CW: discussion of ableism (especially lateral ableism) – particularly functioning labels, nonconsent, sexual violence (including rape), and reference/links to lateral… queerphobia/homophobia/biphobia/transphobia (gold star lesbians)

I recently had an exchange on twitter with one of the main actors of the show “Everything’s Gonna be Okay“, who as it turns out is also the show creator (Josh Thomas). It all started when I took to twitter to voice my displeasure with how the show had handled another main character, Matilda (who is autistic and played by Kayla Cromer, an actually autistic actor) having sex, and the ensuing discussions around nonconsent and disability.

But my main (albeit related) issue was around the use of language, and as I said in my tweets, I actually stopped watching when Matilda says “I’m high functioning, it’s not fair!”. At this point Thomas responded to my tweets telling me to “… maybe finish the episode?” in a tweet he later deleted.

I did. And I regret doing so, as I said when I responded (in a new tweet, tagging him because of the tweet deletion). And he responded to me, but it’s taken me several days to find the words and the spoons to be able to respond to what he said.

There were two parts to his response:

“The reason why I said to keep watching it is because Matilda makes the same points you’re making, and Nicholas and Genevieve realize they’ve probably been ableist.”

I never actually saw this, and I suspect that it’s not actually in the episode I stopped watching but in the next one which I could now watch this week, but honestly after how this was handled (especially the language issues), I am done with this show.

“Re function language: we had three consultants with different views, so I let our actors (who are autistic) use whatever language they wanted to.”

This is the core of what I want to address. Firstly, Thomas doesn’t specify if the consultants were actually autistic. However, even if they were (I know there are diverse views within the autistic community, though the vast majority of us detest PFL – person-first language – and functioning labels), the point he absolutely misses here is the issue of lateral ableism.

So, what exactly is lateral ableism? The simplest definition is that “lateral ableism is when a disabled person is ableist towards another disabled person”.

So let’s see how this actually plays out here. The thing with functioning labels, of course (as many people have written about before – I’m sure you’re able to google this), is that those of us who are labelled as “high functioning” are denied the supports that we do actually need, whereas those of us who are labelled as “low functioning” are considered so disabled that we’re unable to do, well, anything. Work, study, live independently, have relationships, and perhaps the key one here: consent to sex!¹

Let’s use an analogy. Josh Thomas says that they let their actors use whatever language they wanted to. So, if they had a lesbian actor on their show who made a point of calling herself a “gold star lesbian”, would he be ok with that? Or would he take into consideration the myriad problems that people have been pointing out with that for some time?

And of course, he might have been fine with actors identifying as “gold star lesbians” on his shows, I don’t know, though that would rather entrench the problem, I’d say.

Updated to add (another analogy):

Most of the time when I go out, I have one of my snuggly dragons or my snuggly octopus with me (they are very stimmy). I have found that a lot of the time people will see the snuggly toy and proceed to talk to me like I’m a child. And there are times I want to grab them and yell “I’m NOT a fucking child!! I have a fucking Master’s degree (and I would have a PhD if it wasn’t for the PTSD situation)! I am fucking intelligent! Stop talking to me like I’m a fucking child!”

And then I stop myself.

Because it’s exactly the same as the functioning labels. Someone who is not “intelligent” (by what measure, anyway?!), someone who doesn’t have a graduate degree, just like someone who isn’t “high functioning” isn’t any less deserving of being treated as the adult they are; of being presumed competent.

I rarely say anything in situations like that (it’s usually just in passing anyway, in a store, or on public transport, or so). But if I ever do, I would make sure not to appeal to any measure of lateral ableism. Because there is nothing about me, nor about anyone else that makes me more deserving of being presumed competent, just like there is nothing about Matilda that makes her more deserving of having her consent taken seriously.

I absolutely get wanting to let people use the terms of identity that we choose! This is important and in most cases I would support this. However, in some cases there is actual harm being done, especially when the person has a significant platform (like being an actor on a TV show, one of the first to be acting as an actually autistic actor playing an autistic character), and allowing them to use that platform in a way that harms their community… is not great.

I could live with the PFL (just like I swallowed it when I saw Hannah Gadsby’s amazing show Douglas, which I can’t wait to see again when the Netflix special comes out), even though I have very strong feelings against PFL. But using functioning labels, especially in a way which insinuates that her consent ought to be valid because she’s “high functioning” (as though it shouldn’t be if she weren’t) is just too far.

Learn about lateral ableism. And do better.

And in future, don’t EVER tell an autistic survivor of sexual violence (and far, far too many autistics are) to continue to watch something that deals with sexual violence and/or ableism when we have explicitly said that it deals with it in problematic ways and don’t want to/don’t feel comfortable to continue watching it. You might think it gets better/the rest of whatever it is redeems the problematic aspects, but you are not in a position to make that call/that suggestion for someone who has experienced trauma (and yes, being disabled in a world not designed for us, facing constant everyday ableism is a form of structural, systemic trauma, quite aside from the trauma of sexual violence).

---

1 Because yes, the line was said by Matilda when they were talking about whether or not she could consent to sex. And of course, the idea that’s raised by Genevieve (Matilda’s younger sister) and Genevieve’s (bitchy/bullying) “friend” that the guy Matilda had sex with practically “raped” Matilda because she (Matilda) was drunk, sad/crying, and… autistic… is utter bullshit! Yes, alcohol/being drunk makes the whole thing blurry. Being sad… OMFG, seriously, how many allistics (of any gender) have had sex when sad and had it be completely consensual?! And the autistic part… well fuck, there’s your great big helping of ableism right there. (Also note that Matilda is the one who initiated the sexual encounter!)

But what compounds it all is the “I’m high functioning, it’s not fair!”, which Matilda later bursts out with to her older brother (Thomas’ character). Because, no! Even if she wasn’t “high functioning”, that wouldn’t invalidate her consent.