The oligarchs are merging with the state. Credit: Laura Lezza/Getty

American history can best be understood not as a single continuum but as a series of Republics, each arising from the ashes of its predecessor. The First Republic, born of the American Revolution, ended with Andrew Jackson’s Trumpian assault on the genteel elites of his day. Jackson’s Republic in turn collapsed into the fratricidal bloodshed of the Civil War, which gave birth to a Third Republic, ruled by an incredibly wealthy class of Northern-based industrial capitalists, which collapsed in the face of the Great Depression. The Fourth Republic, Franklin Roosevelt’s, was centred around the strong Federal state that won the Second World War, sent men to the moon, and overcame the rival Soviet empire.
Whether Roosevelt’s Republic properly ended with the social chaos of the late Sixties or with America’s victory in the Cold War, and whether we are therefore currently living in the Fifth, Sixth or arguably even the Seventh American Republic, is the type of question that future history students in Beijing or Singapore are bound to contemplate on their final exams. The more immediate point is that another American Republic is collapsing, and also that we’ve been here before. In recent years, as in the Sixties, we’ve seen the take-over of large sections of American cities by armies of drug-addicted zombies, riots in Washington, dirty political tricks by the FBI and the CIA, the capture of universities by militants obsessed with race and gender, dire warnings about the fate of the planet, and the wholesale abandonment of American military allies. The difference between now and the Sixties is that today the people with Angela Davis posters on their walls are living in gated communities, rather than communes.
More troublesome, however, than the sight of America once again shedding its skin, is the shape of the American Republic to come — and the question of whether it will be a republic at all. Since the end of the Cold War, America has transformed itself from a country in which most citizens proudly imagined themselves to be “middle class” into a bi-coastal oligarchy. The hallmarks of this new republic’s politics are the sorts of pathologies that used to be associated with the countries to America’s south: a wildly unequal distribution of wealth, choking bureaucracy, paranoid mass politics, the weaponisation of the security apparatus, and the merger of monopoly capital and invasive state bureaucracies.
The beginning of the current crisis can be dated to the election of 2016, in which a large majority of voters expressed their rejection of the American socio-political order by voting for either Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump over the neoliberal establishment candidate, Hillary Clinton. Trump’s election was followed by coordinated attacks on his flailing presidency by large sections of the American power structure, including the national press, corporate monopoly internet platforms, and a security apparatus that used the press as a megaphone for a series of conspiracy theories and lies that were often spread under cover of anonymity. The media’s already-tattered credibility with the public was plunged into the toilet.
This toxic combination of widening political polarisation and institutional failures was contaminated further by the country’s disastrous response to Covid-19, which crushed small and medium-sized businesses while padding the profits of large investors and internet-based monopolists. The result was the largest single transfer of wealth in American history since the Civil War, and the disenfranchisement of a significant portion of the American middle class — accompanied by a steady drum-beat of “woke” discourse that gleefully demonised the losers as “white supremacists” and “insurrectionists”.
The election of Joe Biden in 2020 was supposed to restore the legitimacy of the American political system and bring a measure of social peace. Instead, President Biden went in the opposite direction, attacking his opponents as “white supremacists” and “fascists”, setting the FBI on domestic foes, and endorsing a banana republic-style raid on Trump’s home.
Yet to blame America’s woes on either the 79-year old Biden, who strikes even sympathetic domestic observers as senile, or Trump, who continues to be a font of ugly and delusional politics, is to dangerously mistake the nature of the crisis. America’s toxic partisan politics are a symptom of deep changes in the American socio-economic structure that date back to the early Nineties, in the aftermath of America’s victory in the Cold War — when President Bill Clinton set out to take Reaganomics global with a series of trade deals that included NAFTA and GATT, and destroyed the American middle class that Roosevelt and his successors created.
From the standpoint of the Democratic Party of the Nineties, Clinton’s trade deals were a huge success, bringing major sectors of Wall Street and large American corporations into the party camp. For traditional Democratic constituencies such as industrial labour unions and their members, they were a disaster, permanently depriving millions of Americans of their jobs and turning large swaths of the country’s industrial base into rubble-strewn reservations for zombified meth-heads.
