neuropoppins - Tumblr blog

neuropoppins · 12 hours ago

Text

Gender Crititcal Autism

Article dated 2023 - PITT Parents, Why Are We Erasing Neurodiversity?

"Neurodivergence is a newer term meant to encompass differences once known as Asperger’s syndrome and/or autism spectrum disorder. The term is somewhat controversial among advocacy groups and autistic individuals. However, the widespread adoption of the term has accomplished what advocates set out to do—destigmatize what they view as simply another human variation. Neurological differences are now thought of more in terms of immutable qualities, like ethnicity or race; the neurodivergent person is another instance of differences in the rich tapestry of humanity rather than a disability or mental disorder.

There is, though, a risk to this reframing. The ways in which neurodivergent people see and interact with the world can make them feel very different from others, and non-typically presenting relative to stereotypes, especially those relating to social interactions, sex, and gender. And, because of these feelings of difference, neurodivergent people are much more susceptible to gender ideology and its related social contagion than the neurotypical population. This is a fact that is blazingly clear and obvious to parents with trans identified children, many of whom are neurodivergent or autistic—and we know that neurodivergent or autistic individuals are disproportionately overrepresented in trans identified populations. Even gender clinics report a significantly high percentage of neurodivergent or autistic clients.

There are a number of reasons put forth to explain why these types of kids are so vulnerable and struggle so much with sex expression and sexuality. For instance, neurodiverse teens may have a more rigid, black and white thinking style that prevents them from seeing commonalities with same sex peers, and the difficulties in showing empathy puts up further roadblocks to developing strong peer relationships.

But lack of empathy does not mean lack of sensitivity—these kids are highly sensitive to rejection and being othered. They live in a world filled with shame and embarrassment from not fitting in and are always trying to figure out why. Isolated from ordinary peer groups, neurodivergent people still long for connection and belonging—thus making them more likely to succumb to social contagions and cults. They are prime targets for gender ideology which, unfortunately in our society, is trumpeted from all directions as a magical solution to loneliness and feeling awkward in your body. The internet and all aspects of entertainment are drowning in it. The very people who should be autism advocates are totally captured by the transgender movement. Civil rights language is incorporated into trans activism and is especially appealing to the strong sense of justice innate to these folks.

On top of the omnipresence of the ideology, the promise of becoming a new person entirely is thrilling—and also especially alluring to the autistic kid who, driven to academic success, seeks strategies to achieve social success as well. Embracing gender ideology gives the ultimate misfit an intrinsic excuse for never quite fitting in. A childhood of awkwardness and shame of rejection can be swept away. Failure as a man can, for the high achievers, be replaced by a shot at success (or partial success) as a woman. And, with trans, there’s a built-in excuse if the success is only partial: If I don’t master being female there is a good reason. I wasn’t born one. Surely others will understand. The black and white thinking of this population creates an all or nothing scenario.

Our society seemingly worships at the altar of diversity, but gender ideology is bent on erasing the actual diversity in our society. How can we promote diversity while at the same time telling those who are different that they need to be fixed—that they need to medically alter their bodies to be whole? Moreover, to accept gender ideology, one has to embrace regressive sex stereotypes of clothing, appearance, interests, and social interactions, and find a way to fit oneself in a proper box based on these caricatures. That philosophy is as anti-diversity as it gets, especially when you consider that there is more than a hint of eugenics in transgender ideology, as the “treatments” themselves are essentially chemical sterilization.

I believe that shoving this marginalized group into transition is discrimination. We should just let them be in the world as they are if we truly respect neurodiverse people and actually value diversity in our society. We should let their minds remain a boundless spectrum of intellect and creativity—and leave their bodies alone because, after all, sex is an immutable characteristic, observed, not assigned as activists would have us believe. When we promote transgender ideology, we are making it clear that, if they want to fit in, they must change their bodies and their very nature. This is erasing neurodiversity. Instead, we should help young people sit in the reality of who they are, and learn to love their immensely valuable selves. Only then we can say we value diversity—natural, real diversity.

