A blogpost with some of my thoughts on autistic special interests, to be used in later work…
Passionate Pursuits: Intense Interests, Identity, and Autistic Flourishing
Autistic people often experience deep, focused engagement with specific topics, activities, or domains. Within autism research, these have historically been labeled “special interests” — a term that, while widely used, has been critiqued by autistic scholars and advocates for implying that autistic passion is somehow categorically different from, or lesser than, the enthusiasms of non-autistic people (Kapp et al., 2019). From my perspective, these intense interests are better understood as a meaningful dimension of autistic cognition and identity: sources of expertise, joy, community, and self-expression — not symptoms to be managed or behaviors to be redirected.
This reframing matters. When we begin from the premise that autism is a natural form of human neurological variation rather than a deficit or disorder, the question shifts from “how do we use interests to control behavior?” to “how can autistic people’s interests be recognized, respected, and supported?” Autistic voices — long marginalized in research about autism — are central to answering that question.
Companion Animals: Connection, Not Therapy
Many autistic people share deep and meaningful bonds with animals. This is not reducible to animals’ “calming influence” on a disordered nervous system, as it has sometimes been framed. Rather, the connections that autistic people form with companion animals often reflect the same qualities that characterize autistic sociality more broadly: depth, loyalty, directness, and a preference for communication that is honest rather than performatively social (Milton, 2012).
Research does suggest that cats and dogs can be meaningful companions for autistic children and adults (Hart et al., 2018). But rather than framing this primarily in terms of therapeutic benefit — animals as instruments of behavioral improvement — we might recognize it as evidence of autistic people’s rich capacity for interspecies connection. The value lies not in what animals do to autistic people, but in what autistic people and animals build together: reciprocal, non-judgmental, and often deeply communicative relationships that enrich both parties.
Sensory and Tactile Objects: Regulation, Not Distraction
Fidget tools, textured objects, and sensory toys have become increasingly visible in conversations about autism — though autistic people have always known their value. Objects like squishies (soft, malleable toys) are not primarily “distractions from destructive behavior,” as they are sometimes characterized. They are tools of sensory self-regulation: ways of managing sensory input and emotional experience that are grounded in autistic people’s own expertise about what their nervous systems need (Kapp et al., 2019).
Stimming — self-stimulatory behavior including touching textured objects, rocking, or hand movements — has long been pathologized and suppressed, often with serious psychological harm (Kupferstein, 2018). The neurodiversity paradigm invites a different understanding: stimming is a form of self-regulation and embodied communication, and sensory objects that support it are valuable precisely because they honor autistic people’s bodily autonomy and sensory experience.
The cultural dimension matters equally. Toys and objects that connect to interests in fantasy, science fiction, animals, or other domains are not simply appealing as behavioral distractions. They often become the foundation of communities, creative works, and shared identity — as decades of fan studies scholarship demonstrates (Busse & Gray, 2011). Fandom and collecting are not workarounds; they are genuine cultural practices.
Pokémon GO and Collecting Cultures: Community and Agency
When Pokémon GO was released in 2016, media coverage frequently framed it as a tool for “fixing” autistic people — encouraging them to leave the house, interact with strangers, exercise. This framing is as condescending as it is reductive. Autistic people were playing the original Pokémon games long before augmented reality arrived, precisely because collecting, categorizing, and mastering complex systems are intrinsically enjoyable — not because they needed behavioral incentives to engage with the world.
Rather than asking “how does this game help autistic people behave more neurotypically?”, a more generative question is: what does the enthusiasm with which many autistic people engage in collecting cultures tell us about autistic cognition, aesthetics, and community-building? The answer points to deep engagement with pattern recognition, system mastery, and the pleasures of expertise — all features of neurodivergent minds worth celebrating, not merely managing.
Pokémon GO and similar games also create genuine community: shared spaces, shared languages, and shared passions. For autistic people who may find conventional social scripts exhausting or opaque, interest-based community offers a different kind of social world — one structured around shared enthusiasm rather than neurotypical social performance. This is not a workaround for social difficulty; it is a distinct and valid form of sociality.
Conclusion: From Management to Flourishing
The neurodiversity paradigm does not ask what interests, toys, or animals can do for autistic people in the sense of managing or correcting their behavior. It asks how autistic people’s lives can be supported so that they can pursue what they love, connect with others on their own terms, and flourish as they are.
Nothing about us without us. Research on autism that does not center autistic perspectives, voices, and expertise is incomplete at best and harmful at worst (Sinclair, 1993; den Houting, 2019). The examples discussed here — animals, sensory objects, games, and collecting cultures — are not therapeutic interventions to be deployed strategically. They are dimensions of a rich, varied, and valid autistic life.
References
Busse, K., & Gray, J. (2011). Fan cultures and fan communities. In V. Nightingale (Ed.), The handbook of media audiences. Wiley-Blackwell.
den Houting, J. (2019). Neurodiversity: An insider’s perspective. Autism, 23(2), 271–273.
Hart, B. L., Thigpen, A. P., Willits, N. H., Lyons, L. A., Bhatt, U. N., & Hart, L. A. (2018). Affectionate interactions of cats with children having autism spectrum disorder. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 5(39).
Kapp, S. K., Steward, R., Crane, L., Elliott, D., Elphick, C., Pellicano, E., & Russell, G. (2019). “People should be allowed to do what they like”: Autistic adults’ views and experiences of stimming. Autism, 23(7), 1782–1792.
Kupferstein, H. (2018). Evidence of increased PTSD symptoms in autistics exposed to applied behavior analysis. Advances in Autism, 4(1), 19–29.
Milton, D. E. M. (2012). On the ontological status of autism: The “double empathy problem.” Disability & Society, 27(6), 883–887.
Sinclair, J. (1993). Don’t mourn for us. Our Voice, 1(3).