Autism and Masculinity

abcdavid01 · Post by **abcdavid01** » April 16th, 2013, 9:16 am

Great article over at Return of Kings:

http://www.returnofkings.com/9482/dont- ... y-disorder

Interesting in its own right, but I was struck by the author's suggestion that Autism is hyper-masculinity. I had never heard that before, so I looked it up. Well it appears Hans Aspergers himself suggested the connection. Research has been done to suggest it's connected to high levels of fetal testosterone. More here:

http://www.iancommunity.org/cs/understa ... male_brain

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the ... le-brain-w

Men are significantly more likely to be autistic than women.

Honestly I have no idea if this is really true or not. I've been told I have aspergers, but it doesn't really mean anything to me. I have no idea what it even means. I know a few of you here on this forum are like that too. I've also noticed how disproportionately intelligent a lot of members are.

But if it is true, great. I'm not usually interested in diagnostic explanations and instead look to analyzing the culture. What's wrong with the zeitgeist? But if I were to accept any medical explanation I'd obviously choose this one.

My mother was a careerist and she had kids in her thirties...you know how the constant complaint and the reason this site exists and is successful is because women in the West as masculinized due to Feminism. Well what if that's leading to higher levels of fetal testosterone and autism?

So if the Return of Kings article explains what happens to women like this, what happens to men? They become school shooters.

Really though, I'd probably fit in better with an older society. In the 20th century the culture and economy became increasingly feminized, so of course a guy exposed to "high levels of fetal testosterone" wouldn't fit in. Or I could find a culture/society that isn't as feminized...abroad.

For the record though, I've always objected to the idea that I somehow have less empathy. Compared to my ice cold mother, who usually makes such accusations? When she does display concern it usually comes off as insincere. It was Tsar who mentioned the women having soulless eyes.

For a real in-depth analysis of extreme male brain theory, here's a paper on it from MIT Press:

bit.ly/Z0tVZI

Also, before any of you start going out and saying psychiatry is totally wack, I have a response. Mental health classifications are neither objective nor subjective. They lie somewhere in between. They are descriptive.

Yes, it is possible to consider bipolar disorder of schizophrenia as social constructs. The same can be done of gender, but is that really useful? No. In fact, it's downright dangerous. Don't be a mental health feminist.

Of course there's the incredibly legitimate fear that the medical industrial complex is just trying to stay in business. But that's not to say that mental health classifications aren't descriptive of some reality. It's like criticizing the military industrial complex by saying there's never any reason for war under any circumstances.

Although the military industrial complex is certainly worth criticizing, I simply do not agree with the notion that there is no reason for war, ever. So it is with the medical industrial complex as well.

I use the phrase "mental health classifications" in lieu of disorder because labeling something a disorder is a value judgment. Not that there's anything wrong with value judgments of course. I think homosexuality is a mental disorder for example.

clowny · Post by **clowny** » April 16th, 2013, 4:38 pm

f**k you david. I personally think many "disorders" are a load of BS. I have my doubts about aspergers syndrome, for example. I mean, I honestly don't know how you're supposed to differentiate between someone who has aspergers and someone who is just chronically shy. They don't have a "disorder", they just don't have any social skills or self esteem.

abcdavid01 · Post by **abcdavid01** » April 16th, 2013, 6:44 pm

What's wrong with you? I don't have a problem with you, but you keep insulting my out of the blue.

I already gave my response about why I think mental health classifications are valid - and as someone actually diagnosed with one!

But apparently you didn't read that part.

zacb · Post by **zacb** » April 16th, 2013, 7:15 pm

clowny needs to be a tad more sensitive. But to answer the question, yeah there is a difference. One is just socially inexperienced while the other makes efforts but is rebuffed, and they tend to be obsessive,have somewhat erratic behavior, and it is harder to read social cues.

abcdavid01 · Post by **abcdavid01** » April 16th, 2013, 7:48 pm

What do you make of it zacb? Have you heard this theory before?

zacb · Post by **zacb** » April 16th, 2013, 7:52 pm

Yeah, and they link it to libertarianism as well. Not as sure about that, but I am familiar with it.

