Makes sense to me.
For myself, I feel it’s heathiest at this juncture that I stop asking, “Am I, or am I not, autistic?” What’s in a name, anyway?
I do have the sense I am neurodivergent, and I am aware of certain particular traits or patterns in myself that might well fall under that umbrella. But I think I’d be better served by sticking with “Neurodivergent: not otherwise specified,” or else “subclinically typical,” rather than attempt the apparently futile trick of putting a finer point on it by employing a word that can label so many different presentations.
The only thing that perhaps I miss by not accepting a name with more particular associations and connotations is the “culture” or community aspect. Knowing that I more or less belong to a particular tribe, which has a particular name, would be one of the benefits, as I see it, of accepting a diagnosis as X (i.e., autistic, or whatever it might be).
But maybe I can just hang in there a while longer while “neurodivergent” itself gets fleshed out a little more.