2 notes · View notes

neuropoppins · 5 days ago

Text

Autism, Sex, and Ideology in the 21st Century by Neuro Poppins

Identity, Ideology, and the Trap of Affirmation

Autistic people have long asserted a fundamental truth: "I am not a person with autism. I am autistic. It shapes everything about how I experience the world." Autism is not an accessory or a trait that can be peeled off or suppressed; it is embedded, biological, structural. To reduce it to a personality trait, a behaviour, or a fashion is offensive and inaccurate. No one is “a little bit autistic”. You either are autistic, or you are not autistic. You can have autistic traits, but sharing similarities with us doesn’t make you one of us.

And yet, these same values - of rootedness, irreducibility, and evidence - are flung out the window when we enter the terrain of sex.

A woman asserts: "I am an adult human female. I am not a feeling or an expression. My sex is not a costume to be worn or removed. It is in every cell, every organ, every developmental pathway of my body."

But she is told she is a bigot.

Meanwhile, men claim to be women, not because their bodies reflect it, but because their inner feelings demand it.

Sex becomes something you can put on, self-declare, perform - and expect others to affirm.

If a non-autistic person (often referred to by autistics as neurotypical/NT) pretended to be autistic and performed stereotyped autistic traits, like hand-flapping, it would rightly be seen as offensive. It would be mockery. Turning autistic traits into a pantomime of identity performance would rightly provoke outrage.

From the outside, autism is often reduced to a set of stereotypes. Those who “fit” that stereotypical view of autism (“high support needs”/“profound” autism) are often stigmatised and excluded in society. For autistic people who do not fit that stereotype (“low support needs”/Asperger’s) getting recognised as autistic becomes problematic. Especially for autistic females who go undiagnosed, misdiagnosed and dismissed. Even they cannot perform autism. Autism is the reality itself underneath any set of behaviours, not the behaviour itself. And when we detach from the biological reality of being autistic, and enter the terrain of relying on behaviour-based criteria, we turn autism into an identity or an act. Reducing people down to a set of behaviours and symptoms has always been an issue in psychiatry for the myriad conditions listed. There are many mental health conditions and disorders that share overlapping traits and characteristics with each other - and are diagnosed based on observable behaviours. This creates a caveat, where autistic traits can be culturally misinterpreted as something else, and non-autistic traits can be seen as signs of autism. The biological underpinnings of autism could not be more important. Especially in a world that denies biology as a reality and places such focus and emphasis on identity through categorising and stereotyping behaviours. Scientific research into the genetics of autism is crucial so we can step away from pathologising people according to the way we perceive behaviours and instead pinpoint the reality hidden underneath them. Until then, we have no choice but to continue to rely on the behaviours categorised in the ever-changing diagnostics criteria.

Autism, Psychiatry, and the Limits of Diagnosis

Unlike most of medicine, psychiatry has to work backwards. In cardiology, we can see the cause of a heart attack: a blocked artery, a clot, a measurable dysfunction in the body’s machinery. From there, treatment is clear (medication, surgery, lifestyle change) all targeted at the root. Medicine begins with the biology and works forward to intervention.

Psychiatry does not have that anchor. We don’t yet know the biological or neurological root of most mental health conditions. There is no blood test, scan or genetic marker that can definitively identify autism or other conditions. So psychiatry is forced to start from the outside in: observing behaviours, clustering symptoms, and then working backwards to construct categories that might explain what is seen. This means diagnoses are descriptive rather than explanatory, and there is a disconnect between diagnosis and potential treatments. It tells us what it looks like, not necessarily what it is. See Dr James Davies controversial lecture where he talks about over-diagnosis.

Gina Rippon, a neurobiologist, addresses the issue in a different light “There is reference to “diagnostic creep” and the “medicalisation” of normal human variation [...] Autism is clearly in the crosshairs, targeted because of the 787% increase in diagnoses between 1998 and 2018. What better evidence is there that there is too much diagnosing going on? Those worried about the rise rarely note that, in the 1980s, after a painstaking UK-based investigation of a large range of developmental disorders, there was a deliberate recalibration of autism’s diagnostic criteria. This was because too many children in need of help were being missed by the then overly narrow definition of the condition. More recently, there has been an emerging awareness that even this more inclusive approach had missed large numbers of marginalised groups, especially women and girls. In conjunction with this, we are seeing a more sympathetic public awareness of autism, and how it presents. So this much-vilified increase is actually a long-needed correction of a longstanding bias, which had overlooked many in need of support.”

