Neurodivergence and accountability in free software September 25, 2024 on Drew DeVault's blog

In November of last year, I wrote Richard Stallman’s political discourse on sex, which argues that Richard Stallman, the founder of and present-day voting member of the board of directors of the Free Software Foundation (FSF), endorses and advocates for a harmful political agenda which legitimizes adult attraction to minors, consistently defends adults accused of and convicted of sexual crimes with respect to minors, and more generally erodes norms of consent and manipulates language regarding sexual harassment and sexual assault in his broader political program.

In response to this article, and on many occasions when I have re-iterated my position on Stallman in other contexts, a common response is to assert that my calls to censure Stallman are ableist, on the basis that Stallman is neurodivergent (ND). This line of reasoning suggests that Stallman’s awkward and zealous views on sex are in line with his awkward and zealous positions on other matters (such as his insistence on “GNU/Linux” terminology rather than “Linux”), and that together this illustrates a pattern which suggests neurodivergence is at play. This argumentation is flawed, but I think it presents us with a good opportunity to talk about how neurodivergence and sexism presents in our community.

Neurodivergence (antonymous with “neurotypical”) is an umbrella term that encompasses a wide variety of human experiences, including autism, ADHD, personality disorders, bipolar disorder, and others. The particular claims I’ve heard about Stallman suggest that he is “obviously” autistic, or has Asperger syndrome.¹ The allegation of ableism in my criticisms of Stallman are rooted in this presumption of neurodivergence in Stallman: the argument goes that I am putting his awkwardness on display and mocking him for it, that calling for the expulsion of someone on the basis of being awkward is ableist, and that this has a chilling effect on our community, which is generally thought to have a high incidence of neurodivergence. I will respond to this defense of Stallman today.

A defense of problematic behavior that cites neurodivergence to not only explain, but excuse, said behavior, is ableist and harms neurodivergent people, rather than standing up for them as these arguments portray themselves as doing. To illustrate this, I opened a discussion on the Fediverse asking neurodivergent people to chime in and reached out directly to some ND friends in my social circle.

Aside: Is Stallman neurodivergent?

Stallman’s neurodivergence is an unsolicited armchair diagnosis with no supporting evidence besides “vibes”. This 2008 article summarizes his public statements on the subject:

“During a 2000 profile for the Toronto Star, Stallman described himself to an interviewer as ‘borderline autistic,’ a description that goes a long way toward explaining a lifelong tendency toward social and emotional isolation and the equally lifelong effort to overcome it,” Williams wrote.

When I cited that excerpt from the book during the interview, Stallman said that assessment was “exaggerated.”

“I wonder about it, but that’s as far as it goes,” he said. “Now, it’s clear I do not have [Asperger’s] — I don’t have most of the characteristics of that. For instance, one of those characteristics is having trouble with rhythm. I love the most complicated, fascinating rhythms.” But Stallman did acknowledge that he has “a few of the characteristics” and that he “might have what some people call a ‘shadow’ version of it.”

The theory that Stallman is neurodivergent is usually cited to explain his various off-putting behaviors, but there is no tangible evidence to support the theory. This alone raises some alarms, in that off-putting behavior is sufficient evidence to presume neurodivergence. I agree that some of his behavior, off-putting or otherwise, appears consistent, to my untrained eye, with some of the symptoms of autism. Nevertheless I am not going to forward an armchair diagnosis in either direction. However, because a defense of Stallman on the basis of neurodivergence is contingent on him being neurodivergent, this rest of this article will presume that it is true for the purpose of rebuttal.

tl;dr: we don’t know and the assumption that he is is ableist.

This defense of Stallman is ableist because it infantalizes and denies agency to neurodivergent people. Consider what’s being said here: it only follows that Stallman’s repugnant behavior is excusable because he’s neurodivergent if neurodivergent people cannot help but be repugnant. An autistic person I spoke to, who wishes to remain anonymous, had the following to say:

As an autistic person, I find these statements deeply offensive, because they build on and perpetuate damaging stereotypes.

Research has repeatedly proved that, on average, autistic folks have high empathy and a higher sense of values than the general population. We are not the emotionless robots that the popular imagination believes we are.

But we are not a monolith, and some autistic folks are absolute assholes who should be called out (and held accountable) for the harm that they cause. Autism is context, not an excuse: it can explain why someone might struggle in some situations and need additional support, but it should never be an excuse to harm others. We can all learn and improve.

I have witnessed people pulling the autism card to avoid consequences for CoC violations, then calling out the organization for “not supporting true diversity” when they’re shown the door. This is manipulative and insulting to the other neurodivergent members of the community, and should never be tolerated.

Bram Dingelstad, a neurodivergent person who participated in the discussion, had this to say:

Problematic behaviour is what it is: problematic.

There are a lot of neurodivergent people out there that are able to carry themselves in a way that doesn’t make anyone unsafe or harm victims of sexual assault by dismissing or downplaying their lived experience. In my opinion, using neurodivergence as an excuse for this behaviour only worsens the perception of neurodiversity.

Richard Stallman should be held accountable for his speech and his actions.

Another commenter put it more concisely, if not as eloquently:

It’s fucking ableist to say neurodiversity disposes you towards problematic behaviors. It’s disgusting trying to hide behind it and really quite insulting.