Among the writers, thinkers, and reporters who tried to analyse the travails of the American working and middle classes during Bill Clinton’s presidency, perhaps the most acute was the Pentagon-linked geo-strategist Edward Luttwak. For Luttwak, the problem with America wasn’t market capitalism or the failure of American workers to compete with their peers in Mexico and China. Rather, it was the unholy conjunction of Right-wing libertarian Reaganomics with selfish Left-wing baby boomer mantras about free trade, technology, and open borders.
What both the Left and the Right shared, in Luttwak’s analysis, was their disdain for the kinds of Bismarckian social bargains that keep states strong. Luttwak called the unholy alliance of the libertarian Left and Right “Turbo-Capitalism”, and he warned of its disintegrating effects on the American middle class, which he saw as the foundation-stone of American stability, prosperity, and geo-political dominance.
In his concern for the disintegrating American middle class of the Nineties, Luttwak was hardly alone. The troubles of middle-and-working-class Americans were a common theme during that era among a cohort of perceptive American thinkers including Robert Bellah, Barbara Ehrenreich, Michael Lind, Robert Putnam, and Robert Reich. What made Luttwak a rarity among his peers, Lind excepted, was his embrace of European-style welfare state capitalism in the context of an overtly nationalist politics — ie the American status quo before the Reaganites and the Clintonites set out from different directions to destroy it.
The America of the Obama-Trump-Biden years now looks a lot worse than the America that alarmed Luttwak and Lind in the Nineties. At the top of the narrowing social pyramid is a tiny class of mega-billionaires who personally own and control a staggering percentage of the country’s wealth, resources, and power, and make their money from the globalised economy. Then comes the professional class that services the billionaires, ranging from highly paid lawyers and investment bankers to chefs and fashion designers and real estate salesmen. Below them is the servant class of bureaucrats, teachers and other lower-status employees whose salaries are paid by the state or non-governmental organisations and foundations, who funnel money back to their political patrons in the Democratic Party in the form of free campaign labour and contributions.
Finally, there are the working poor, many of whom formerly considered themselves “working class” or “middle class”, but who are now forced to rely on government programs and subsidies covering everything from rent, to school tuition, to health care, to food. The glue that holds this power vertical together is the Democratic Party, which now regularly outspends the Republican Party — an incoherent mix of Trumpists, Christians, and other socio-economic losers — by margins of three or four to one.
In addition to being an oligarchy, the new American social pyramid is also a gerontocracy, in which both political power and wealth are wildly skewed in favour of people above the age of 60. Biden (79) and Nancy Pelosi (82) lead the Democrats, while Trump (76) and Mitch McConnell (80) lead the Republicans. Where the average American over the age of 55 has a net worth of somewhere between $1.2 and $1.5 million, the average American adult under the age of 35 is worth approximately $75,000, with the vast majority having no significant assets at all.
Understanding the new America as a decaying oligarchy run by old people is essential to understanding the increasingly bizarre mutations of Left and Right in American politics. The “Left”, in the United States, now represents the new oligarchy and its dependents. The resulting “Left-wing” preferences for free trade and open borders in turn make it impossible for American workers to earn a living wage. The fact that the new American Left is funded by billionaires such as George Soros (92) and Warren Buffet (91) ensures that Left politics is focused not on decent pay for workers but on the ever-mutating math of woke identity politics.
In place of tangible goods, such as a living wage and the chance to buy a home, groups of dispossessed Americans are offered official “recognition” of an ever-expanding set of “identities” rooted in race, gender and sexual preference, which pits them against other groups of Americans who suffer from much the same woes. Wokeness, as an ideology, can be seen as a function of the ascendent Turbo-Capitalist order — a means for controlling the working and middle classes to ensure that they can’t unite against their increasingly all-powerful masters.
