From the Inside Out

A Reading List in the Spirit of Tōjisha-Kenkyū · 当事者研究


Within Tōjisha-kenkyū lies the potential of rearranging the relationship between the tōjisha (the person with lived experience of the condition being studied) and the specialist — in other words, between experienced knowledge and specialized knowledge. . . . The mutual respect from the tōjisha and the specialist for each other’s knowledge, along with the collaborative efforts between the two sides, will surely help restore trust to academic knowledge. — Kumagaya and Aono (2019)


This list builds outward from the experience of people with sensory, cognitive, behavioral, emotional, somatic, and relational differences — toward frameworks for self-understanding in community, in explicit challenge to clinical epistemology. Organization is simply my brain’s way of dividing things up. You may see a better option.

Please note: I have included direct links where possible for accessibility, because I believe these many voices need to be amplified in public discourse. That being said, most of these are works by living authors who deserve all of out support and respect. Many works will be available from public or university libraries, but consider purchasing works directly from authors when possible. I have avoided the big marketplaces where possible.

Please let me know about any errors or dead links. This will remain the canonical version of my reading list. It is a living document, and will receive periodic updates and changes.

rag


I. Tōjisha-Kenkyū: The Tradition Proper

Self-directed research by and for people with lived experience. Emerged from Bethel House (浦河べてるの家), a psychiatric survivor community in Urakawa, Hokkaido.

Bethel: Community and Schizophrenia in Northern Japan · dir. Nanako Kurihara · documentary film
The most accessible English-language entry point to the Bethel House community and its practice of communal self-study. Watch before reading about it.
link to film at archive.org

Tōjisha-kenkyū · Satsuki Ayaya & Junko Kitanaka · Aeon Essays (12 June 2023)

Traces the practice from its 1980s origins at Bethel House in Urakawa, Hokkaido — where people with schizophrenia became “researchers” of their own experience — through its expansion into University of Tokyo labs, corporate workplace design, and dementia care. The most accessible English-language survey of the tradition’s full arc, from grassroots peer support to institutional citizen science.

article in Aeon Magazine

Japanese Journal of Disability Studies · journal (ongoing)
Primary source venue. Some issues contain translated material. Bethel’s own publications (some translated) are the primary sources for the collection of scholarship.

online access


II. The Neurodiversity Paradigm

The paradigm shift from pathology to variation — and the political history of that shift.

“Don’t Mourn for Us” · Jim Sinclair · 1993 · essay (free online)
Short, essential, foundational. The tōjisha moment in anglophone autism discourse. Read first.

online article: tw: poor formatting

Introductory chapter coining “neurodiversity” · Judy Singer · 1998 · thesis excerpt (free online)
Thin but foundational. The term’s origin. Worth reading for genealogical purposes even where the theory has been superseded. Provenance has been disputed. Offered for historical context.

pdf

NeuroTribes · Steve Silberman · 2015 · book
Historical and narrative. Recovers suppressed neurodivergent voices and challenges the Kanner/Bettelheim lineage. Strong on the politics of who gets to define a category.

pdf

Neuroqueer Heresies · Nick Walker · 2021 · book
The clearest single articulation of the paradigm shift from pathology to variation. Also theorizes “neuroqueer” as both identity and praxis — the intersection of neurodivergent and queer self-determination.

author’s website

Unmasking Autism · Devon Price · 2022 · book
Strong on the masking/performance/harm nexus. Accessible and grounded in lived account. Good for understanding the cost of performing neurotypicality.

publisher’s website

ASAN (Autistic Self Advocacy Network) · institutional primary source
“Nothing About Us Without Us” as organizational praxis. Foundational documents available free at autisticadvocacy.org.

website tw: bad formatting


III. Monotropism: A Generative Framework

Organized around deep, channeled interest rather than distributed attention. Explains a remarkable range of autistic experience from one structural principle — including interest-driven cognition.

“Attention, Monotropism and the Diagnostic Criteria for Autism” · Dinah Murray, Mike Lesser, Wenn Lawson · 2005 · journal article (Autism)
The original paper. Proposes that autistic cognition channels attention into deep interest-tunnels rather than distributing it across a broad field. Has the quality of a good structural analogy: makes many things make sense at once.

link to article

Writings at monotropism.org · Fergus Murray · online essays (free)
Ongoing development of monotropism as a full cognitive and phenomenological framework. Murray is autistic; the writing enacts what it describes.

website


IV. The Double Empathy Problem: Shifting the Frame

The unit of analysis shifts from the individual to the relationship. The “deficit” is in the interface, not the person.

“On the Ontological Status of Autism: The Double Empathy Problem” · Damian Milton · 2012 · journal article (Disability & Society)
Probably the most important single paper in autism studies in the last two decades. Demonstrates that the “empathy deficit” is a bidirectional relational misfire — a cross-neurotype translation problem — not a unilateral autistic failure. Reframes the social difficulty structurally.

pdf version

Subsequent empirical validations of the double empathy problem · Catherine Crompton, Kilee DeBrabander, Brett Heasman, Damian Milton & Noah Sasson · 2020s · journal articles (synthesized in an open-access primer)

The core empirical program, led largely by Crompton’s group at Edinburgh, has tested Milton’s 2012 theory directly: diffusion-chain studies show information degrades fastest in autistic/non-autistic pairs and holds together equally well in same-neurotype pairs (autistic-to-autistic or non-autistic-to-non-autistic); rapport studies find matched-neurotype pairs consistently rate each other higher regardless of which neurotype is matched; and later work (Jones et al., 2023) shows even outside observers detect and rate mixed-neurotype interactions as more strained. Together these findings relocate the “problem” from autistic deficit to bidirectional mismatch—the mechanism Milton proposed but could not yet demonstrate.

author summary


V. Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Neurodivergence

Where the double empathy problem relocates deficit from person to interface, these sources relocate the interface itself — showing that “neurodivergence” is a category produced by the collision of Indigenous cosmology with settler-colonial diagnostic apparatus, not a universal biological fact awaiting local color.

