#yeh!!

I think I’ve answered a question like this before (and it’s also come up for other characters) and my general policy is like…when it comes to fictional characters I generally don’t want to put specific modern diagnoses on them, for a number of reasons I’m just averse to doing so as a rule.

I think some of this has to do with how…culturally determined specific diagnoses can be - not saying that diagnoses aren’t real or helpful, just saying that there’s so much overlap and intersection and the specific way people get their stuff named and identified can have a lot to do with where they are, when they are, and who they are.

so basically…sure! maybe! certainly if it resonates with someone who is carrying around a specific diagnoses of one kind or another and that is somehow helpful or meaningful to them, I’m not going to say they shouldn’t roll with the headcanon; more power to them. but for myself specifically I just tend to leave it at “Xue Yang’s got some weird brainstuff going on that impacts how he relates to other people” and write/analyze that in the ways it manifests in his behavior, rather than putting a specific diagnosis name on it and claiming that as my definitive headcanon.

(I do have headcanons about how in a modern AU I think Xue Yang has been thoroughly pathologized throughout his life in a way that is very ableist, but also nobody can really agree on what, exactly, is pathological about him, and certainly there’s not a lot of interest in helping. it’s basically a lot of “people just trying to pick a specific name for what’s "wrong” with him" and it stopping there.)