The digital technologies on which the new American mega-fortunes are based offer historically unprecedented opportunities for surveillance, censorship, and social control — and have allowed the oligarchs who own them to merge with the state. Jeff Bezos of Amazon, for example, owns the Washington Post, which the security apparatus used as a megaphone to spread the Russiagate conspiracy theory to undermine Trump. Amazon also holds a lucrative cloud computing contract to manage all the CIA’s data, which it administers from a centre in Northern Virginia where over 20,000 people work, many of whom were formerly employed by the government. While tech giants such as Oracle and Palantir have large contracts with the US security apparatus, public-facing companies such as Facebook, Google, and Twitter regularly censor news and opinions at the behest of the White House while funneling private user data to the security services for free.
If techno-monopolists have merged with the security bureaucracies in Washington, the human instrument of elite control is the “professional-managerial class”, which forms the backbone of the lay Democratic Party. But how did this relatively narrow group of lawyers, professors, teachers, nonprofit workers, bureaucrats, and lower-level editors gain the power to anathemise, exclude, condemn, and generally lord it over much larger sectors of the population?
One answer is its ability to leverage digital tools, particularly social media — a medium in which small numbers of activists can wreak havoc on hundred-billion-dollar corporations or prestige institutions. By this logic, the Woke is a vanguard movement that seized control of a new technology and used it as a force multiplier to discipline and terrorise the larger institutional landscape.
A more subtle version of this answer is that woke-ists use the threat of reputational damage to impose uniformity of opinion on the class of people like themselves, whose careers exist only insofar as they are backed by sufficient reputational capital. Unlike previously dominant forms of capital (like, say, land and cows), the reputational capital that is the professional class’s stock in trade — the ticket to the next job or fellowship — can be vaporised by a single tweet. In turn, the uniformity of opinion that the woke imposes within its own cohorts allows it to control those cohorts, and use them to bend powerful institutions to its will.
This explanation of wokeness, though, is to imagine that the tail is wagging the dog. But, media companies have stockholders, just as universities have wealthy and powerful trustees to answer to. These stockholders and trustees should be more powerful than broke 20-somethings with Twitter accounts. Surely, at some point, market forces should begin to punish institutions that chose to ignore reality. If Princeton University, say, were to embark on a programme of persecuting faculty who dissent from faddish doctrines, then those faculty members — and the donors who support them — could migrate to Harvard, which would accumulate money and prestige at Princeton’s expense. But that never happens. Not just institutions of higher education, the entire professional layer of society — from the professions, to corporate management, to non-profits, to media and publishing — moves in lock-step.
So who does control the new American system? The answer isn’t broke woke-ists. It’s the monopolists who own the platforms where the woke-ists live. Elon Musk and Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos and Warren Buffett and Sergei Brin and Larry Page and Lorraine Jobs don’t care about mean tweets. They care about the hundreds of billions of dollars in their bank accounts, their lavish mansions and private jets, and pursuing rich person hobbies like colonising Mars. Their primary political goal, as a class, is to prevent the state from ever getting strong enough to tax their fortunes, break up their monopolies, or interfere with the supplies of cheap immigrant and offshore labour from which they profit. The more fractured, dejected, and heavily surveilled the America public is, the less likely a strong state is to emerge.
In the contest between the oligarchs and the fading Rooseveltian state, the woke are a useful tool— not an independent power. They are the foot soldiers of the Democratic Party, whose job it is to organise the dispossessed into groups that are narrow, factional, and divided enough that they can’t come together into a force that threatens oligarchical control. Discontent with the Turbo-Capitalist order can be usefully turned against anyone who refuses to follow the ever-changing party line — beginning with the “deplorables” who are now regularly portrayed as murderous, undemocratic racists and fascists, and extending to JK Rowling and Margaret Atwood. The result is a closed circuit in which Turbo-Capitalist oligarchs and Woke activists make common cause against formerly independent institutions like universities, professional associations, and the press. All of these institutions rely on guarantees of individual and collective rights by the state, which the Turbo-Capitalists and the Woke seek to capture and use as an instrument to enforce their own privatised social bargain: everything within the Party, nothing outside the Party, nothing against the Party.