“Indigenous Autism in Canada: A Scoping Review” · Grant Bruno et al. · journal article
Bruno (Samson Cree Nation, Maskwacîs, Treaty 6 territory, Alberta) is a pediatrics researcher and father to autistic children; his scoping review maps the near-total absence of Indigenous-specific autism research and names the extractive-research skepticism that any future work has to earn its way past. Founder of the Indigenous Caregiving Collective and Ispimihk Awâsisak (Sky Children).

link to article

“The Gift of Being Different” · Grant Bruno (project lead) · 18-minute documentary (free online)
Short-form, community-facing entry point paired with the scoping review above. Good to watch before reading the academic literature, in the same spirit as the Bethel documentary in Section I.

youtube

Indigenous Perspectives on Autism and Neurodiversity, with Grant Bruno and Otilia Johnson · Uniquely Human podcast, episode 123 · Jan 2025
Bruno in conversation with Otilia Johnson (Cora Nation, Nayarit, Mexico), both parent-professionals. Focused on what non-Indigenous clinicians and systems would need to unlearn, and on what Cree and Cora understandings of raising a “different” child already do well without a diagnostic apparatus.

link to episode

“We Just Took Care of Each Other”: Exploring Cultural Understandings of Neurological Conditions · Melissa Joan Blind · 2017 · PhD dissertation, University of Arizona (American Indian Studies; chair: Mary Jo Tippeconnic Fox)
The title is the finding: a community account of how neurological difference was held before — and often without need of — clinical categories. Structurally close kin to tōjisha-kenkyū’s community-first epistemology, arrived at independently. Contact author directly for copies.

dissertation page

Scholarship of Dr. Sandra Yellowhorse (Kinyaa’áanii, Diné/Navajo) · ongoing academic work, Critical Indigenous Disability Studies
Works from Diné storytelling and land-based knowledge to reframe “disability” — recovering ancestral stories that treat sensory and cognitive difference as a form of relation to land and community rather than a medical deficit. The load-bearing move: disability-as-story and disability-as-diagnosis are different genres with different truth conditions, and the second did not exist before contact.

link to publications page

Indigenous Autism Research Special Interest Group · International Society for Autism Research (INSAR), 2025 meeting
Not a single text but a convening — self-advocates, service providers, and academics building a shared methodological paradigm shift away from deficit-based, Western-normed research and toward Indigenous-led, strengths-based, relationship-first models. Useful as a map of where the field’s live edges currently are.

IARSIG repository


VI. Mad Studies and Psychiatric Survivor Paradigm

The Western parallel to tōjisha-kenkyū — rougher-edged and more politicized. Survivor knowledge as a distinct epistemological category, not merely a perspective to be “included.”

On Our Own · Judi Chamberlin · 1978 · book
Foundational survivor-led critique of psychiatric institutionalization. The original “nothing about us without us.” Establishes that people labeled mentally ill are the experts on their own experience.

pdf

A Straight Talking Introduction to Being a Mental Health Service User · Peter Beresford · book
Beresford’s theoretical work on survivor knowledge as an epistemological category is the key contribution; this is the most accessible entry point.

borrow from archive.org

Accepting Voices · Marius Romme & Sandra Escher · 1993 · book
The foundational text of the Hearing Voices Movement. Voice-hearers studying their own experience: structurally parallel to tōjisha-kenkyū. Romme was a psychiatrist who took his patient’s challenge seriously enough to redesign his framework.

transcript of lecture

Decolonizing Global Mental Health · China Mills · 2014 · book
Extends the critique to how Western psychiatric categories are exported as universal — particularly relevant for multilingual, multicultural community contexts.

publisher

Anatomy of an Epidemic · Robert Whitaker · 2010 · book
Empirical critique of the biological-disease model using the field’s own long-term outcome data. Argues that psychiatric medications worsen outcomes over time for many people. Not fringe — based on published literature.

borrow at archive.org

buy from publisher

VII. The Power Threat Meaning Framework

The most ambitious attempt to replace diagnostic categories with a framework organized around lived experience and social context. Developed with survivor collaborators.

The Power Threat Meaning Framework · Lucy Johnstone & Mary Boyle (eds.) · 2018 · book / free PDF (British Psychological Society)
Four organizing questions replace diagnostic categories: What has happened to you? What threats did you face? What meanings did you make? What are you doing to cope? Explicitly anti-nosological. Worth reading critically — the language sometimes remains too professional-class, but the structural move is essential.

pdf


VIII. Phenomenology of Embodied and Cognitive Difference

Philosophical grounding for why first-person accounts carry epistemological weight — and why clinical knowledge structurally cannot access certain things from outside.

Illness: The Cry of the Flesh · Havi Carel · 2008 · book
Uses Merleau-Ponty to argue that illness is a transformation of the lived body that clinical knowledge structurally cannot access from outside. The gap between disease and illness is where tōjisha-kenkyū lives.

publisher

The Meaning of Illness · S.K. Toombs · 1992 · book
Phenomenological. Distinguishes disease (biomedical object) from illness (lived experience). Essential vocabulary for articulating what clinical frameworks miss by design.

pdf repository

The Social Construction of What? · Ian Hacking · 1999 · book
The “looping kinds” concept: psychiatric and psychological categories interact with and reshape the people they categorize. Deeply relevant to the experience of receiving a diagnosis — the category changes what it names.

borrow at archive.org

“What Is It Like to Be a Bat?” · Thomas Nagel · 1974 · essay (free online)
Old but essential. The irreducibility of subjective experience to third-person description. Philosophical foundation for the epistemological claim that lived experience cannot be fully translated into clinical observation.

pdf


IX. Backgrounding and the Master Model: Val Plumwood’s Ecofeminist Philosophy

Not a text about neurodivergence, but the deepest structural diagnosis of the logic that produces its mistreatment. Plumwood names the operation by which mastery renders what it depends on invisible — the same operation that lets diagnostic and portability systems consume the coverage-range labor of neurodivergent people while categorizing the residue as deficit. Included because she has greatly influenced my thinking, and everyone should know about her.

