
I mean, people generally don’t say “he’s an autistic writer” unless they specifically want to reference the fact that this is an autistic person who writes, whereas they would say “he’s a gifted writer” when they mean that he’s very good at his job as a writer.
I think this is a case of a word being used in two different ways. There is gifted, meaning “good at”, and Gifted, as in the special categorization of giftedness. I think in your example, the former definition is being used.
It’s like stoic (unemotional) versus Stoic (specific philosophy).







I’m extremely surprised that the text-only trials had results as good as they did. It’s been my experience that people can detect something “off” from text alone as readily as they can from audio conversations or in-person interactions.
Regardless of medium – email, instant message, forum post, fiction writing – I have received feedback that my communication style is offputting, robotic, unemotional, pompous, direct (negative connotation), and more. If I try to compensate for lack of emotion by including emojis in emails/messages, I’m told it comes across as inauthentic, performative.