Ask The Tropers

I'm pretty sure autistic people just aren't a periphery demographic to begin with.

What even is the target audience for Sonic? I'm pretty sure it's not supposed to be just a "for kids" series.

Agreed, I don't think the creators look at Sonic and go "I sure don't expect people with Asperger's to like this!).

I think both parts are really weak. The demographic isn't that periphery nor is it particularly into the franchise.

I think like Nintendo, it's a "for everyone" franchise.

(I'm not sure if this thread is gonna raise the question of if disability would be considered a demographic.)

Yeah, I'm gonna go with a "kill it with fire". It's not an example, plus it seemingly makes fun of autistic people.

As we all know, if you're on the spectrum and you're a Sonic fan, that means you must want to create your own OC and write terrible fanfic about them, because everyone with autism is basically Chris-chan. Definitely cut.

I'm fairly sure that the spectrum is not a demographic at all. Cut for sure.

As a person pretty far up on the spectrum I'll say that it could be that we're more inclined to like Sonic the Hedgehog. If that's the case, then that's not stereotyping, it's just stating the facts.

With that said: There's no point in stating such a fact here, since we'd only be a Periphery Demographic if Sonic had been mainly intended for non-autistic people.

I mean, everyone is into their own things, autistic or not. No matter how pattern-based and setting-based a work is, I don't think any of us (I'm autistic too) are inherently more likely to like Sonic. I just don't think that's how it works.

Yeah, I'm with everyone else on this one. Target demographics, from what I can tell, seem to be based more on things like age or gender, rather than disability; that's why we have tropes like Animation Age Ghetto and Girl-Show Ghetto. I don't think many creators go into their work thinking "I am going to deliberately target this series towards non-autistic people and it'll be a surprise if autistic people do end up enjoying it". That's just not how it works. Also, the example you've mentioned indeed sounds like it's playing on a stereotype used to mock autistic people and Sonic fans, and I'd rather we not do that.

I agree with Lord Yoink, it's a rather rubbish stereotype and it should be cut.

It's gone

Wasn’t there also a “people with autism like this show” entry with Thomas the Tank Engine?

On WesternAnimation.Thomas The Tank Engine:

The series has been known to have had a following among people with disabilities, especially people with Autism and Aspergers, in part thanks to the usage of static imagery in the model seasons.

On YMMV.Thomas The Tank Engine:

• Periphery Demographic
  • As mentioned on the main page, the original series is also very popular with autistic children, thanks to its straightforward narration and lack of busy visuals, which prevent sensory overload. It's also proven extremely useful in teaching children with autism visual cues, as the characters' limited facial expressions are usually accompanied by a narration of exactly what emotion they're experiencing.

Not sure about this one. It's much better than the Sonic the Hedgehog example as it lacks stereotyping, but does this deserve to be kept?

After some looking, there are autism spectrum Periphery Demographic examples for Keep Your Hands Off Eizouken!, Bear in the Big Blue House, Frozen (also with anxiety disorders and depression), and Inside Out. Teddy Ruxpin has an example involving learning disabilities.

This really raises the question: Can autism (and any other disability) be considered a demographic?

No. I dont think so.

As I said earlier, I don't think it's a valid demographic, as I don't really see marketing towards people on the spectrum. If there were several examples of entertainment or somesuch specifically aimed at people on the spectrum, I would consider it a demographic, but without someone catering to it in some way, I don't think it counts as one.

Doublepost, Ignore this textbox here.

Among the other reasons, another reason it's invalid is, again, it lumping everyone into one group that likes the same things, and just assuming that people on the spectrum like Sonic and Thomas because of these specific qualities and not, say, because the characters are cool. It just rubs me the wrong way that it assumes the same things appeal to all of us and for the same reasons.

Many of the bad examples of Periphery Demographic are better fits for applicability.

^^ That's not a very good argument. A similar argument could be made for "lumping" all early-to-mid-20s men into liking MLP because bronies are a thing.

Membership in a larger group does not imply membership in a smaller, related group. Sticking with Sonic as the example, it has a prominent Furry Fandom, but not all fans are furries and a good number of them would be quite offended if you assume they are.

As another person on the spectrum, I agree. Nobody makes works for us, or any other disorder/disability.

^^ That's not what I said at all.

They're arguing that people on the Spectrum are more likely to like this because it has these specific qualities, but I don't think that's true; unlike, say, Furry Fandom, you can't quantify how many people on the spectrum even like the thing because we don't even make up a sizable enough portion of these fanbases, or at least, we don't form our own obvious group like the Furries do.

You can say for certain that Sonic does have a Furry Fandom. You can't say for certain it has an Autistic Fandom, especially not if your only arguments is that it has patterns and world-building. Claiming as such is claiming that we're drawn to those specific things; lumping us into one group with one taste in media based solely on our ASD.

These examples make a lot of assumptions about what people like based on them having ASD, but they're just jumping to conclusions with no evidence (like I said, Autistic Fanbases likely do exist but don't have their own obvious niche like other smaller fan-groups do, so this is even just assuming these ASD fans exist in the first place) besides that "ASD people like patterns, and this work has patterns".

Yeah, sure, technically we may be more likely to enjoy works like these, but there's no evidence we actually do, and the examples are written on the assumption that these stereotypical qualities is all we care about in a work.

Or in other words, it's assuming these demographics even exist based on stereotypes and assuming we all like specific things.

^ The example in the OP doesn't say people on the spectrum are more likely to like it, it says "it's extremely popular among people on the autistic spectrum." And then lists some reasons why, which may have merit to them, or may be speculative — there's no way to tell with the context given.

The issues, as I see them and as they've been pointed out in this thread:

• How do we know that it's "extremely popular among people on the autistic spectrum"? Is there a visible online community anywhere?
• The pattern and world-building reasoning: Is this based on what autistic fans have said about what draws them to the work, or is it speculation?
• Can autistic people even be considered a Periphery Demographic in the first place, if they are not explicitly or implicitly excluded from the target audience? (If the answer to this is 'no', then the previous two bullet points are moot.)

^ And that's my problem exactly; if it said we're more likely to enjoy it, I'd have no issue, but it's saying we do like it- and there's no proof of that.