Extreme male brain theory: do you believe in it?

Post Reply New Topic

While I love watching and playing hockey, that's about the only stereotypical male interest I have. I generally feel more comfortable around women and while I am very straight, if I was given the opportunity to magically become a straight female I would probably take it. Like I've said previously this is not a case of gender confusion: I have always been aware of being male and have always been attracted to the beautiful feminine form. I can't speak for any other Aspie males but they tend to present themselves as more feminine with more female friends (and the reverse applies to the Aspie females). I should point out that most goalies like me are probably somewhat Aspie and guess what, we are seen as the oddball ones (referees generally like us though )

Didn't read responses here, but I don't believe this nonsense at all.

I am extremely empathetic, emotional, etc. Yet, I have a lot of traits that resemble autism. A lot of the time, I act as if I don't have feelings because I just feel so overwhelmed.

Male brain nonsense. BS. Males, females, these gender roles are created by society. It is dumb to use these roles to identify mental abnormalities Dumb.

I think it should read extreme stereotypical nerdy quirky scientific attends comic conventions type of male with poor social skills because that was the type of pale that Baron-Cohen was talking about not jocks

The initial study by Cohen showed this relationship among males and females with so-called lower functioning Autism.

Cohen has supported further research that shows this correlation does not hold up the same with so-called higher functioning males.

Even in the initial study, the male brain correlation is higher among so-called lower functioning autistic males and females than the higher functioning folks.

The newest studies show a male leaning brain associated with females on the so-called higher end of the spectrum and a somewhat feminine leaning brain for the males per androgynous morphological features of both brain and body.

This is not too surprising as research from Andrew Whitehouse from Australia suggests that overall higher levels of prenatal testosterone is associated with language development problems in males, while the higher levels of prenatal testosterone actually protects language development in females.

THAT COULD be part of the reason why so many so-called higher functioning autistic girls talk about androgynous issues, as well as males, per that correlation that research suggests exists with both male and female so-called higher functioning autistic folks.

On the other hand, social abuse during school years or before by peers or parents 'cause the youth don't fit the gender mold, could be a factor too, as humans who are socially abused tend to shut down in reciprocal social communication ways.

So It could be what comes first, androgyny or the social abuse factor that CAN BE ASSOCIATED WITH INCREASING NEGATIVE SYMPTOMS OF AUTISM FOR youth who simply look different and are not accepted into the gender molding that occurs in society; particularly patriarchal leaning societies/cultures....

But of course, for more severely impacted folks on the spectrum, not being able to verbally speak is a problem with or without the polar opposites of gender molding expectations in both culture and morphological physical sexual dimorphic looks.

There is a lot Internet chatter about this issue that does not accurately reflect all the research that has been done on this.

Cohen's research on systemizing and empathic qualities per cognitive and affective empathy issues is well documented research, and applied as correct in the clinical world of Autism per the Autism Quotient test that many folks use to self-diagnose themselves....

However, the 32 score cut-off suggesting the potential for Autism, on the scored test, can be a score that most anyone with social anxiety and OCD can attain without a professional diagnosis, and in this way many 'introverted folks' come to the suspicion they might be on the spectrum, when if clinically diagnosed they might not be close to diagnosed.

I score an 11 and am professionally diagnosed, and my wife who has considerable social anxiety and OCD and is far from Autism scores a 32 on the AQ test, so it certainly cannot be replied upon as an actual diagnostic tool for Autism as it is far from accurate and even Cohen will admit that as it is only a screening tool, and not a diagnostic tool.

And on top of this, considering that Autism is now almost totally a behavioral assessed disorder without real medical tools for neurological diagnosis per objective diagnosis, a diagnosis is hit and miss, still at best, as the researchers really don't have an objective medical view of what Autism even is.

It's definitely a problem of reciprocally social communicating with repetitive behavioral and restrictive interests; however, there is almost an infinite number of environmental and innate factors that can lead to THAT and to come full circle around that includes social abuse for whatever reason at almost any age per symptoms alone of the behaviorally assessed deficits...

As long as I've been posting here the non-acceptance by peers for out of gender expectations associated factors is a common driving factor of social stress among the participants here.

In my opinion, ANY CAUSAL ISSUE that results in social abuse by others, is an environmental and or innate factor THAT MAY CAUSE AUTISM, IN PART, PER THE RECIPROCAL SOCIAL COMMUNICATION difficulties.

