Is it more difficult for autistic people to adhere to a code of conduct (in written communication)?

Question

As a moderator on Stack Exchange, users suspended for rudeness have repeatedly argued along the lines of the following:

I am autistic and therefore I am unable to recognise when something I write is offensive. Therefore the code of conduct discriminates against me.

My question is: Is there any merit to this argument, i.e., is it really more difficult for autistic people to adhere to a (reasonable) code of conduct?

Some clarifications and constraints:

• I only care about written communication. Also, I do not particularly care about instantaneous communication like chat.

• I only care about clear transgressions of a code of conduct, i.e., anything worthy of a suspension. Being slightly off tone or similar doesn’t qualify. As a rule of thumb, I do not care about anything that could also happen to a well-intentioned non-native speaker of English (or whatever the language of the community is).

• This is not about the possible conclusions for moderation, e.g., whether it should be more lenient. If anything, this would be a separate follow-up question.

My thoughts so far is that none of the typical symptoms of autism supports this argument. In particular, most communication difficulties encountered by autistic people revolve around non-verbal communication, which is naturally absent from written communication. There are exceptions like difficulties with understanding figurative language or irony, but I don’t see how those would result in a suspension, unless in a very unfortunate chain of coincidences. Moreover, in none of the cases I encountered could I see a link between the transgressions and autistic communication difficulties.

Answer 1

Is there any merit to this argument, i.e., is it really more difficult for autistic people to adhere to a (reasonable) code of conduct?

There is some merit to this argument, in certain circumstances.

The Double-Empathy Problem

Simply put, the theory of the double empathy problem suggests that when people with very different experiences of the world interact with one another, they will struggle to empathise with each other. This is likely to be exacerbated through differences in language use and comprehension. – Dr Damian Milton, 2018-03-02

Instead, much like the English word ‘hough’ can have many different pronunciations and meanings (huff, hock, how, etc) non-autistic language and actions are often bewildering and contradictory– dazzle of hints and secret signals which leave me thinking that much of their language must be in a pitch which I am unable to hear. – thearhystocrat, 2020-01-10

When you write a code of conduct, you need to write it for an audience who doesn't already understand what you mean by "be nice". Here's an example:

• When people correct me on things, I consider that a kindness, for obvious reasons.
• When I correct certain other people, they consider it an insult. This has something to do with status and implicit social hierarchies ("the pecking order"), I think. People I correct often become:
  • inexplicably angry or hostile towards me, or
  • subdued, deferent, and less inclined to correct me,
    • often to talk badly about me behind my back at a later point.

Often, when people write Codes of Conduct, they do so so they have a Code of Conduct; this is fairly useless. A Code of Conduct should clearly set out:

• What kinds of behaviour are recommended.
  • And why.
• What kinds of behaviour are unacceptable.
  • In enough detail that a total ignorant can understand.
  • And why.

There's little point having things in your Code of Conduct that don't apply to your community. Stock CoCs are all well and good, and it's good to peruse them to make sure you haven't forgotten something relevant, but normally you'll want to write your own Code of Conduct for your own site. This way:

• it's directly relevant to the problems that your community has, and the guidance that your users need;
• you'll feel more comfortable about editing it when necessary.

If your Code of Conduct is clear, actually

You're moderator of a Stack Exchange site. Our old-skool Be Nice policy was good enough in most instances, and the current Code of Conduct is, by and large, even clearer than it was. (I wouldn't use it as a model for another community's CoC, but it does the job.)

I am autistic and therefore I am unable to recognise when something I write is offensive. Therefore the code of conduct discriminates against me.

I only care about clear transgressions of a code of conduct, i.e., anything worthy of a suspension. Being slightly off tone or similar doesn’t qualify.

Moreover, in none of the cases I encountered could I see a link between the transgressions and autistic communication difficulties.

This sounds like a textbook case of "making excuses". Autistic people are, normally, not arseholes. Keeping arseholes on your site has nothing to do with inclusivity. “And therefore I am unable to” are the words of somebody who knows full well what they're doing wrong, and why, and refuses to change their behaviour.

For Stack Exchange moderation specifically, this user's behaviour meets both reasons for a suspension.

But what if it isn't clear?

So you want to give the user the benefit of the doubt? Try:

• Pointing out that social norms are different in different communities;
• Asking them which behaviours they're confused about the "legality" of;
• Asking them which parts of the CoC they're confused about;
• Explaining some rules-of-thumb they could follow to avoid getting into this situation in the future.

If this resolves the issue, chances are your CoC needs updating – or, at the very least, you need a supplemental help page. If the user keeps coming up with an excuse for everything you say, they're probably acting in bad faith.

If the rules are as simple as "don't use these words to describe people, on this website", and they're still "not getting it", it doesn't matter either way. That's not the kind of phenomenon you want in your community.

Answer 2

I am autistic so I have a say in this matter.

In some cases it is easy for me to stick to a code of conduct. Like "Don't bully others". I would not.

But sometimes indeed I trouble to figure out why I am not being considered "nice" when I am steer clear of my intentions being good, and being end up totally misunderstood. I don't understand why this happens.

Also I am very much impatient and restless so sometimes it happens a SE moderator says me to behave in a certain way, I try but I fail to strictly adhere to that behaviour. The failures make me ashamed and guilt which are painful feelings.

Also personally my writing quality is quite not up to professional level. I tend to incorporate contextual information that may seem irrelevant to other users. I personally face difficulties to figure out what exactly to say or what exactly to ask. Because I can't often see which associated informations may be less important.

Answer 3

I found the blog post Neurodivergence and accountability in free software by Drew DeVault relevant to this. Its plug is a similar defense to Richard Stallman’s statements on sex, but it quickly becomes more general. It surveyed neurodivergent people on this (non-systematically).

Some relevant quotes

Since the blog post doesn’t have the same focus as the question, some of these verge into the follow-up question of how to react to CoC violations.

• An autistic person I spoke to […] had the following to say:

  […] But we [autistic folks] 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.

• 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.

• […] 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.

• I also heard some advice from the neurodivergent community […]. Clearly stated community norms and expectations, through codes of conducts and visible moderation, is often helpful for neurodivergent people.

Lessons for this question (and my take on them)

• Adhering to a code of conduct is more difficult for that subset of autistic people who already have a problematic attitude to begin with, because they find it difficult to suppress that attitude or express it within the rules.

  My take on this is that the main difference between a neurodivergent and a neurotypical problem user is that the latter is more likely collect suspension points slowly with borderline behaviour testing the waters, while the former is more likely to exhibit a clear transgression right away. However, both are equally disturbing the community, and neurodivergence is not the central cause of problematic behaviour.

• A clear code of conduct actually helps autistic people to avoid social faux pas when they have no bad intentions or hold problematic views.

  I would expect that such faux pas are rare to verge into suspension territory anyway, unless the community has norms that I would consider unreasonably strict or downright bizarre.