"You're So High-functioning. Maybe You Don't Really Have Autism."

"High-functioning" has more than one definition.  The clinical definition is related to IQ and childhood language development.  The common definition is related to how impaired a person with an autism spectrum disorder appears to be.  The disorder I have isn't exactly the same as high-functioning autism.  But from the outside my impairment seems so mild that one might think it possible that I don't actually have any neurodevelopmental condition at all.  That my problems could be behavioral.  Simple as that.

How should I respond when a layperson comparing my apparent impairment with somebody else's says that maybe I don't really have autism?  I could say that mental health professionals don't evaluate for ASD on the basis of such comparisons.  Or I could try to explain that there are things going on that they can't see.  Some things I have to regulate so I can fit in, such as my compulsion to make repetitive sounds for the sensation they create in my mouth or throat.  Or my obsession with complex symmetry.  Other things are invisible to the naked eye, such as the neural connections in my brain.  Lastly, I could say that if by default the least impaired autistic person you know is most likely not autistic then after you've written them off the second least impaired autistic person you know must be next for dismissal.  Following this line of thought carefully, comparing by increments, you can arrive at a definition of autism that allows only profound disability.  And there are many who take such care in judging which of their autistic acquaintances is wrong or is making excuses or is maybe even malingering.  This is the care we should take not to dismiss pointed the wrong way.  We would do better to design our consideration with help in mind.  But how convincing would any of that be to a person who believes they can question two independent clinical diagnoses based on a gut feeling?  On how things seem?

I do not have a misdiagnosed behavioral disorder.  I take offense when laypeople insinuate that I do.  It suggests that they see me as lazy or as an NT person with a bad outlook.  As if this whole time all I needed to do was tweak my attitude.  Like Dorothy and the Silver Shoes.  Comparing my degree of disability to someone else's to make the point that my diagnosis is as likely incorrect as it is correct is prejudicial and diminishes my real struggle.  But I don't know how to change minds.  Presenting evidence takes a long time and people resist.  I don't know what can stop their bad evaluations.  People generally overestimate their consideration of any evidence, and those who can't evaluate evidence can't be cured of ignorance.  But I should still try.  Right?