In the current research climate, in which many autistic and autism communities are increasingly calling for a move towards collaborative forms of research, we consider how a loosely formed epistemological community may serve to challenge 'business as usual' in the academy. Mindful of the need to move beyond theory, we use this experience to concretely consider how knowledge about autism and neurotypicality can be meaningfully (co)-produced, and made available both to the research community and also to autistic and autism communities. Here, we use our own coproduction of this article to explore how autistic experience may trouble normative meanings of academic knowledge production. We also consider the limits and possibilities of a neurodiverse research collaboration to reflect on ways in which a loose epistemological space may serve to contribute to knowledge about both autism and neurotypicality, adding to debate around collaborative research. Point of interest  It is important to include the voices of autistic people (as both researchers and participants) at all stages of research: this leads to higher quality research. Even though this is often mentioned in articles and studies, it is still unusual to see it happening.  Academic systems (such as the writing of articles, the training of researchers etc.) can be a barrier to the inclusion of autistic voices. We believe encouraging autistic and non-autistic people to work together (as has been done in this article) is a positive step to inclusion more generally.  We explore the advantages (and the difficulties) of collaborative work.  We think of this type of collaborative work as a project that can produce new perspectives and contribute to a move towards new ways of thinking about autism that do not rely on existing 'deficit-based' narratives.  We use the process of writing this article as a 'neurodiverse collective' as a starting point to discuss the benefits and difficulties of emancipatory and participative research more generally.  We reflect on how our theoretical discussion can be applied concretely at various stages of the research process.

Autism is conceptualized in much scientific literature as being associated with restricted and repetitive interests, characterized by an 'empathy deficit', and negatively impacting social communication. Meanwhile, 'good and healthy' sexuality is largely considered to be a social endeavor: asexuality and sexualities defined by acts rather than by partner gender-for example kink or BDSM-are broadly pathologized. Perhaps, therefore, first-hand autistic experiences of sexuality challenge existing assumptions about 'good and healthy' sexualities within couplehood. As a theoretical starting point to explore this potential, we revisit Gayle Rubin's notion of 'sex within the charmed circle' to ask whether autistic sexuality can ever truly 'fit' within this (neurotypically defined) virtuous sexual arena. We further consider the ways in which the intersection of autism and sexuality is understood and experienced in first-hand autistic accounts of sexuality within a specific context, through analysis of a Swedish online discussion forum in which autistic people discuss sexuality. In doing so we seek both to better understand autistic sexual experience, and to track and deconstruct potentially restrictive assumptions of (non-autistic) couple sexuality more generally. We also consider ways in which assumptions of deficit concerning both nonnormative sexualities and autism may have a deleterious effect on autistic people and on research more broadly, limiting theoretical and conceptual understandings of autism and autistic ways of (sexual) being by a default comparison to sexual and neurological norms.

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text.

No abstract

Research and anecdote dealing in autistic sexual and gender identities present the picture of a group of people who may not conform to (cis)gender binaries, (hetero)sexual norms, or discrete sexual categories of a 'heterosexual, bisexual, or homosexual' nature. Considering that the 'over-representation' of sexual and gender diversity amongst autistic people requires attention, research in the field largely emphasises perceived autistic deficits to explain this phenomenon. In this way, the authenticity of autistic sexual and gender subjectivity is called into question, while both deficit readings of autism and assumptions of a stable, binary reading of sexuality and gender are left untroubled. Leaning on Halberstam's use of failure, I challenge the grounding of autistic sexual and gender diversity in deficit, considering instead autistic experience of gender and sexual identity as valid and authentic. This approach offers epistemological, ethical, and ontological opportunities and turns the research gaze away from supposed autistic deficit, interrogating instead the often unquestioned assumptions of the 'imperfect systems' of sexual and gender norms. I briefly present three alternative and emergent theoretical approaches with the potential to question both what we think we know about autism and what we may be able to know about sexuality and gender through autism.