These two narratives - concerns about overdiagnosis and the correction of historical underdiagnosis - conflict and contradict each other. Perhaps there is no clear “right” or “wrong”; both are simultaneously true, reflecting the complex interplay of culture, psychiatry, and biology in understanding autism and other conditions.

Some autistic people have, potentially at their own expense through protest, shut down genetic research into autism - such as the Spectrum 10K project - out of fear it could be misused for eugenics. Yet, ironically, many turn a blind eye to the eugenic consequences implicit in gender-affirming care that high rates of autistic people are under-going in the name of ideology. By resisting genetic research, we might protect ourselves from one form of exploitation, but we also slow our own understanding of autism’s biological foundations - foundations that could help distinguish true autistic realities from stereotype, misdiagnosis and harmful ideologies. This self-imposed barrier underscores the stakes: until we fully embrace rigorous scientific inquiry, psychiatry must continue to navigate murky territory with cultural pressures, incomplete knowledge, and shifting definitions.

Stereotypes and Performance

Just as sex has been culturally draped in stereotypes (masculinity and femininity) autism has always been weighed down with social expectations of what it “should” look like, too. Cultural stereotypes of autism include the “nerdy” boy with comic books, the math savant, the socially inept computer geek. These are inventions. But the core autistic realities - sensory differences (that can lead to hand-flapping or rocking), restricted interests, difficulties with social reciprocity, etc - are innate. And crucially, not all autistic people express, or deal with them, in the same way.

Gender ideology, however, treats stereotypes as if they were biology. A man who feels “feminine” because he likes dresses, has long hair, or cultivates submissiveness is declared a woman. By the same logic, anyone who flaps their hands must be autistic.

Carried further, it suggests that anyone could perform autism convincingly enough to fit diagnostic criteria. The deeper issue is not that clinicians are pressured to “affirm,” but that psychiatry’s reliance on observable behaviours leaves it vulnerable to cultural scripts and stereotypes. A clinician’s challenge is to look past surface-level traits, whether learned or genuine, and probe the underlying reality with as much precision as the tools allow.

And just as importantly, they must look past their own psychiatric stereotypes about what autism “looks like.” But what do you do if the diagnostics criteria is the problem? For decades, autism was defined as a male condition, with the female presentation dismissed or erased. Clinicians who simply replicate stereotypes - whether cultural or psychiatric - become complicit in the very distortion that has historically denied so many people recognition and support.

History Repeats

We have seen this before. Doctors once dismissed women’s physical and psychological distress as “hysteria,” a catch-all rooted in misogyny rather than medicine. Later, psychiatric fashions replaced hysteria with “bipolar,” then “personality disorder,” (and some argue now “autism,”) dragging countless women through cycles of misdiagnosis. Today, the pattern continues with a grotesque twist: when women spoke truth, they were locked away as hysterics. But when men today literally insist they are women (an obvious psychiatric delusion) we are commanded to applaud. What was once pathologised in women is now celebrated in men. To even suggest they may be suffering from a mental illness has become a cultural offense. “Oh no, nothing hysteric to see here” we are told.

But just as with Gender Dysphoria was once understood as distress about one’s sex rather than declaring the male patient as literally a woman deep inside, there is growing concern that we are sliding into the same mistake with autism. We risk mistaking surface-level traits and behaviours for the essence itself, and labelling people “literally autistic” when in fact they may simply share some observable overlaps.

The difference, of course, is that sex is unambiguous. We know what it is, and we can identify it accurately in 99% of cases without recourse to psychiatry, at all. In fact, to rely on psychiatry to identify sex would be absurd - it would collapse into crude stereotypes about “masculinity” and “femininity,” the very distortions that fuel distress in the first place.

