On the other hand, there was one woman who used to be in my life who violated every single personal boundary I put before her, and when I called her out on it, she would claim she was bipolar and therefore should not be held responsible.
There's a grey area in terms in this thread that I think you captured nicely here.
Even if an excuse is provided,
people need to be held accountable for their actions.
Accountability is somewhat associated with punishment, but they're not the same. (Though it's the the same as the terminology range that includes explanation, excuse, responsible for, accountable for, sanctioned for etc.
If people do bad things
they need to stop. This includes anyone
hiding behind an excuse. They can be sorry, and perhaps their apology is accepted . But only the first time, and only if there's a good case that the action was a mistake.
Repeats are different.
The means for changing behavior are many and varied.
It's usually considered that the sanctions should be in proportion to the nature and scale of the offense.
And that greater sanctions are appropriate in the case of repeats.
So what about an Aspie that keeps doing something bad, excuses it "because it's their nature", and doesn't change?
Are they completely off the hook? Not IMO if they are
capable of participating in normal society, and
want to do so.
We have the right to special consideration, but like all rights, it comes with responsibilities and limits.
Anyone who chooses to ignore those responsibilities and limits, and "weaponizes" their rights,
deserves criticism.
And will certainly
be criticized, and perhaps sanctioned, sooner or later. At that point it's too late for "the leopard to change its spots".