Feminism and the Mastery of Nature · Val Plumwood · 1993 · book
The master text. Develops “hyperseparation” and “backgrounding” — the twin moves by which a dominant self defines itself against a subordinated other (nature, women, the colonized) and then treats its dependency on that other as beneath notice. Chapter 2, “Dualism: The Logic of Colonisation,” is the direct ancestor of any argument that a classification system naturalizes an extraction it cannot admit to needing.

pdf

Environmental Culture: The Ecological Crisis of Reason · Val Plumwood · 2002 · book
Extends the master model from metaphysics into culture and reason itself — argues that instrumentalizing rationality is not a neutral tool misapplied but a rationality already structured by mastery. The closer companion, of the two, to an argument about diagnostic and credentialing systems as rationality-with-a-standpoint rather than rationality-as-such.

borrow at archive.org

“Being Prey” · Val Plumwood · 2000 · essay (free online; originally Aeon/Utne Reader)
Plumwood’s own near-fatal crocodile attack, narrated as a forced first-person confrontation with the fact of being food — of ecological dependency and vulnerability that mastery had trained her to disavow. Tojisha-kenkyū in an ecofeminist register: the theorist made to live inside the collapse of her own master-story.

doc

The Eye of the Crocodile · Val Plumwood (ed. Lorraine Shannon) · 2012 · book, posthumous / free PDF (ANU Press)
The fuller philosophical working-through of “Being Prey,” left unfinished at her death. Reflects on predation, death, and the ecological self with the same precision she brought to dualism — essential for anyone using backgrounding as a diagnostic lens beyond its original domain.

pdf


X. Crip Theory and Disability Studies

Political philosophy of disability as a social and structural relation, not a property of individuals. Challenges cure-orientation and futures organized around normalization.

Feminist, Queer, Crip · Alison Kafer · 2013 · book
Best single-volume introduction to crip theory. Challenges the assumption that disability is a problem to be solved — and that the future should be organized around its elimination.

pdf

Crip Theory · Robert McRuer · 2006 · book
“Compulsory able-bodiedness” as a structure analogous to compulsory heterosexuality. Crip and queer theory in productive dialogue.

borrow at archive.org

“Access Intimacy” and related essays · Mia Mingus · essays (free at leavingevidence.wordpress.com)
What it feels like when someone else gets your access needs without performance or resentment. A phenomenological concept with no clinical equivalent — it describes the relational texture of belonging rather than accommodation.

blog post

Care Work: Dreaming Disability Justice · Leah Lakshmi Piepzna-Samarasinha · 2018 · book
Disabled femme of color perspective. Mutual aid, collective access, community care as political and somatic practice. Enacts as much as it argues.

pdf

Skin, Tooth, and Bone: The Basis of Movement Is Our People · Sins Invalid · 2016 · book / zine
Disability justice framework from a BIPOC-disabled-led collective. Justice over access, liberation over inclusion. The political grammar for this whole list.

pdf


XI. Community Care and the Mutual Aid Frame

Self-understanding is not only individual — it is generated and sustained in relation. These texts theorize the community infrastructure that makes that possible.

Mutual Aid: Building Solidarity During This Crisis (and the Next) · Dean Spade · 2020 · book
Short and structural. Distinguishes mutual aid from charity at the level of power analysis. Directly relevant to sliding scale and care economy models.

author’s website

Leaving Evidence (blog archive) · Mia Mingus · online essays (free)
Years of writing on interdependence, disability justice, access, and community. One of the richest single archives for this project.

author’s website

Writings on interdependence and disability justice community · Stacey Milbern · essays / talks
Milbern died in 2020. Her writing on collective care, community as survival, and disabled joy remains essential.

collected works and essays


XII. Connective Threads and Further Directions

Works that cross the above categories or point toward territory not yet mapped.

The Examined Life · Stephen Grosz · 2013 · book
Psychoanalytic case studies written as literature. Not politically aligned with the above, but valuable for the phenomenological precision of its attention to how people make meaning of difficulty — including the ways that meaning-making resists clinical interpretation.

archive.org

All the Weight of Our Dreams: On Living Racialized Autism · Lydia X. Z. Brown, E. Ashkenazy, Morénike Giwa Onaiwu (eds.) · 2017 · anthology
The intersection of autism and race, written entirely by autistic people of color. Expands who “neurodivergent self-understanding” is allowed to include.

pdf

Emergent Strategy · adrienne maree brown · 2017 · book
Organizing, relationship, and social change through the lens of complexity and adaptation. The structural thinking maps well onto neurodivergent community-building and non-normative institutional design.

pdf at archive.org


Addendum: The Diagnostic Apparatus Itself

Hans Asperger, National Socialism, and “race hygiene” in Nazi-era Vienna · Herwig Czech · 2018 · journal article (open access)
The primary-source archival case: Asperger did not resist Nazi child-euthanasia policy, he administered it. Drawing on personnel files and clinical assessments Asperger himself wrote, Czech documents dozens of referrals to Spiegelgrund, the Vienna clinic where children Asperger deemed “ineducable” were killed. The diagnostic category and the eugenic sorting mechanism share an author.
PDF at ResearchGate

Asperger’s Children: The Origins of Autism in Nazi Vienna · Edith Sheffer · 2018 · book
Extends Czech’s archival case into a full institutional history: the 1940 Vienna conference where child psychiatry formalized eugenic selection as doctrine, and the vocabulary of “social integration” that let some children be classified as treatable and others as disposable. The diagnostic frame of high-functioning vs. low-functioning autism has this sorting logic as its direct ancestor.
PDF at ResearchGate

Suffer the Restless Children: The Evolution of ADHD and Pediatric Stimulant Use, 1900–1980 · Rick Mayes & Adam Rafalovich · 2006 · journal article (open access PDF)
Traces ADHD’s diagnostic lineage from “minimal brain damage” through encephalitis-linked “organic drivenness” to DSM-III’s 1980 codification — a diagnosis that changed names five times without stable underlying criteria, each renaming driven as much by institutional and pharmaceutical interest as by new evidence.
PDF