And that's just common sense for most anyone who has spent time with thousands of diverse human beings, to SEE what makes them tick.

Extreme Male Brain Theory doesn't make sense to me.

Isn't there a centre in the left side of brain shared by males and females, responsible for the human behaviour of emphasizing/ systemizing. In males they receive a higher dose of prenatal testosterone in the womb which results in poisoning more of the emphasizing brain cells than the dose received by females in the womb. So females are more empathetic than males and males are more systematic than females. But socialization is still a key element in the way males behave, because in evolutionary terms evolved from caveman times, the males naturally seek out mates for procreaction and hunt to provide food for their children and raise them to adulthood.

In autistic males, don't they receive a higher dose of prenatal testosterone which kills off more of their emphasizing brain cells. So that means they lack the emphasising brain cells that a normal male possesses, which means that an autistic male is less male than a normal male.

Rather than necessary say whether the theory is right or wrong, I wanted to say that it is important to clarify what one means by "systemizing" and "male brain".

First, I understand "systemizing" as not being the same thing as "systematic thinking". Systematic thinking is thinking that is methodical and highly organized, involving making lists, using formal logic, etc. Some aspies do seem more prone to this than the average person, but some not. It seems in my experience that more ADHD/bipolar-like and visually-oriented aspies have much less of a tendency to think systematically than normal-mood, unipolar depressive, and verbally-oriented ones.

How I would define "systemizing" in regards to the autism spectrum is the tendency to see all the parts that make up a whole, and to always seek an underlying mechanism or explanation for things. This might not be an explanation that can be expressed in words, it might be an abstract one that only exists in the mind's eye, but nevertheless, there is the goal of seeing how all the parts of something fit together to make the whole.

It becomes blatantly obvious what this means when I run into "earth-lover hippie" types, of which quite a few live in my area. On the surface it seems that they are interested in knowing what makes things "tick", they talk a lot about systems, self-organization, fractals, etc.--until you get to know them and realize that this is all just kind of an excuse for a worldview that sees lots of things as irreducible wholes. It amazes me how much certain people can be really philosophical yet NOT bother to look for underlying structures in things. I'm not talking about basic mono-sensory qualia like the color blue, I'm talking about rich, complicated things like love, social harmony, etc. I would never consider these as atomic building blocks of any model of the world not just because they are abstract and "metaphysical", but even more fundamentally because they are such multifaceted ideas that are very clearly made up of many other things, feelings, etc. I certainly believe in emergent properties, but the very term implies that they emerge *from something*. A lack of systemizing allows someone to not care what that "something" is, and that is a very foreign way of thinking to me as a strong systemizer.

Then about the "male brain"--I think the kind that Baron-Cohen is referring to might best be described as an extreme BOY brain rather than an extreme MAN brain. A lot of what is defined as "manliness", at least in the culture's I'm familiar with, has to do with being strong and protective, standing firm, and valuing physical prowess. These are the kind of traits one would need to defend territory and hold onto a place in the world one already has, and this is not what aspies are known for. I know I often think to myself, "how could I ever be someone else's 'rock' when I can't even be my own".

Aspie skills are involved much more in creating a new place in the world than in defending an existing one. Until recently, it wasn't often necessary for an adult man OR woman to be able to design a circuit with 100 transistors in their head, or visualize a plan for a city down to the minute details, because almost nobody had the necessary time, resources, and/or power to actually use that ability. Still even in these days of high technology, it is often true that constraints of practicality, resource availability, etc., set a much lower upper bound than anyone's imagination, aspie or not. However, these skills are useful for a child who is growing up--he starts out barely knowing how to move his own limbs, and must, by adulthood, have enough understanding of something to carve a niche for himself. Girls need some this too, but in prehistory, it was probably more important for them to build a "nest" than to find a territory and become masters of an "art" or trade.

So there is a spectrum here with a trade-off, being able to conceive of something new and starting a new "foundation" versus building and nurturing ties to an existing one, although it doesn't precisely coincide with the "manliness"/"womanliness" dichotomy. And some chromosome studies seem to back this up--while males with XYY instead of XY chromosomes were initially expected to be more "manly" and violent, in fact they seem to be at higher risk for those things like ADHD and mood instability that specifically hamper establishing a solid place in the world, but may enhance creativity and the ability to pursue novelty.

This article gels with me about the extreme male brain delusion. The IVF part is a bit of a shocker, I didn't realise this was happening.

http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com ... of-autism/