Accusations of sexual creepiness are increasingly common, but are such accusations morally problematic? Legal scholar Heidi Matthews thinks so, arguing that the category of sexual creepiness conflicts with liberal and progressive moral commitments. While principled liberals and progressives may reject creepiness as a legitimate moral category, doing so may come at a cost. Empirical findings about who gets accused of being creepy suggest that the creepiness norm has been repurposed to control male sexual advances in two ways: first, by discouraging (...) substandard male suitors from approaching young women unlikely to be interested in them (“prefiltration”); and second, by stigmatizing age-discrepant relationships in order to steer older men away from younger women and toward age-matched partners (“redirection”). Repurposing creepiness in these ways would benefit women in mating markets transformed by liberal sexual norms and technological change. If something like this hypothesis is correct, the ethical question liberals and progressives must wrestle with is whether these benefits justify maintenance of a creepiness norm that is (inter alia) lookist, ageist, sexist, sex-negative, and neuronormative. (shrink)

The proliferation of work by autistic writers continues apace, defying a long and multidisciplinary tradition of constructing autistic people as lacking the capacity for narration. To study neurodivergent literature, then, is to witness the refusal of these exclusionary narrative conventions, and to register the ideological presuppositions that underpin pathologization. In this article, I engage with recent insights from Neurodiversity Studies to explore the connections between narrative neuronormativity and other discourses of oppression, especially those that have generated racialized, gendered, and (...) colonial narratives of desubjectification. Focusing on the neuroqueer movement—an emergent practice of disidentification that refuses the interpellations of neuronormativity, ableism, heteronormativity, and cisnormativity—I discuss the concept of allism, arguing that this satirical critique of pathologization harbors a deconstructive force that denaturalizes the dialectic of recognition. Pursuing the discursive context and theoretical implications of this critique, I provide a short genealogy of narrative neuronormativity, connecting the operation of the dialectic in the early novel to the clinical texts of child psychology. To demonstrate the neuroqueer subversion of this tradition, I then read An Unkindness of Ghosts, by Rivers Solomon, a text that stages a disidentification with storytelling. Protagonist Aster’s neuroqueer refusal indexes the concomitance of the construction of Blackness as an ontological foil for whiteness and the construction of autism as a standard of disordered sociality that neuronorms can be measured against. My reading of Unkindness suggests that the extant techniques of literary narratorship are political instruments that will, unless repurposed, continue to disseminate these dispossessive dialectics. (shrink)

Music therapy for autism has historically been guided by a “pathology paradigm” that aims to normalize autistic people in line with neuronormativity. The neurodiversity movement has initiated a paradigm shift towards more neuro-affirming practices. However, music therapy would benefit from a more robust theoretical grounding to guide this neuro-affirming transition. We address this gap by putting forward an enactive account of autistic musical engagement—grounded in the neurodiversity paradigm—that avoids pathological framing. Drawing on first-person reports from recent qualitative studies, we (...) discuss how autistic people use music in everyday life for emotional regulation, identity construction, and social connection, while also noting how music can sometimes clash with autistic sensory sensitivities and agency. From this enactive perspective, autistic styles of musical engagement are revealed not as a set of symptoms to be managed but as vital dimensions of sense-making. We conclude by deriving some core principles to guide the development of neuro-affirming music therapies and inclusive live music events, creating spaces for autistic flourishing. (shrink)

The brain in its plasticity and inherent 'sociality' can be proclaimed and projected as a revolutionary organ. Far from the old reactions which opposed the authenticity of political theory and praxis to the dangerous naturalism of 'cognitive science' (with images of men in white coats, the RAND Corporation or military LSD experiments), recent decades have shown us some of the potentiality of the social brain (Vygotsky, and more recently Negri 1995 and Negri 2000, Virno 2001). Is the brain somehow inherently (...) a utopian topos? If in some earlier papers I sought to defend naturalism against these reactions, here I consider a new challenge: the recently emerged disciplines of neuronormativity, which seek in their own way to overcome the nature-normativity divide. This is the task of a materialist brain theory today. 1. The setup: horns of a dilemma There is a lingering zone of what one might think of as sore cognitive muscle tissue in the area of materialism. It is an area of both contested territory and in some cases, a kind of pathos of distance of the 'Ugh! Keep that thing away from me!' sort. I have in mind the combination of materialism as an emancipatory socio-political project (which need not be construed in strictly Marx-Engels terms, if we think of Lucretius et al.) and as a cold-hearted 'spontaneous philosophy of the men in white coats', e.g. nefarious neurophilosophers. Faced with this rather massive alternative, this choice between two projects, I have stubbornly been saying since some discussions with Negri in the late 90s. (shrink)