Opening Pandora’s Box: The 19 Worst Suggestions for DSM-5 / Psychological Warfare: The DSM-5 Debate · Allen Frances & Robert Spitzer · 2009–2012 · essays/commentary
The two chairs of DSM-III and DSM-IV, from inside the institution, on how DSM-5 criteria were actually set: closed-door committees, confidentiality agreements barring public review, and diagnostic thresholds loosened without proportionate evidence. This is the methodology critique from the people who ran the methodology.
Scribd

Race and Sex Bias in the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS-2) · Kalb et al., commentary · 2022 · journal article (open access)
What DSM-based instruments still get wrong: the ADOS-2’s underlying behavioral profile was built on white, male samples, and it systematically underestimates autism features in Black children and girls. This is the mechanism, not just the outcome — diagnostic disparity is built into the tool, not layered onto clinician bias.
PMC

The Autism Matrix: The Social Origins of the Autism Epidemic · Gil Eyal · 2010 · book
The wider historical claim: autism’s visibility didn’t track a biological epidemic, it tracked the 1970s deinstitutionalization of “mental retardation” as a category. Where deinstitutionalization went furthest (Scandinavia, UK, US blue states), autism diagnosis rates rose highest; where it didn’t happen (France), they stayed low. The disorder category expanded to fill the institutional space vacated by an older one.
Wiley Online Library


This is a living document, to be extended as time allows. Drop me a line and suggest an addition.

what i brought with me

ever since i was young, i’ve felt like i was from a different culture, and was dropped into this one by a stork. somewhere along the way, i decided to stick by this, and honor the integrity of my original culture, and not get too deep into this dominant culture that i still feel like i’m just visiting.

what’s interesting is that i see, hear, and feel traces of my original culture, the more i move through the world, study other cultures, and talk with culture-bearers when they are available. i can’t claim belonging in any one culture, but i can recognize ways of relating and of doing things that align with the nature of things in ways that the dominant culture does not. sometimes, just a tiny affirmation that something i’ve struggled with in the modern, capitalist world makes sense in a different context can provide a sense of deep calm.

i present as male, and am feminine-attracted. i have always been told that i need to be more assertive in finding a partner, that i need to put myself out there in a certain way. i notice that there is a certain way that the glance of the masculine-attracted person tends to not land on me. even with my deep voice and male presence, being more feminine-identifying internally, this makes a certain sense to me.

when i feel an affinity for someone, though, my instinct is not to be assertive, but to continue to be open and present, without trying to grasp. i don’t feel that this is hesitation, lack of confidence, or fear of rejection. i feel that this is a cultural norm that my body remembers, even as the world moves quickly around me.

i feel that my original culture is centered around inclusion, and meeting everyone’s needs in the community, simply because everyone belongs. this being so, my original culture is a women’s organization, and men are willing participants in this organization, but do not center themselves in matters of partnership.

i see that a woman recognizes a person that would make a good partner by seeing how that person moves and deals in their affairs — whether it’s a business partner, an activity partner or a romantic partner — and gender is not really at issue here. and a woman, knowing that she can choose or not to engage in partnership, because her needs are met by her community, has all the agency.

there’s some deep part of me that has a cultural memory of a time and place where it is understood that a woman simply chooses a partner when she recognizes one who she wants to work with, and that any advertisement on the part of a potential partner is a cheap performance that is never going to land well. i may or may not be a good partner — in business, activities, intimate relationships — but either way, that is not my decision to make; it’s instead the shape of my arc, the cut of my cloth, and whether i am useful is right there for all to see. it is either my time or it isn’t, but forcing the issue benefits no one.

i read about places where such arrangements are indeed the way of everyday. this gives me a sense of deep calm, while also reinforcing the feeling that i was dropped here by a stork.

Normalize casual intimacy.

I’m a bi-gender person—masc and femme together in parallel unison. Like a Tootsie Roll, a Twinkie, a Ho-Ho, or a KitKat, I have a more brittle, masc outer layer; and a creamy, femme inner core.

The femme part of me has been surprised when I have proposed activities to femme friends that I think of as normal and platonic, like getting together to braid one another’s hair or do nails or other grooming activities, along with gossip and food and music. The response I’ve gotten doesn’t tell me that the idea is being rejected because it came from someone with a masc presentation, but just that the idea itself feels icky or weird or frivolous, regardless of who proposed it.

I think we’ve reached a time of cultural compression when the the need to mask in public makes casual intimacy too costly—if we forget for a couple of hours that we’re supposed to be competing with one another, and stepping on one another’s shoulders and fingers and toes, we’ll miss an opportunity for social advancement. Moments of casual intimacy remind us of the brutality of the work environments we operate within, and since it seems that brutality is unavoidable, it is the intimacy that becomes the thing to avoid.

And since I experience this casual intimacy as a kind of vitamin—an important part of a balanced social diet—I recognize that we have created a condition where everyone is starved of something that would always be available if we would collectively let down our guard and stop performing invulnerability. We hunger for it, but someone’s rules say that we are only allowed to experience it within a contractually sanctioned relationship, so when we get feelings outside of those pigeonholes, there is a conflict—between the natural tendency toward connection, and the imposed imperative to suppress the connection.

This being so, I own that I will always be perceived as too much—”too familiar,” “flirty,” “inappropriately intimate,” “overly emotional,” “dramatic,” “too informal,”—simply because I refuse to accept the inevitability of the brutality that many people face in their work and social environments. I refuse to suppress the natural tendency toward connection. I refuse to impose a contractual constraint on where I experience intimacy. I feel it is actually my whole job to remind my community that productivity is not the goal, that free time is a virtue to be cultivated, and that casual intimacy is our actual settled and natural state.

That being so, I might describe the grief I feel about the loss of a loved one in the middle of a work meeting. I might express that an interaction with an especially loud and reckless motorcycle made me feel vulnerable when applying for a business license. I might point to the behavior of a person in a management position, and show how that person is taking an opportunity to punch down, rather than being accepting, inclusive, and supportive. “Too much” means “not silent,” and in spaces where we are expected to disappear, “not silence” equals “too much.”