I came away from these discussions with the following understanding: neurodivergence, in particular autism, causes people to struggle to understand unstated social norms and conventions, sometimes with embarrassing or harmful consequences, such as with respect to interpersonal relationships. The people I’ve spoken to call for empathy and understanding in the mistakes which can be made in light of this, but also call for accountability – to be shown what’s right (and, importantly, why it’s so), and then to be expected to behave accordingly, no different from anyone else.

Being neurodivergent doesn’t make someone sexist, but it can make it harder for them to hide sexist views. To associate Stallman’s sexism with his perceived neurodivergence is ableist, and to hold Stallman accountable for his behavior is not. One commenter puts it this way:

I’ve said quite a few times is that sexism is not a symptom of autism. Writing this sort of behaviour off as “caused by” neurodivergence is itself ableist, I’m not a huge fan of the narrative that I have “the neurodevelopmental disorder that makes you a bigot”.

I fundamentally disagree with the idea that the pervasive sexism in tech is because of the high incidence of neurodiversity. It’s because tech has broadly operated as a boys club for decades, and those norms persist.

Using neurodivergence as a cover for sexism and problematic behavior in our communities is a toxic, ableist, and, of course, sexist attitude that serves to provide problematic men with space to be problematic. Note also how intersections between neurodiversity and identity play out: white men tend to be excused on the basis of neurodivergence, whereas for women, transgender people, people of color, etc – the excuse does not apply. Consider the differences in how bipolar disorder is perceived in women – “she’s crazy” – versus how men with autism are accommodated – “he can’t help it”.

So, I reject the notion that it is ableist to criticize problematic behavior that can be explained by neurodivergence. But, even if it were, an anonymous autistic commenter has this to say:

If we accept the hypothesis that it is ableist to condemn behavior which can be explained by neurodivergence (and I don’t), my answer is: be ableist. I don’t like it, but it’s ridiculous to imagine any other option in the physical world, and it’s weird to treat the virtual world so differently.

Here’s an anecdote: when I was at school, a new person, Adam, joined the class. We didn’t want Adam to feel excluded, so we included him in our social events. Adam had narcissistic personality disorder, and likely in part because of this, he was also a serial harasser of women. So what did we do about it?

We stopped inviting Adam. I wish we didn’t have to stop inviting him, but our hands were tied. I’m not going to say it’s something only he could change, because maybe he truly couldn’t change that. Maybe it was ableist to exclude him. But the safety of my friends comes first. The hard part is distinguishing between this situation and a situation where someone is excluded when they are perceived as a threat just because they’re different.

Stallman’s rhetoric and behavior are harmful, and we need to address that harm. The refrain of “criticizing Stallman’s behavior is ableist and alienates neurodiverse individuals in our community” is itself ableist and isn’t doing any favors for our neurodiverse friends.

To conclude this article, I thought I’d take this opportunity to find out what our neurodiverse friends are actually struggling with and how we can better accommodate their needs in our community.

First of all, a recognition of individuals as being autonomous, independent people with agency and independent needs has to come first, with neurodiversity and with everything else. Listen to people when they explain their experiences and their needs as individuals, and don’t rely on romanticized and stereotypical understandings of particular neurodevelopmental conditions such as autism. These stereotypes are often deeply harmful: one person spoke of being accused of incompetence and lying about their neurodivergence in a ploy for sympathy. They experienced severe harassment, at the worst in the form of harassers engineering stressful situations and screenshoting their reactions to humiliate them and damage their reputation.

Standing up for your peers is important, in this as in all things. Not only against harassment, discrimination, and abuse on the basis of neurodivergence, but on any basis, from any person – which I was often reminded is especially important for neurodivergent people who are not cishet white men, as these challenges are amplified in light of these intersectional identities. Talk to people and understand their experiences, their needs, and their worldview. Be patient, but clear and open in your communication. The neurodivergent people I spoke to often found it difficult to learn social mores, moreso than most neurotypical experiences, but nevertheless the vast majority of them felt perfectly capable of it, and the expectation that they weren’t is demeaning and ableist.

I also heard some advice from the neurodivergent community that applies especially to free software community leaders. Clearly stated community norms and expectations, through codes of conducts and visible moderation, is often helpful for neurodivergent people. Many ND people struggle to intuit or “guess” social norms and prefer expectations to be stated unambiguously. Normalizing the use of tone indicators (e.g. “/s”), questions clarifying intent, and conflict de-escalation are also good tools to employ.

Another consideration of merit is accommodations for asynchronous participation in meaningful governance and decision-making processes. Some ND people find it difficult to participate in real-time discussions in chat rooms or in person, and mediums like emails and other long-form slow discussions are easier for them to engage with. Accommodations for sensory sensitivities at in-person events is another good strategy to include more ND folks in your event. Establishing quiet spaces to get away from the busier parts of the event, being considerate of lighting choices, flexible break times, and activities for smaller groups were all highlighted to me by ND people as making their experience more enjoyable.

These are the lessons I took away from speaking to dozens of neurodivergent people in researching this blog post. I encourage you to speak to, and listen to, people in your communities as well, particularly when dealing with an issue which cites their struggles or impacts them directly.