The unprecedented reach of the technologies that the new oligarchy commands has already destroyed the press and replaced it with a government-corporate censorship regime that has no parallel in peacetime America. Combined with what appears to be a healthy appetite for humiliating others, this power does not bode well for the future of social peace in America, or for the health of the next American Republic.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeRecently In the U.K, many autistic girls have been sent for mutilation into the male gender before any real autism is diagnosed. I wonder if this is related….
Binary thinking? Obsessive behaviours? Self-hatred? No I am sure that it is all just a coincidence.
Autism Spectrum Disorder and Gender Dysphoria/Incongruence. A systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis:
Aimilia Kallitsounaki et al. J Autism Dev Disord. 2023 Aug.
*Significant link established between ASD & GD/GI*
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3559602
3/
I am 72 yrs old and I am autistic. I was a “tomboy “ when I was young but grew out of it naturally throughout the years. I am married HAPPILY to a man for 50 yrs!!!!!!!
Binary thinking? Obsessive behaviours? Self-hatred? No I am sure that it is all just a coincidence.
Autism Spectrum Disorder and Gender Dysphoria/Incongruence. A systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis:
Aimilia Kallitsounaki et al. J Autism Dev Disord. 2023 Aug.
*Significant link established between ASD & GD/GI*
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3559602
3/
I am 72 yrs old and I am autistic. I was a “tomboy “ when I was young but grew out of it naturally throughout the years. I am married HAPPILY to a man for 50 yrs!!!!!!!
Recently In the U.K, many autistic girls have been sent for mutilation into the male gender before any real autism is diagnosed. I wonder if this is related….
“Why are boys more likely to be diagnosed?”
Perhaps because the girls are all being “diagnosed” as trans. And no, I’m not kidding. Many parents on PITT (a great substack) report autistic behavior from their now sexually confused children.
That makes so much sense. If autistic people need to follow rules and order and these rules include gender stereotyping and/or sexual preferences, then it would seem logical that if you are not conforming to the ‘norm’ then changing your body to fit would sound like a good idea.
Because boys are far more likely to be autistic
Well it is true
I think you’re right. In fact, I’ve thought that the overall male personality leans toward autism.
Well it is true
I think you’re right. In fact, I’ve thought that the overall male personality leans toward autism.
I am 72 yrs old and I am autistic. I was a “tomboy “ when I was young but grew out of it naturally throughout the years. I am married HAPPILY to a man for 50 yrs!!!!!!!
That makes so much sense. If autistic people need to follow rules and order and these rules include gender stereotyping and/or sexual preferences, then it would seem logical that if you are not conforming to the ‘norm’ then changing your body to fit would sound like a good idea.
Because boys are far more likely to be autistic
I am 72 yrs old and I am autistic. I was a “tomboy “ when I was young but grew out of it naturally throughout the years. I am married HAPPILY to a man for 50 yrs!!!!!!!
“Why are boys more likely to be diagnosed?”
Perhaps because the girls are all being “diagnosed” as trans. And no, I’m not kidding. Many parents on PITT (a great substack) report autistic behavior from their now sexually confused children.
i fist heard of Asperger’s syndrome 20 years ago, when my oldest son was 16. He had ticked all the boxes for autism from infancy except that he talked early and often. Fully fluent at 15 months. My only early talker of 5 and he never shut up. He was what first interested us in homeschooling, a brilliant child except on bad days when he knew nothing. And he was just like me. Suddenly the horrible experiences I had had in school made sense. And they stopped happening in high school because by that time I had learned to just shut up. Don’t correct the teachers. The French detective show Astrid, about an autistic woman who works as a crime researcher has brought me as close to tears as I get with flashbacks of her childhood which are exactly like mine. Finding out why I still have zero social skills was freeing, like being diagnosed with a hereditary neuromuscular disease explained why I could never play sports as a child. But you still have to get on with the hand you’ve been dealt.
i found myself suddenly popular with boys in college and married very young, and happily, now going on for 40 years. This business of turning autistic girls into boys is incredibly sexist and ableist, and surely there are a few more “ists” we can come up with. If you’re more comfortable around boys, as I always was, marry one. Far from needed to be shepherded into being some unnatural creation of the industrial medical complex high functioning autistic girls have a lot to offer, and there is a line of high functioning autistic guys out there looking for you.