And to be clear, what I am calling intimacy has nothing to do with sexuality or even physical touch. Intimacy is simply the willingness to return to our basic, true character in the presence of another, and to drop the mask that work and social navigation require of us. Intimacy is simply abandoning the performance of invulnerability for a moment or two. Intimacy is simply acknowledging the fiction of independence, and experiencing the wonder and joy of interdependence, even if only for a couple of moments.

At the present moment, I propose that the most radical and revolutionary act we can engage in (but the most powerful, since we can engage in it any time) is simply the act of casual intimacy—when we acknowledge that each of us has a way that we care for ourself, and that we could just as easily care for one another in the same moment.

As we brush our hair, realize that we could be engaging in casual intimacy by brushing someone else’s hair. As we manage our pet’s excrement on a walk, realize that we could be engaging in casual intimacy by helping a loved one who needs support to manage their excrement. As we feel a moment of grief for the loss of a loved one, recognize that we could just as easily feel a moment of grief alongside a friend who is experiencing a similar moment.

I propose that the more we engage in casual intimacy, the less we demand that our contractual relationships fulfill our needs for intimacy, and that that quality in itself is liberating to both sides of our relationships.

So, on that note: let’s get together soon to braid each other’s hair, or do our nails together, and have some snacks and music and gossip time, and maybe cry about our dog that just died, or about the parent that doesn’t remember us that we are caring for.

In this economy, this is the type of care that cannot be monetized, and that is only available to the privileged. Let’s privilege one another with casual intimacy, and invite whomever we can into that state of privilege—because if everyone is included in it, it is no longer a privilege, but a right—simply a natural state of being, around which we organize ourselves, around everyone’s comfort, and not just our own.

Normalize casual intimacy.

‘ey, aye

all of the reasons to hate ai and to love ai are valid, to a point. it does things for us that are helpful to have done for us. it does things to us that are harmful to have done to us.

the main thing we should focus on is what it requires of us. it requires that power be centralized in such a way that concerns about water and land use are deprioritized. it requires that people who don’t have our best interests in mind influence elections. it requires that we relinquish our rights to our own ideas in the tos agreement required to use it.

ai is not local: it requires centralized control of a vast network of resources from around the globe. it doesn’t fit in a backpack.

ai is not democratic: the algorithms that deliver it’s results are designed by a small team that does not answer to us. it doesn’t respond to community review.

ai is not neutral: it’s knowledge base is a collection of writings that represents centuries of colonizers writing about encounters with beings deemed lesser. it doesn’t weight indigenous voices higher.

ai is not embodied: nothing in its database includes information that can only be experienced through the senses. it didn’t smell what you smelled.

ai has not experienced loss: it can tell you what grieving people have said, but it cannot experience their pain, and console you in the ways that only someone who has experienced loss can console you. it can’t adjust the way you’ve adjusted.

ai has never attended a birth, nor tasted the final breath of a loved one. it doesn’t know the poem your mother needed to hear for comfort.

ai is a performance by someone who was never there, but who requires you to hand over all rights to land, water, minerals, species diversity, diplomatic nonpartisanship, labor justice, bioregional congruity, indigenous stewardship, ecosystem integrity, economic equity, cultural heritage, family legacy, intellectual architecture, emotional elaboration, and environmental renewal.

but it’s so convenient. i’ll give it that.

The Mammoth Hunter

How Making Sense of My Child’s Cannabis Use Helped Me Understand The Beauty of Human Adaptation

Does Domestication of the Human Species Really Represent Our Shared Future on the Planet?

My almost-adult child is a gifted and challenged person, navigating the transition to adulthood in post-industrial American society. They’re a systems thinker, who aces every test, and who also can’t sit still or conform to the demands of a quiet workplace or a grid-based schedule. They often miss appointments due to oversleeping, and sometimes sleep for periods that don’t align with respectable industrial grid time.

They are highly engaged in any task at hand, but have difficulty playing the long game of connecting with a regular schedule. They pick up new skills very quickly, but express little interest in developing any of those skills into something that, in a modern context, looks like a career.

The environments they express the most affection for are highly cooperative: soccer is a big one; skateboarding in community, where peers are moving together, both in synchronous and asynchronous formations; making public art in strategically complex spaces, that require collaboration to envision, coordination to plan, and cooperation to execute. They are the epitome of the team player, as long as the team has a clear plan that serves the collective need for transparent and direct expression of experience in a creative and innovative way.

Making Sense of the Early Adult Drive for Autonomy and Relevance

My child’s challenges have moved them toward strategies to mitigate those challenges, and cannabis has been a recurring strategy that serves some need.

As an engaged parent, who is trying to nurture their adult child’s independence, while managing my alarm when witnessing behaviors that appear problematic, or as leading toward future failure to integrate into the workplace, I’ve been trying to make sense of what I’m seeing: a young person who is fiercely dedicated to their friends; who takes pride in a complex task well-executed; who resists being pigeonholed into existing categories of social, ideological, economic, or aesthetic legibility; and who sincerely wants to play a meaningful role in their community, despite repeated experiences of mismatch with established academic and occupational cultures.

Considering all of this, I’ve been unsatisfied with the ‘just say no’ or ‘avoid this substance because of the potential dangers involved’ frameworks of personal discipline, relative to what I see as cannabis use as substance-scaffolding.

I ask instead, “How is this scaffold serving their needs,” and “what is this person seeking to satisfy, according to the tendencies of their nervous system?”

Asking these questions, and exploring the range of possible resolutions, has caused me to rethink everything I know about individual competence, self-medication, and utility-within-community.

Here’s the story that unfolds in my brain, starting with trying to understand my child’s use of cannabis.

Understanding Cannabis as a Regulation Support

Question: A subset of neurodivergent people find cannabis to be highly regulating. Using current diagnostic frameworks, would we be able to reverse engineer this mechanism and suggest alternative supports for regulation?

Answer (from multiple channels): Diagnostic frameworks don’t code this directly—no DSM category for “cannabinoid-responsive regulation phenotype”—but the mechanistic literature gives us enough to reverse-engineer some plausible pathways, and each one maps to a non-cannabis lever.

