Summary

The article "Speech Is Seriously Overrated" argues against the ableist belief that non-speaking individuals are less intelligent and advocates for the recognition and acceptance of Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) methods as valid forms of expression.

Abstract

The author of "Speech Is Seriously Overrated" challenges the harmful misconception that intelligence is correlated with the ability to speak, highlighting the significant role of non-verbal communication. The article emphasizes that the majority of human communication is non-verbal, including tone, facial expressions, and body language, and with the rise of digital communication, written text has become increasingly prevalent. The author criticizes the hypocrisy of those who discredit AAC while using written communication themselves and points out the irony in behaviorists' attempts to invalidate the very form of communication they utilize. The piece also condemns the ableist accusations made against Neuroclastic, an advocacy organization for Autistic and disabled individuals, for allegedly falsifying articles written by non-speaking Autistics. The author underscores the importance of acknowledging the competence of non-speaking individuals, citing examples of accomplished non-speaking authors and activists, and insists that all forms of communication are valid. The article concludes by advocating for critical thinking in the evaluation of research on Autism and alternative communication, suggesting that presuming competence and providing the right tools can enable individuals to communicate effectively without speech.

Opinions

The belief that non-speaking individuals are less intelligent is a harmful and uneducated viewpoint.
Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) is a legitimate means of expression and should not be dismissed as pseudoscientific.
The majority of human communication is non-verbal, which undermines the emphasis on spoken language as the primary indicator of intelligence or ability.
There is hypocrisy in behaviorists who use written communication to discredit AAC, which is also a form of written expression.
Accusations against Neuroclastic for allegedly misrepresenting the authorship of non-speaking Autistics are considered ableist and unfounded.
The author asserts that given the proper tools and resources, non-speaking individuals can communicate effectively, as evidenced by numerous non-speaking authors and activists.
The article criticizes the lack of accessibility as a barrier to communication for non-speaking individuals rather than a lack of ability.
The author advocates for the recognition of all forms of communication as valid and emphasizes communication as a basic human right.
The author calls for a critical approach to scientific research on Autism and alternative communication, especially when such research is conducted by those without lived experience of the conditions being studied.

Speech Is Seriously Overrated

Assuming someone who does not speak is unintelligent is ableist b.s.

The hypocrisy and the irony are baffling

There is a harmful and uneducated faction of the population who wrongly believe those who don’t use speech to communicate are less intelligent than those who do.

Even more dangerous to the autonomy of non-speakers are those who believe that Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC), and other alternative forms of communication, are “pseudoscientific”. They believe the messages conveyed are somehow influenced and do not represent the individual’s thoughts or intended message.

Umm, hello?

First of all, did we forget that the significant majority of our communication is, in fact, not spoken? I’m referring, of course, to the old adage, “90% of communication is non-verbal”. Nonverbal involves messages sent via our tone, facial expressions, and body language.

Data source: Mehrabian & Williams, 1969 — (image created by author)

(There have been follow-up studies which question the accuracy of the percentages and conclusions reached by Mehrabian & Williams back in 1969, but none have ever challenged the idea that the majority of our communication does not involve spoken words).

Further, with the ever-increasing multitude of hours spent online, a significant portion of our communication doesn’t even involve body language or facial expressions, it’s purely written (rather, typed) word.

Wait — isn’t that the exact form of communication certain behaviourists are using to post comments in attempts to invalidate that very same form of communication?

Dizzy yet?

The ableism is strong with this one

I am not one known for a subtle style of communication, and I tend to miss subtleties from others. This message was as blatant, blunt, and unsubtle as they come. There was no missing this one, not even for me.

Neuroclastic, a non-profit advocacy organization run for and by Autistic and disabled people, has a section on their website dedicated to articles, blogs, and other works by non-speaking Autistics.

This is awesome and necessary because non-speakers are amongst the most ignored and discounted populations. It’s very important for more organizations to make space for non-speakers to be seen and heard.

