And my words in no way implied that those were equal, or that autism was necessarily an illness or a disability. People often make those arguments and I'm not one of them. You're attacking a straw man.
> I see this sentiment often, but only when it comes to autism. How is this different from other disorders, disabilities, illnesses?
We have a comparative question involving a list of things, here.
Let's unroll the list and make separate comparative questions instead:
autism. How is this different from other disorders?
This works. Autism is a disorder. It can be compared to other disorders.
autism. How is this different from other disabilities?
This doesn't work. The comparison rests upon the implication that autism must be a disability, but that's just not absolute. It certainly can be disabling, but it often is not disabling.
autism. How is this different from other illnesses?
> I see this sentiment often, but only when it comes to autism. How is this different from other disorders, disabilities, illnesses?
We have a comparative question involving a list of things, here.
Let's unroll the list and make separate comparative questions instead:
This works. Autism is a disorder. It can be compared to other disorders. This doesn't work. The comparison rests upon the implication that autism must be a disability, but that's just not absolute. It certainly can be disabling, but it often is not disabling. This doesn't work. Autism is not an illness.