The candidate mechanisms, each with its alt-support:

  • Excitation/inhibition imbalance (the leading cortical model in autism/ADHD research)—the nervous system runs with too much glutamatergic drive relative to GABAergic brake. CB1 agonism works presynaptically to turn down excess signal.
    Alt-support: deep pressure/proprioceptive input, rhythmic bilateral movement, anything that mechanically dampens throughput rather than trying to out-think it.
  • Low endocannabinoid tone—some autism research finds blunted anandamide signaling tied to social ease and anxiety regulation. If the system’s baseline ECS is running lean, exogenous cannabinoids are topping up a deficit rather than adding a foreign effect.
    Alt-support: sustained aerobic movement (the “runner’s high” is partly endocannabinoid-mediated), omega-3s as ECS precursors, consistent touch/massage.
  • Thalamic sensory gating failure—the filter that should mute irrelevant input doesn’t, so everything arrives undifferentiated and loud. Cannabinoids affect thalamic gating directly.
    Alt-support: environmental engineering, without pharmacological substitution: reduce raw input volume rather than trying to improve the filter (single-channel environments, structured monotropic focus, noise reduction).
  • Vagal/parasympathetic underactivation—anxiety compounding the sensory load, cannabis’s anxiolytic effect partly vagally mediated.
    Alt-support: direct vagal stimulation—humming, slow exhale-longer-than-inhale breathing, cold water on the face.
  • Dopaminergic under-stimulation (more ADHD-coded)—restlessness eased by mild dopaminergic modulation.
    Alt-support: novelty-structured tasks, high-engagement movement, body doubling.

Considering this data, relative to the questions that framed my inquiry, here’s how I connect the dots when I choose to view my child as perfectly-abled, rather than disabled, and here’s how I attempt to contextualize this for my community.

Greetings, esteemed community:

I compiled this explanation of how cannabis helps regulate the neurodivergent nervous system. This all maps very cleanly onto our child’s character, and shows why they miss soccer so much (missing as ‘longing for,’ and not ‘fails to show up for.’ I think you get my meaning, but it’s good be precise where language suggests multiple meanings).

This all points to running (‘rhythmic bilateral movement,’ ‘sustained aerobic movement’), with intense interest-based focus (‘structured monotropic focus,’ ‘high-engagement movement’) and cooperative participation (‘high-engagement movement,’ ‘body doubling’) as being the the regulation supports they are reaching for, or the activities that they are predisposed to seek in making their character meaningful in a human community engaged in dialogue with a natural environment.

Basically, our child shows the collection of ecological adaptations that would enable ice-age hunter-gatherers to hunt and bring down a wooly mammoth, as a source of food and raw materials for clothing, shelter, and tools. Mammoths were herd animals, much larger than humans, with thick skins and wooly coats that were very difficult to pierce with the projectiles of the time—wood or bone projectiles that were either sharpened or had separate affixed bone or stone tips specialized for cutting/piercing.

Bringing down a mammoth would require a high degree of coordination and sustained movement by a group of humans—to first isolate an animal from the herd; bombard it with a number of projectiles, none of which would be able to kill the animal on its own, but only weaken it when applied in numbers; and then chase the animal until it was weak enough to be able to approach directly, to apply severing cuts with stone knives at strategic points, to bring on death. Then, the animal had to be processed fairly quickly, before bacteria, insects, and scavengers moved in to take their share.

The Mental Health Day

This coordinated activity would involve great risk-taking, and sublimation of fear-response. In other words, badass individuals engaged in a life-or-death struggle to meet the needs of their community.

Engaging in this way would have resulted in a huge output of energy in a specific time period, that would likely extend beyond one cycle of dawn-to-dusk; which could not be segmented into work hours that resemble modern industrial time cycles of work and rest; by an individual who could literally measure their life by their proximity to such a resource as a mammoth herd. The individuals involved in this project would have needed extended periods of rest to recover from the endeavor, perhaps spanning multiple day-night cycles; and the community would have been happy to oblige, considering the benefit of their energy expenditure to the community.

Where Do We Go From Here?

in the context of domesticated society, none of our child’s particular traits make sense. but our period of domestication has been a tiny blip in the overall arc of the human project. human evolution, and adaptation to changing environments, is a very long and slow process, relative to our understanding of adapting to environmental changes within our lifetimes.

Considering those changes, i hope we can find ways to recognize our child’s unique gifts as adaptations that are valuable to the community; to recognize the range of skills required to make the human project work; and to rediscover how a person with these natural predispositions is a valuable contributor to their community — because of, and not in spite of, their characteristic rhythms and sensibilities.

Thanks for coming to my TED talk, and thank you for your cooperation in this project of nurturing a unique person to be their best self in the rapidly-shifting priorities of life in modern industrial society.

big loves,

parent of a mammoth hunter

letter from nana

i got this letter from my nana today. i thought id share it with you. it made me cry, she’s such a sweetheart. i miss her so much, but i thought you might get something out of hearing how she talks to me.

take care,

rag

hey, baby,

i hope you’re settling in nicely. i was just thinking about you, and wanted to give you some nice words in case you’re lonely. it can get lonely, these days. here’s some things that will help you remember that you’re not alone.

the meditation hall, the container that meditation happens within, is a character. we know this to be true because each meditation hall smells a little different, has different drafts, and the shadows land differently at different times of day.

just as each individual, each buddha within its walls is a character, and the sangha expresses the shape of the community’s character, the meditation hall is a character whose walls contain the character of the teaching that has happened there. even if no dharma talk has ever been given in the space, in this space, dharma is always being expounded. the particular shape of the dharma being expounded in the meditation hall continuously is called character. we say it is neutral, but in fact it has a shape that is exactly its own.

zen’s emphasis on shikan taza, and the absence of guided imagery during the meditation period, allows each mind to settle in its own way. each buddha is the container for the teachings, myriad ways of seeing and being seen, arising interdependently, and liberation is not dependent on following instructions, save the ones one follows to remain upright, if one needs them, be they remembered words, embodied shapes, or pictures of buddhas practicing upright.

