution — it’s a stark reflection of society’s failure to grasp the full humanity behind autism. This misstep isn’t just an oversight; it’s a dangerous simplification that warps autism into a tool for entertainment and extremism, stripping away the dignity and complexity of those it describes.
By dissecting these narratives, from Chance the Gardener’s fictional persona to the real-world impact of labels like “weaponized autism,” we uncover a disturbing trend. Certain segments of our society have consistently opted for the easier path: pigeonholing a diverse condition into convenient stereotypes. These labels aren’t just wrong; they’re damaging, perpetuating myths that hinder genuine understanding.
The call to action is clear: dismantle these simplistic narratives and forge a new path that recognizes autistic individuals for who we are — complex, valuable members of society, not caricatures or tools for others’ agendas. It’s time to shift the narrative, ensuring that autistic voices lead the conversation, defining their own stories, free from the shadows of societal misconceptions. This isn’t just about changing perceptions; it’s about restoring respect and dignity to a community that has been misunderstood for far too long. Let’s not just change the narrative; let’s revolutionize it.