I am 72 yrs old and I am autistic. I was a “tomboy “ when I was young but grew out of it naturally throughout the years. I am married HAPPILY to a man for 50 yrs!!!!!!!
I am 72 yrs old and I am autistic. I was a “tomboy “ when I was young but grew out of it naturally throughout the years. I am married HAPPILY to a man for 50 yrs!!!!!!!
i fist heard of Asperger’s syndrome 20 years ago, when my oldest son was 16. He had ticked all the boxes for autism from infancy except that he talked early and often. Fully fluent at 15 months. My only early talker of 5 and he never shut up. He was what first interested us in homeschooling, a brilliant child except on bad days when he knew nothing. And he was just like me. Suddenly the horrible experiences I had had in school made sense. And they stopped happening in high school because by that time I had learned to just shut up. Don’t correct the teachers. The French detective show Astrid, about an autistic woman who works as a crime researcher has brought me as close to tears as I get with flashbacks of her childhood which are exactly like mine. Finding out why I still have zero social skills was freeing, like being diagnosed with a hereditary neuromuscular disease explained why I could never play sports as a child. But you still have to get on with the hand you’ve been dealt.
i found myself suddenly popular with boys in college and married very young, and happily, now going on for 40 years. This business of turning autistic girls into boys is incredibly sexist and ableist, and surely there are a few more “ists” we can come up with. If you’re more comfortable around boys, as I always was, marry one. Far from needed to be shepherded into being some unnatural creation of the industrial medical complex high functioning autistic girls have a lot to offer, and there is a line of high functioning autistic guys out there looking for you.
Lovely article Clara.
It is so difficult to be different, even when the “difference” is no threat to anyone else. Tiring is how I can best describe it.
Tiring is the perfect word. As a stay at home mom I simply avoided everything and everyone and that works for me, but my son didn’t have that choice. He lived in Asia for ten years where his weirdness was attributed to being a foreigner rather than a loser.
Tiring is the perfect word. As a stay at home mom I simply avoided everything and everyone and that works for me, but my son didn’t have that choice. He lived in Asia for ten years where his weirdness was attributed to being a foreigner rather than a loser.
Lovely article Clara.
It is so difficult to be different, even when the “difference” is no threat to anyone else. Tiring is how I can best describe it.
I suggest that Asperger’s is used for people who seem to be more dominated by their left-brain and Autism is kept for the diagnosis of brain damage.
The two have blurred together and yet they are obviously different (maybe with some overlap).
I find it disrespectful to sufferers and their parents when we broaden the definition of autism to include almost all of us.
It waters down the seriousness.
Absolutely. I have friends who are desperate for support with their profoundly autistic, non verbal, adult daughter. The attention seeking victims desperate for a label are taking resources from those who really need it.
No one is allowed to be eccentric anymore.
I absolutely agree with this. I hate using high functioning autism because it is an insensitive oxymoron but they tell us now that Aspergers’s isn’t the right term….
Absolutely. I have friends who are desperate for support with their profoundly autistic, non verbal, adult daughter. The attention seeking victims desperate for a label are taking resources from those who really need it.
No one is allowed to be eccentric anymore.
I absolutely agree with this. I hate using high functioning autism because it is an insensitive oxymoron but they tell us now that Aspergers’s isn’t the right term….
I suggest that Asperger’s is used for people who seem to be more dominated by their left-brain and Autism is kept for the diagnosis of brain damage.
The two have blurred together and yet they are obviously different (maybe with some overlap).
I find it disrespectful to sufferers and their parents when we broaden the definition of autism to include almost all of us.
It waters down the seriousness.
