Emily Bronte's biographer speculates about Aspergers

Post Reply New Topic

Emily Brontë may have had Asperger syndrome, says biographer

Punching out dogs is an Aspie trait? WTF

That´s rubbish!
However, none of those siblings were quite ordinary.
Emily did seem to have some traits and Bramwell, the younger brother did as well, but he had something else too.

People with Asperger's are not usually so violent to animals.

In fact, they feel more empathy for animals than what is seen as "normal."

I hate historical speculations

Yes. Most is rubbish.

"Asperger’s-ey" - People should be shot just for saying that.

This is actually one of the worst historical speculations. Most you can say, yes that's possible but not here.

Stop right there!

Elizabeth Gaskel made no such claim. Thus, YOUR claim is false.

The biography was written in 1857. Elizabeh Gaskell died in 1865. Hans Asperger was born in 1906. Asperger's Syndrome was defined as "Autistic Psychopathy" in 1944, given the name "Asperger's Syndrome" in 1962, and recognized by the World Health Organization in 1992.

Even if the biographer had made such a claim (which she didn't), it would have (1) been made by a person who had received no training in psychology; (2) preceded the birth of Hans Asperger by 49 years; (3) preceded the definition of Asperger's Syndrome by 87 years; and (4) preceded the official recognition of Asperger's Syndrome by 135 years.

________________

T minus 28 and counting

Headline of article linked

From line 1 of the the article linked.


bolding mine

Did Emily Jane Brontë Have Autism? by Emily Willingham for Forbes

When I was little I used to swat at dogs or cats if they got too close to me.

'Asperger's-ey' - what a foolish thing to say. Claire Harman clearly knows nothing about the condition. It's like that other awful phrase that you hear so often: 'Everyone's a bit autistic' ...

While I do think some of the Bronte sisters might have been on the spectrum, that biographer doesn't know what she is talking about. Abusing animals is NOT a sign of ASD, but of ASPD, and people on the spectrum, especially women, actually tend to be more empathetic towards animals.

Emily Jane Willingham is clearly NOT qualified to make such a "diagnosis". Her degrees are in endocrinology and urology, and she is professionally known for her research into the red-eared slider turtle. As a hobby, she blogs about autism, as well as genetically modified food controversies - she is on the "diet causes autism" bandwagon, and has argued that the autism epidemic may, in fact, just be the result of diagnostic substitution and increased awareness of the disorder. The only book she contributed to on the subject of autism required input from no less than three other "experts" on the subject, whose sole claim to autism "expertise" was giving birth to autistic children.

So, unless she has (1) found a causal link between hormones and autism, and (2) analysed a sample of Emily Jane Brontë's own urine, it seems unlikely that Ms. Willingham has any qualifications whatsoever to make an informed diagnosis of someone who has been dead since 1948.

________________

T minus 17 and counting

I agree those aren't good phrases, but I do think they show that the world in general is more willing to try understanding ASD and its various manifestations. Considering how many individuals here complain of professionals who are too rigid in looking for stereotypes when they diagnose, it's unfair to get angry with the inexperienced for trying to be more inclusive. Bad phrasing on her part, but good intentions. Being too inclusive is also just part of the natural dialectic with being too inclusive which we have to go through until a more realistic balance is found. Many here complain about not being understood, after all, so at least Ms. Harman is trying to understand even if she may not be doing a good job.

**Edit**

These articles are also saying different things. The Guardian article does not say Claire Harman is diagnosing anyone. "May be" is not a diagnosis.

The Forbes article by Emily Willingham says that Harman "diagnosed" Emily Bronte, but those are Willingham's words. Willingham's article also doesn't take Harman's statement seriously and you can tell Willingham is offended by Harman's statement.

Also, Gaskell was reporting in 1857 on the dog incident, not Asperger's.

No, YOUR reading ability, is BAD! It CLEARLY says in the OP:

"Harman said on Sunday..."

You were looking for suggestions for your last few precious posts----*I* suggest you apologize to ASPartOfMe.

Thanks for this, I take your point and had actually already read The Guardian article. So I wasn't angry, just slightly exasperated because there's currently a lot of ill-informed speculation in the UK press, as well as in wider society, about ASD because it's currently 'flavour of the month', and on the basis of very little factual knowledge everyone feels entitled to express an opinion about who is or isn't on the spectrum (alive or dead). In fact a number of politicians and other public figures have 'accused' various people, usually their opponents, of being autistic (the new Prime Minster, Theresa May, has been described as 'half-autistic' because she's rather aloof) as if it's a crime, giving the word a pejorative sense that negates a lot of the good work that's being done to improve public understanding of the condition.

I agree completely with what you say about the dialectic process that's taking place, which is welcome and long overdue. But it doesn't help when people jump on the publicity bandwagon simply because autism is in the news at the moment.