Cornfed · Post by **Cornfed** » April 16th, 2013, 9:29 pm

The situation with Asperser's syndrome/ADHD/functional autism etc. is like this. Humanity can be divided up into two kinds of people - the majority of stupid, mindless zombies and the minority of authentic human beings. The authentic human beings are made up almost entirely of males, but there are a few (likely chromosomally abnormal) females. The difference is the capacity for inductive human thought. The zombies don't have this capacity because the inductive centers of their brains are either absent in the case of females or suppressed with a high background level of the neuro-inhibitor dopamine in the case of males. The reason for high resting dopamine levels in most males is the process of domestication they are put though which subjects them to various forms of stress, causing their dopamine levels to rise. Hence domestication in humans is essentially the feminization of men. Some males are naturally resistant to this process for some reason, so they retain their capacity for human thought. How these outliers are received by society depends on the society. In societies in their ascendency they are regarded as "visionaries" or "gifted" or similar. In societies that are going down the tubes, unless they are in the elite they are the subject of hysterical hatred and diagnosed with disorders such as ADHD etc.

abcdavid01 · Post by **abcdavid01** » April 16th, 2013, 10:15 pm

Great post Cornfed. Yes, the world certainly changes once you start looking at most people as not really human:

http://mattforney.com/2013/02/08/the-living-dead/

zacb · Post by **zacb** » April 17th, 2013, 5:02 am

Great post Cornfed. I believe a lot of people's behavior towards things can be linked back to public education. Compare todays school with Prussian style schools, and you will get the picture. Not to brag or anything, but once I began homeschooling, it opened up my mind big time. Can't really explain it.

S_Parc · Post by **S_Parc** » April 17th, 2013, 9:52 am

zacb wrote:Not to brag or anything, but once I began homeschooling, it opened up my mind big time. Can't really explain it.

Homeschooling is great. If I had a time machine, that might be the ONLY thing that I do differently on a re-pass. All other superfluous decisions wouldn't really make a difference, to warrant a "Butterfly Effect" movie re-try.

abcdavid01 · Post by **abcdavid01** » April 17th, 2013, 10:25 am

Heh. I watched that film many times as a kid...

Yeah, I should have been homeschooled.

S_Parc · Post by **S_Parc** » April 17th, 2013, 11:23 am

abcdavid01 wrote:Heh. I watched that film many times as a kid...

Yeah, I should have been homeschooled.

Well, given the fact that you're not to far off from your teen years, & the amount of content on the net, you'd do pretty well in the mid-2000s.

For someone from the pre-internet era, one needed to be within public transit distance from either a community college or let's say the Harvard night school/Extension studies, to really make a huge leap forward via homeschooling. That would have resulted in me, basically being done with college at the age of 17 and starting my first real job at 18 (or sooner).

Since I believe that it was destiny, to never settle down with an AW, it wouldn't have happened anyways, regardless of what path I could have taken.

zboy1 · Post by **zboy1** » April 17th, 2013, 3:56 pm

abcdavid01 wrote:Heh. I watched that film many times as a kid...

Yeah, I should have been homeschooled.

I think a lot of kids would benefit from "homeschooling," and when looking at it from an adult perspective: not only do you get your kids away from the indoctrination centers of government schools, but your children will be spared from the online and in-person bullying, and teen suicides and rapes, that is endemic in the US/Canada right now.

S_Parc · Post by **S_Parc** » April 17th, 2013, 4:39 pm

zboy1 wrote:I think a lot of kids would benefit from "homeschooling," and when looking at it from an adult perspective: not only do you get your kids away from the indoctrination centers of government schools, but your children will be spared from the online and in-person bullying, and teen suicides and rapes, that is endemic in the US/Canada right now.

Well, part of how parents' think that education should be left to the professionals ... ala the teachers in those overpriced towns with *good* school systems.

I've already lambasted a lot of my peers on this issue.

Brazor · Post by **Brazor** » April 17th, 2013, 5:00 pm

Not everyone is temperamentally suited for homeschooling. The school system is still the most efficient way to transmit knowledge to students.

Most of you who do eventually have kids will most likely send them to public school (or maybe private, if you can afford it). Knowing what you do about public schools, are you still willing to put your kids through it? That's something to think about.

BTW WTF happened to my post? It disappeared for no reason.