I always wonder whether to disclose my ASD as people say, “you don’t seem autistic’ or they start talking slowly and smile obsequiously, overwhelmed by pity. However, starting a new job or dealing with sudden changes or demands can provoke a rather extreme reaction from me. I don’t believe this makes me less able to do the job or make a useful contribution to the issue; quite the reverse. Ideally society would notice the value of eccentric thinkers and include them in policy making and processes; no doubt this will be the case eventually.
I always wonder whether to disclose my ASD as people say, “you don’t seem autistic’ or they start talking slowly and smile obsequiously, overwhelmed by pity. However, starting a new job or dealing with sudden changes or demands can provoke a rather extreme reaction from me. I don’t believe this makes me less able to do the job or make a useful contribution to the issue; quite the reverse. Ideally society would notice the value of eccentric thinkers and include them in policy making and processes; no doubt this will be the case eventually.
Super article, thank you.
Super article, thank you.
The author is probably not autistic. Like anorexia, FtM transgenderism, ADHD and various other ills that have emerged in numbers only in the past three decades, an autism diagnosis is thrown at everyone under the sun. A century ago you might merely have been labelled eccentric, except now, armed with a badge from one of the representatives of our technocratic-managerial-bureaucratic nightmare of our modern society, you have the ultimate victimhood point. Anything is better than being a ‘neurotypical’ CIS white British woman. ‘True’ autism renders you unable to function at all.
I had a friend who claimed all 3 of her children were ‘somewhere on the autistic spectrum’. But then nowadays we’re all ‘somewhere on the gender spectrum’. Diagnoses always give ‘relief ‘ nowadays but there’s always the placebo effect.
Yes, the placebo diagnosis. I’ve known people who felt relief after a diagnosis of something since dropped from the DSM entirely. Diagnose someone who’s troubled in some way with TISW syndrome and they’ll feel better.
Yes, the placebo diagnosis. I’ve known people who felt relief after a diagnosis of something since dropped from the DSM entirely. Diagnose someone who’s troubled in some way with TISW syndrome and they’ll feel better.
Not anything.
Thank god for your comment. I was feeling a bit unkind for thinking this was a load of victimhood BS.
i saw the article as a bit of both. I’m not sure if the author is really on the spectrum, or if it matters. I do think girls who are autistic, and it has to be a pretty small number, are being diced and sliced by the trans agenda and need to be protected. If a girl likes hanging out with boys and doing boy things she isn’t bad at being a girl, she’s actually well poised to have a functioning heterosexual relationship. Imagine.
I am 72 yrs old and I am autistic. I was a “tomboy “ when I was young but grew out of it naturally throughout the years. I am married HAPPILY to a man for 50 yrs!!!!!!!
I am 72 yrs old and I am autistic. I was a “tomboy “ when I was young but grew out of it naturally throughout the years. I am married HAPPILY to a man for 50 yrs!!!!!!!
i saw the article as a bit of both. I’m not sure if the author is really on the spectrum, or if it matters. I do think girls who are autistic, and it has to be a pretty small number, are being diced and sliced by the trans agenda and need to be protected. If a girl likes hanging out with boys and doing boy things she isn’t bad at being a girl, she’s actually well poised to have a functioning heterosexual relationship. Imagine.
It feels almost like the author wanted to be autistic to enable her to give a judgement of her social interactions with people so that she could do things that are out of the norm with a caveat.
But nowadays, who is the norm? What does it mean to be perfectly able to deal with every social interaction. I don’t know these people, and likely never will. We all deal with a variety of difficulties at all moments. This isn’t to say that there are autistic people who have real difficulties in life (love, life, job..), but if you’re able to overcome these issues, I’m at a loss to understand why there is a need to wish away your past self. That in its self, is the true demon.
My college roommate’s major required that she work with children with brain function disabilities, one of whom was an autistic boy age about four or five. He couldn’t (or wouldn’t) communicate, sat in his “special” spot and rocked while organizing blocks in multiple configurations over and over, couldn’t stand certain noises, and would scream when touched – even by his parents. It was awful to witness and I coudn’t help imaging how his mother and father coped.
