ASD Representation in Media

By Amanda Gardiner

Intro

If you’re on the spectrum, or are close to somebody who is, you may have noticed that it doesn’t show up a lot in popular media. Sure, mentions of it might appear in documentaries or the news—usually in conjunction with some form of special needs educational reform, or when a new treatment or therapy gains popularity—but it’s rare to see a neurodivergent character of any kind in the sort of mainstream media meant for entertainment.[1] And unfortunately, a large number of the most well-known examples of stories to include ASD tend to portray it in a highly stereotypical manner at best, and at worst will demonize or mock people on the spectrum for not “acting normal.”[2]

Why representation is important

At a first glance, it might not be obvious why a lack of characters with ASD in popular media is an issue. After all, we’re explicitly talking about fictional stories created to entertain, rather than, say, a lack of educational documentaries on the subject. But here, it’s important to remember that we’re talking about popular media; that is, media designed to be consumed by large numbers of people from a variety of different demographics. While you probably already have a decent idea of what ASD is and know at least one person on the spectrum (I assume, since you’re reading this on the Autism Calgary blog), it’s very likely that a lot of people’s first experience with ASD would be through watching a movie or TV show designed for entertainment rather than education. In other words, the average person is far more likely to be familiar with Rain Man that the works of Temple Grandin[3], despite her self-advocacy and authorship presenting a far more nuanced and empathic view of life on the spectrum than a blockbuster comedy-drama, which its writer admitted was “never a story about autism.”[4]

Poor Representations vs No Representation: Which is More Harmful?

Nowadays, pieces of media like Rain Man tend to be divisive among ASD advocates. On the one hand, it’s undeniable that several aspects of the movie’s depiction of a character on the spectrum are decidedly problematic. For instance, perhaps the most obvious example is the fact that the character’s institutionalisation from a young age was largely treated as being perfectly reasonable; near the end of the film the claim is made that the adult character being on the spectrum means that he has no ability to so much as state a preference about whether he’d live under the care of his brother (not by himself, it must be emphasized; he would be living with a close relation who had expressed a desire for this setup) or in the institution he’d been sent to as a child. This and similar elements of the film enforce harmful views about the opinions and preferences of neurodivergent people not being worth as much consideration and respect as those of neurotypicals.

One the other hand, so few examples of people with ASD exist in popular media that a lot of people are desperate to see any acknowledgement whatsoever of people on the spectrum, with the question of whether it’s positive or accurate being only a second consideration. This is why a number of advocates view films like Rain Man as a positive influence; prior to its release the general public’s awareness of ASD as a concept was practically nonexistent, and the movie’s character was quite possibly the only generally-positive mainstream depiction of the condition at the date of its filming. Even now, over thirty years later, the movie is likely to be one of the first pieces of media that people remember when thinking about depictions of ASD in popular culture, in a way which probably says more about the lack of representation available than about whether the depiction itself was so good that it still stands up after decades of research and advocacy.

Explicit Depictions

Another issue related to how ASD is depicted in media has to do with whether or not characters are explicitly stated to be on the spectrum. There are times when a character in a movie or television show exhibits a large number of characteristics associated with ASD—such as struggling with social cues, having a special interest, nonstandard verbal or physical tics, etc.—but is never stated to be on the spectrum within the piece of media. This can manifest in a range of different ways, some of which are more excusable than others.

Sometimes the writer doesn’t feel like they can utilize terms like “autism” or “Asperger’s” because it would be out of place in the story’s setting (such as a fantasy world, or a piece of historical fiction), and so heavily imply a character being on the spectrum within the narrative, while typically confirming their intent outside of the narrative (such as in interviews, or in social media). This can be quite admirable, since it usually shows a desire to tell a story that isn’t primarily about living with ASD while still including characters on the spectrum, which can help to normalize neurodivergent representation.[5] The character of Entrapta from the 2018 Netflix series She-Ra and the Princesses of Power is a case of this, as confirmed by the production team on Twitter.[6] An explicit diagnosis within the program would not fit with the show’s fantasy setting, but the character was written to create more representations of girls on the spectrum within children’s media, with help from a woman on the production team who herself has ASD.