A certain ableist behaviourist (not the first of his kind, but this one has been the loudest of late) had the audacity to straight-up accuse Neuroclastic of faking these articles. They said other people wrote the articles, then Neuroclastic falsely claimed they were written by non-speaking Autistics.

What in the ableist fuckery is this?

Let me get this straight. Their contention is allistic (non-Autistic) people can write articles. Speaking Autistic people (like myself) can write articles… but they claim there’s no way any non-speaking Autistic could have produced a well-written article?

I guess they haven’t heard of Amy Sequenzia, Tito Mukhopadhyay, Ido Kedar, or Naoki Higashida, among many others. Aside from published authors, there are thousands of non-speaking Autistic self-advocates and activists who post on social media, blogs, and online forums.

The reason there aren’t more is not due to lack of ability, it’s due to lack of accessibility.

This gives “use your voice” energy

For those who don’t know, I’m hard of hearing, fluent in American Sign Language (ASL), and have been involved in the Deaf community for much of my life.

I wrote a piece this past Spring about an experience I had at a Deaf camp as a teenage camp counsellor. To summarize briefly, I was immersed in the Deaf camp culture where everyone was using ASL to communicate, and it was wonderful.

Until the day the parents came to visit.

One mother kept insisting I “use my voice” when communicating with her Deaf son. She was clearly anxious about him learning to read lips and speak, along with using ASL, and expected me to facilitate her ableist approach to her son’s language development.

Nope.

I get this parent was thinking of her child’s future. She’s worried he won’t be able to “get a job and contribute to society” (society being capitalism) if he can’t communicate with hearies (hearing people).

Part of the reason these barriers still exist is because people keep playing into ableist beliefs about one form of communication being superior over others.

All forms of communication are valid, and communication is a basic human right.

Let’s get right down to it

The crux of the anti-communication argument (made mostly by ableist behaviourists) is that certain types of alternative communication are invalid because there is not yet strong scientific evidence that they are accurate and effective.

I’m typically a strong proponent of “evidence-based” services and information — up to a point. I’m an even stronger proponent of critical thinking, which includes being critical of scientific research when necessary.

Much (most) research on Autism and alternative communication is done by allistic, speaking academics with little to no lived experience. Much of that research is unabashedly ableist, assuming Autistic and non-speaking participants are not competent.

Many alternative methods of communication presume competence of the individuals using them. This means we acknowledge and understand that, given the proper tools and resources, people are able to communicate in ways other than speaking.

Plenty of Deaf and non-speaking people communicate directly using signed languages, writing, typing, and specialized apps or computer programs.

Ever heard of Dr. Stephen Hawking, my guy? Yeah, the Dr. Stephen Hawking uses text-to-speech software, which is a form of AAC. I wonder if our ableist behaviourists would have liked to question the great Dr. Hawking about his capacity and competency?

Update

After watching a livestream conversation with Neuroclastic representatives and the ableist behaviourist, I had a lot more to say, so this article now has a part two:

Weaponizing Science

IFLS, I do, but let’s remember it does have its weaknesses

medium.com

When you join medium, as a member you’ll have access to unlimited reads for only $5 per month. If you use my referral link, I’ll earn a small commission, and you’ll earn my undying gratitude.

If you’d prefer give a one-time tip, you can support my writing on Ko-Fi — also, it’s free to follow me on Facebook!

Speech Is Seriously Overrated

Assuming someone who does not speak is unintelligent is ableist b.s.

The hypocrisy and the irony are baffling

The ableism is strong with this one

This gives “use your voice” energy

Let’s get right down to it

Update

Weaponizing Science

IFLS, I do, but let’s remember it does have its weaknesses

Related Stories

Communication Differences Are Not Deficits

Thinking about neurodivergent people as a cultural group, rather than as being disabled by our neurotypes

This Is What Ableism Looks Like

A real-life example of what ableism and micro-aggressions look like in action

Ableism And Invisible Disabilities

An update to my micro-aggressions and ableism story

My Hearing Loss Is Also My Gain

Deaf culture, Deaf pride, and Deaf gain

References