Part One: The Spectrum Isn’t the Problem — We Are

By Shaun K.

What if no one was broken — just different? What if the problem wasn’t in the wiring, but in the way we measure minds at all?

“Neurodivergence” only exists because we decided some ways of thinking were to be deemed more acceptable than others. But what if we hadn’t? What if we just let minds be?

We created and now throw around terms like the spectrum, neurotypical, neurodivergent — as if they’re objective truths. As if these labels were written in nature. But they weren’t.

The only reason the spectrum even exists is because we’ve chosen to count — to calculate how many people think in specific ways. And we’ve silently agreed that majority = normal. That “typical” thinking is the gold standard — not because it’s better, but because it’s more common.

But what if we never made that comparison?

What if we never defined one way of thinking as the default? What if we stopped pathologizing anyone who fell outside that statistical bell curve?

The idea of “neurodivergence” would collapse. Not because minds wouldn’t still vary — they absolutely would — but because there’d be no stigma attached to that variation. No diagnosis required to explain your experience. No need to prove yourself just to be treated with some basic understanding.

The Spectrum Isn’t the Problem

It’s the weight we’ve attached to it.

It’s not inherently bad to say people think and process differently. That’s just a fact. But we’ve layered so much meaning on top of that truth — labels, judgements, gatekeeping, pity, alienation — that “the spectrum” stops being a neutral observation and starts becoming a system hierarchy.

And the thing is: it didn’t have to be.

We could’ve chosen to design society around a plurality of minds — instead of building everything around a narrow slice of what we call “normal.” Schools, workplaces, communication styles, emotional norms — all constructed with the assumption that if you don't fit the mold, you’re broken.

But what if no one was broken?

What if we stopped asking how far someone is from neurotypical and just started asking what kind of support, space, or design actually works for them?

The Term “Neurotypical” Only Exists Because We Made It So

It’s not a diagnosis — it’s a statistical category. One we made up.

We drew a line in the sand and said, “People who think like this are regular. People who don’t… well, let’s name that.” And we called it neurodivergence.

But imagine if we never drew that line.

Imagine if difference wasn’t difference from something, but just difference.

 That would radically change how we see learning, creativity, emotional processing, relationships — even identity itself. The spectrum would still exist, but it would be stripped of its judgement. Just a landscape of minds. Not a ruler.

Part Two — What if There was No “Normal” to Fall Short Of?

Loneliness, love, and the lies that keep us apart — especially when you’ve been taught, you’re not who someone would choose.