On the other hand, a lot of the time creators will make a character who exhibits (often stereotypical) characteristics of ASD in a setting where it would be feasible for them to have an in-universe diagnosis, but this is never explicitly stated. While there can be legitimate reasons for doing this, more often than not it’s used as a hedge; if the writer never confirms (within the narrative or outside of it) that a character they wrote is meant to be on the spectrum, it’s more difficult for their audience to criticize or correct them if they do a poor job, or even if they show outright ableism against people with ASD. Many people feel that the character of Sheldon Cooper from the 2007 CBS sitcom The Big Bang Theory is a case of this, due to the character exhibiting characteristics strongly associated with ASD, yet never explicitly confirmed as being on the spectrum either within the story or outside of it. In this instance, the problematic way that the narrative engages with the character becomes much more obvious if he’s viewed as being on the spectrum; a large number of the jokes made about the character are tightly tied to the same traits that codify him as having ASD, which shifts the jokes from being about “isn’t this character weird” to “aren’t people on the spectrum weird.” Needless to say, this is less than ideal from an advocacy standpoint, as it encourages the view that it’s acceptable for neurodivergent people to be mocked for the traits that set them apart from neurotypicals.[7] The writers even acknowledge this, but instead of working to be less ableist in their writing, they simply decline to ever explicitly refer to their character as having ASD, on the assumption that it resolves them of the “burden to get the details right” or address the fact that a lot of their humour regarding the character relies on “mocking a medical condition.”[8]

Some Notable Recent Representations

Loop (short film, animated, Disney+) This story features a nonverbal girl on a canoe trip with a peer, and explores how she interacts with the world around her.[9]
Everything’s Gonna Be Okay (television series, live action, Freeform) One of the main characters in this series is a queer teenaged girl on the spectrum, who is actually played by an actress on the spectrum.[10]
The Good Doctor (television series, live action, ABC) The series’ protagonist is a young man on the spectrum, who struggles against ableist prejudices as he strives to be recognized as a capable surgeon.[11]
Atypical (television series, live action, Netflix) This show explores some of the many facets of life on the spectrum through its protagonist, including the perspectives of family members and friends.[12]

Conclusion

At the end of the day, it’s important to stay positive. “Critique” isn’t inherently the same thing as “criticism,” and just because media still has a long way to go in terms of portraying neurodiversity doesn’t mean that a lot of progress hasn’t already been made. The fact that there’s now enough fictional characters on the spectrum in popular media that we can compare them and nitpick the quality of their representation is huge, and not that long ago would have been unthinkable. According to Wikipedia, in the last three years ten characters with ASD have been introduced in television programs, while only four existed in the entirety of pre-2000 television.[13] So, while less than a dozen characters over the course of three years really isn’t that much compared to the legions of neurotypical characters, it’s definitely an improvement over what it used to be, and the numbers will continue to climb as advocates continue to push for more diversity in popular media for all ages.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7q2A3ic0-w

[2] https://journals.library.brocku.ca/brocked/index.php/home/article/view/311

[3] https://www.templegrandin.com/

[4] https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/dec/13/rain-man-at-30-autism-hoffman-cruise-levinson

[5] https://www.sjdr.se/articles/10.16993/sjdr.56/

[6] https://twitter.com/Gingerhazing/status/1263965526126034945

[7] https://medium.com/@francisblack/the-big-bang-theory-and-ableism-c206526ad70d

[8] https://www.nj.com/entertainment/tv/2009/08/reader_mail_does_sheldon_from.html

[9] https://www.popsugar.com/family/pixar-loop-short-film-details-47156866

[10] https://www.popsugar.com/family/how-everything-gonna-be-okay-taught-me-about-autism-47329512

[11] https://themighty.com/2019/03/good-doctor-tv-show-autistic-perspective/

[12] https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.ajp-rj.2020.150309