Autism, by contrast, does not yet have a definitive biological marker. We haven’t found the “autism gene” (though genetic research is making strides). Which means psychiatry still has to fill in the gaps. But psychiatry, with its shifting categories, cultural blind spots, and history of misdiagnosis, is a fragile foundation. Autism is a biological reality, not a psychiatric guess, which is why it is continuously scrutinised and debated. One day we will have genetic research to confirm (or deny) autism diagnoses.

Self-Diagnosis and Ideology

"Self-diagnosis is valid!" is a popular mantra in autism spaces. And to an extent, it has value. Many autistic people are missed by the system. Many self-diagnose because they have no other path. And many of them are right.

But some are wrong.

And increasingly, to say so is taboo.

We have created an environment where self-identification is unquestionable. This has morphed into an ideology and it is potentially escalating. Science will only set the record straight in time, but social narratives can run away from truth and change the landscape for everyone.

And like gender ideology, it demands affirmation - not inquiry. "If someone identifies as autistic, then they are autistic." This mirrors the statement "trans women are women." But there's a critical difference: A man who says he’s a woman is always wrong - biologically, neurologically, factually. Someone who self-diagnoses as autistic might be correct, and need support accordingly and we need medical and psychiatric knowledge to catch up.

Finally being seen after decades of erasure is transformative. But let’s not pretend that the system is suddenly accurate. It’s still fallible. Still shaped by culture. Again, the biological underpinnings of autism are essential. Yet more and more on social media, people define autism through performance: a list of traits, visible behaviours, TikTok-style identities. Just as sex is now reframed as gender expression, autism is becoming divorced from biology (and psychiatry) and recast as a personality style, and even tangled up in gender ideology. Autistic traits are being reclassified as “trans” traits and signs of an internal “gender identity”, pushing autistic people onto the gender affirming conveyor belt and away from self-understanding. And people who are suffering from mental illness, narcissism, trauma or even porn addictions are seeing their traits through the lens of autism and self diagnosing and infiltrating autism spaces which are full of vulnerable people. The lines are blurring. Because the ambiguity mixed with affirmation-obsession allows it. If only we could “see” autism the same way we can see sex, we’d kick those people out of our spaces like we do men from women’s spaces! Drawing real lines, defending real boundaries.

And while it is crucial to recognise new cohorts of people as autistic and this means many self diagnosed people are likely correct, we need to be patient while this works through the population and hold space for some being incorrect, as is normal with implementing new research. We can accommodate people whilst remaining neutral until proven. That’s not bigotry or ableism. Science isn’t kind, nor does it need to be. When we have new research, we change accordingly. That’s progress.

But we can at least say trans/gender identities are not real and that not conforming to sex-stereotypes is ordinary in all people, but autistic people and people suffering with mental illness may be more prone to adopting maladaptive coping mechanisms and we need to call it what it is and stop affirming nonsense and stay inline with evidence.

Consequences of Misdefinition

It is easy to see that incorrectly defining autism has harmful consequences, like with sex.

Some people who believe themselves to be autistic or trans are, in fact, dealing with trauma, isolation, social anxiety, mental health issues, social media influenced manipulation, etc. If we rubber-stamp every case as autism or trans, we deny them the support they actually need. And it makes it harder for them to release themselves from its grip if they realise they’ve been wrong or misled.

Some autistic people whose observable behaviours don’t match the current criteria of autism cannot receive understanding and recognition. As has happened throughout history. Mistakes happen.

Both cases are suffering at different ends of a cultural spectrum of understanding.

We need better safety nets for the people who get caught in these identity belief systems - whether it’s trans or neurodivergence.

Some people who “identify as autistic” are autistic. Some aren’t.

Not a single person who “identifies as trans” is trans, because trans doesn’t exist.

There is no such thing as a non-autistic autistic person. There is no such thing as a male woman.

Whether in sex or autism, ideology can obscure biology, performance can overshadow reality, and cultural narratives and fears can shape both recognition and misunderstanding. The challenge is to honor the reality of people’s lives while remaining grounded in evidence and biology and keep pushing and critiquing research.

https://open.substack.com/pub/neuropoppins/p/autism-sex-and-ideology-in-the-21st

3 notes · View notes