within the meditation hall, the sangha arranges itself into the shape suggested by its walls, which were built exactly as a container for the sangha from the suggestions of the sangha. a buddha settles into sangha in the ways that the sangha suggests, and the shape of this settling is a suggestion that informs the sangha. countless momentary interactions, with people, with architecture, with idea and interpretation—nothing but dharma unfolding, and this unfolding is a character.

i know, sometimes people say you’re being a character, but you’re just being yourself. i see you, baby. miss you, sweetheart.

the moment a new monk, or the visitor from another temple, enters the meditation hall, the character of the hall is revealed: where are its boundaries rigid? where are there walls that adjust to the needs of the moment?

notice how quickly the seasoned monk moves to correct. notice the subtle signs in their behavior that they are adjusting to something, to understand it. beyond the postures and the mudras of the service, and the way the bells are sounded and clappers clapped, what other shapes is the sangha embodying that are shaped by the character of the meditation hall?

the new monk, or the visitor from another temple, might do well to view each interaction in a new space as a kind of guided meditation that reveals the character of the meditation hall—the character is being performed, and can be perceived—a perfect character study. someone is being meditated upon, and decisions are being made, just as one is meditating upon the space one moves through and making decisions.

seeing these encounters as guided meditations, that sitting in stillness prepared us to move through, how is one’s response to being guided, in the way one’s being guided? what is the character of the response to or the receipt of the dharma talk that one’s movement through the environment offers the sangha? where is the friction, or the resolution of friction, at the edges of the interaction between your character and the character of the meditation hall, and the sangha, and the buddhas within?

where does one notice resistance or redirection? where does one feel a curtain yield or a window open. breathing the shared air, understanding how air cycles through a space, understand how generosity flows through the space, and how it is redirected, and why.

when a monk asks questions, their questions reveal their character. when the sangha responds, the response reveals the character of the sangha. the character of the meditation hall is revealed in the particular way a footstep echoes, or the way the line of a tan invites us over, and these are reflected in the character of the sangha, and the buddhas within. a cast of characters with a certain character.

notice your capacity for kindness, child, and notice the way that kindness breaks you open when it reaches deep inside you.
be reachable, honey.
be generous, baby.
knowing the way that kindness breaks you, consider the way that being forced open breaks you, and sit with that. i know you do.

have you ever had moments where you’ve been forced open, or moments where kindness broke you open? have you ever accidentally broken someone open with kindness? have you ever forced someone open with kind intentions? i know you’re thinking about these things, baby. that reflects kindly on your character.

don’t worry about performing the fiction of independence.
try to abandon the performance of invulnerability.

the earth needs us to be vulnerable, right now, sweetie.

can you hear it?

i wish i could hug you.

nana loves you.

you be good now, and you just live your life, and be the best person you can. it’s your life, and no one can live it for you.

don’t forget to think of your old nana once in a while.

love you, baby.

tl:dr: recognition ≠ choice

Framing gender, sexual, and relational preferences as choices does real harm. These choices are the result of a culture built around a specific origin story, that by now is clearly a failed metaphor. When the beauty of human variation has been forced through binary tunnels for centuries, who we are has to make a choice as to whether or not to question imposed binaries and let oneself become observably nonconforming, without role models or a shared language.

It’s the conformist power structure that forces the human being to prune themselves or be pruned, or risk the consequences of noncompliance. The choice is whether or not to allow oneself to be who they know themselves to be—and no one should be forced to make that choice. Calling the decision to do so a choice is a cruel trivialization of a life-or-death ultimatum.

You have to understand that growth requires belonging, and belonging requires recognition. A child who is loved is recognized, every day. A child who is recognized accurately, every day, by their community, grows to understand themselves in community. Belonging to the whole community, a child learns what their strengths and frailties are; and the community learns how to reciprocate with that specific child.

On the other hand, a child who is viewed with mistrust because some characteristic does not conform to imposed role options is neglected. Even if they get their material needs met, a child that is not recognized misses out on growing up belonging. If the whole community fails to recognize them, without knowing it they have imposed a completely different growth arc, shaping that child indelibly. A community that knows no differently ascribes this different arc to the common deviation metric of the day—which never includes the complicity of the community, or the imperfection in the lens being used to observe it.

The community that recognizes the value of human variation to the well-being of the collective will be delighted with a child’s specific qualities, and growing up with a community that is delighted by your presence has consequences, for the better.

The community that has a narrow tolerance for human variation that deviates from a small set of imposed categories that don’t map well onto the human organism will have difficulty experiencing delight in their children’s growth. They may go so far as outsourcing child rearing en masse, raising children in environments with few real role models, and without the belonging that comes from recognition.

Delight is like a vitamin, depriving a child of real-time reciprocal delight has real consequences, not for the better.

In the wake of centuries of binary training that twists our nature into prescribed shapes, given a window of opportunity, what looks like a decision to choose a nonbinary gender, a sexual preference that’s not prescribed in the dominant origin story, or a relational orientation that deviates from the cultural median, is more like an acknowledgement than a choice.

Acknowledgement is a moment of recognition. It is the delight that we reflect back to our child through our eyes, that allows one’s inner light to grow alongside one’s outer presentation. It’s an acknowledgment that should never have been framed as a choice. That moment of acknowledgment should always be celebrated, and never trivialized as a choice from a menu made on a whim.

bigender identity journal entry

i passed 3 tween girls doing a coordinated dance for tiktok on a walk

recognition: that’s me.

memory: when i was a kid, i wanted to play jump rope and hand-clapping games with the girls, instead of kickball and four-square. the boys were always trying to win, and would spike the ball; girls were smiling at each other, clapping hands and hugging.

i tried a couple of times to fit into these girl groups, but it was awkward, and i just gave up. i went to a different school every year, but that aspect of social life was always the same, as was my inner sense of association.

it was like not being allowed to be myself.

you have to ask yourself

Saying that autistic people who question the current paradigm of neurodivergence are seeking proof of a superpower does real harm. Diagnostic criteria are a snapshot. To refer to the snapshot as reality, without considering the hand that crafted the lens it was taken with, and for whose benefit, or what it distorts, cannot be seen as anything other than harmful to an understanding of complex systems.

Downstream of that, to then force people to identify with a disability designation that hints at accommodation, while the already meager care infrastructure is being actively dismantled by a government that wants to put autistic people on a list and ‘cure’ us, while at the same time removing funding from research that doesn’t agree with their agenda… to watch this all unfold is beyond heartbreaking. It’s criminal and cruel, and to enter neurodiversity justice spaces and hear the rhetoric from people who are claiming to advocate for the best interests of autistic people is just another example of the gaslighting being replicated by the gaslit.

It’s also understandable. We work from the models we’ve been given to work with. We recognize that there are privileged people and marginalized people. It seems to make sense to keep the structure intact and simply reset the algorithm to bring marginalized people in. But the system depends on there being marginalized people, and changing the algorithm simply shifts the suffering onto a different group of people. If we want equity to work, for real and for everyone, we need to learn how to work together differently.

Western science is good at some things, but it is also a paradigm that is easily gamed. What question we choose as a thesis determines the field of inquiry, the variables we can see (and the ones we can’t from our viewpoint), and the output is a snapshot. If we limit our questions to support a funding requirement, a political climate, a class preserving mechanism, or a corporate agenda, the snapshot is distorted, and this has real consequences.

I live in Berkeley California. Do you know how many people I have crossed paths with who are engaged in a research project that is losing funding due to the political climate? Let’s just say that we are not living in a time when good information is on the ascendancy, even at the academic level. I know people whose whole departments are fundraising to keep the lights on, and funders are not neutral.

In hostile times, it’s time to circle the wagons and protect the children within. The wagons here are perhaps a poor metaphor, being a symbol of colonial expansion. But what works is the idea of a circle protecting the future health of our community. The civic infrastructure that was supposed to protect us is being dismantled and defunded, along with the research institutions that were ostensibly designed to help us describe ourselves in ways that align with our nature.

But there is so much we can do if we train ourselves to abandon those decaying structures and find support through cooperation. Tōjisha Kenkyū is a self-study paradigm developed by people in the mental health community in Japan, who recognized that the stories being told to them by clinicians did not match their experiences nor provide support in the ways they needed. Through deep inquiry and information sharing, people working in this modality are learning bottom-up strategies and new language that allows them to access mutual support and offer more effective advocacy.

Every healthy community has access to its own story, that changes and unfolds within its very ecosystem. The questions that arise might not fit a funding landscape, but mutual support makes things possible that top-down institutions won’t.

The understanding of neurodiversity is in its infancy relative to Western scientific paradigms. As far as I can tell, the word neuronormativity only emerged within this century. Paradigms this new are bound to experience shifts that change the landscape of our understanding. When I hear people in the neurodiversity community loudly advocating for top-down paradigms that view neuronormativity as a standard of human growth and ability, and neurodivergence as a collection of abberant deviations from the norm, I can’t help but wonder who they are representing, and why they feel so confident in articulating the boundaries of an emerging paradigm.

Nature has amazing ways of achieving balance in a changing ecosystem. The whole reason we look like we do, and not like our ancestors Australopithecus, is that we diverged. Does that make us disabled versions of our ancestors? No. Evolution is a series of mistakes, that sometimes end up being helpful to the community, even as they are divergent from what came before.

Sometimes, what’s helpful to the community is someone tall enough to reach a food source inaccessible to most, and perhaps communities who had a few statistical outliers in height were more successful. In the context of industrial productivity, maybe the tall ones are just a liability, but is that the driver of change we want to follow? Look what doing so has done to biodiversity on the planet.

Sometimes what’s helpful might be someone with sensitive hearing, who can hear the approach of a predator or track game hidden in the canopy. Again, in an office, they are just seen as annoying, asking for accommodation again. Sometimes what’s helpful might be someone who thinks differently. When I think of the process of getting nutrition out of cassava, I wonder who on earth would have the patience and determination to figure that out. I’m sure it wasn’t one person, and parts of the process probably unfolded over centuries. But it’s not hard to imagine that at some point in the process, someone with cognitive differences might have thought to try something new. That’s not evidence of a superpower. It’s a person working the way they work, in the context of a team that values them. That’s the person we all know who we find frustrating, because their thinking seems so contrary.

In a society that’s not conforming to an origin story that pathologizes differences and that recognizes that through drought and famine and herd depletion and times of bounty, differences in the community are an asset, not a liability. They might develop ways of doing things that build respect for these differences. If we look at the practices of various cultures we can actually see that this is true.

Are autism advocates who advocate for the model of neurodivergence as a deviation from neuronormativity simply trying to practice realpolitik in social terms, accepting that industrial agriculture, production, and the administrative mechanisms that support them are the way it will always be, and we should engineer ourselves to align with that reality? If so, count me out. That’s the project I thought we were trying to abandon at all costs. If not, where does your confidence come from, and why does it feel so much like a story we’ve heard before, that got us into this mess?

unkind binaries

this is one kind of harm caused by the abled/disabled binary when it is applied as a permanent designation to people: it erases from view the environment that enables or disables a person, and it makes invisible all of the ways that the environment is designed to enable the abled person.

it functions to other into a social class an experience that everyone is living, but some don’t recognize—the experience of needing to exist in relationship.

if we recognize that no one can live outside of relationship, and that we play both roles continuously—the carer and the cared for—then we start to recognize the moment of need without needing to label someone needy.

In designating certain people as disabled, without the embedded values of care and reciprocity at the cultural level, then the abled person gets to sidestep the role of caregiver, and there is not enough care to go around, leaving the disabled to have to negotiate for care that in a different culture would be considered a human right. I’m not just talking about healthcare. I’m talking about basic human dignity.

binaries are useful conceptual shorthand that should never be applied to people without their consent. if you can understand the value of going beyond the binary based on biological gender, and the real harm that strict adherence to that binary causes, you can understand why permanent status as a disabled person might leave some people out. What I hear when I hear “autism is always a disability” is “there are only two genders: male and female.”