Ms.Tornvall went to university, worked in television, and has a daughter. That autistic boy, if he’s still alive, is probably rocking in an institution somewhere.
It took until mid-30s (& several admissions to A&E and on MH wards) to receive correct treatment (after recieving bipolar diagnosis) after years of incorrectly (and dangerously) recieving mania-inducing antidepressants since 17. My older brother wasn’t so lucky and ended his life 2004 age just 34yrs.
Sometimes, a diagnosis is crucial. To play down just how impactful, is dismissive of genuine suffering.
I was diagnosed with autism (then ADHD) age 51 (Spring 2023) after being on waiting lists for YEARS. The NHS do not fling these diagnoses around, asp at female adults like myself, easily or quickly.
Medical research historically uses the male as the default human. Fact! Until females have suffered unnecessarily, their differing needs don’t get a look in. There’s no reason to think there are fewer (or more, even) females with ASD (or Asperger’s, no longer the preferred term, erroneously, in my view) than males…. because neither hypothesis has been proven.
Why is researching anything from a female angle somehow considered less worthy – we make up half the global population Doing so does not demand that men’s health
(or research into it) suffer as a result.
M/Fs are different (newsflash), including in how our bodies deal with illnesses (developmental, psychological, physical).
Since my diagnoses, I was able to begin to understand why I am the way I am and how ‘hiding’ myself has effected my life and health. As a child, I learned quickly to make myself small (for safety / avoid conflict). I never fully straightened my back or said No and allowed profound isolation to steer me socially, even while to outsiders, I may have seemed to have friends (always the only other ‘weirdo’ in my school year). I learned to sacrifice my desires, my voice, my discomfort and to my ultimate detriment, as adolescence and then adulthood approached, even my safety.
Not all of my issues or difficulties were ’caused’ by ASD/Aspergers (or ADHD), of course. Although, it’s difficult to determine accurately at this early stage of research. And perhaps in a different family, or decade, or school, or socioeconomic situation, I may not have hated my differences (only the rich & the elite are ‘accepted’ as being ‘eccentric) so compulsively and agreed with my many detractors and abusers.
Researching autism in females is not a ‘labels’ thing or a ‘battle between the sexes’ thing. It’s a health thing / a continuation of the research bias thing. I’m not sure why so many here seem angry and so convinced otherwise.
I have sympathy for your position, but it seems as far as I can tell “since my diagnoses, I was able to begin to understand why I am the way I am” is the most salient part of your post. Ultimately it boils down to a need for settled identity that I would submit is mostly experienced by adolescent girls and immature women. It is nothing to do with a battle between the sexes, and I believe most boys that are diagnosed are labelled on spurious grounds, for liking trains a bit too much, and having poor eye contact.
Given the sheer numerical explosion however there is no way it isn’t mostly down to ‘social contagion’. Autism is the new ‘dancing sickness’, a product packaged primarily for nervous mothers of boys and self-hating social media addicted girls.
You’ll have to forgive me if you find my posts distasteful and blunt, but a thousand bad apples have spoiled the well of my trust in the modern industrial-medico complex and it’s ability to diagnose anything.
What a great comment.
It sounds as if you and your family have been dealt a really crap hand and have had a really rough time.
A super succint description of the state of medical research in the twilight zone (psychological / psychiatric disorders and “womens problems” – endometriosis is one that springs to mind)
Glad to hear that you got a decent diagnosis in the end.
Maybe the fact that some of us are uncomfortable about the massive proliferation of psychiatric/psychological diagnoses is because it suggests a culture that patholgises variation in human personality that society should be able to accommodate and has a detrimental effect on the way we see ourselves and each other.
And because it undermines autonomy and agency.
I am 72 yrs old and I am autistic. I was a “tomboy “ when I was young but grew out of it naturally throughout the years. I am married HAPPILY to a man for 50 yrs!!!!!!!
I have sympathy for your position, but it seems as far as I can tell “since my diagnoses, I was able to begin to understand why I am the way I am” is the most salient part of your post. Ultimately it boils down to a need for settled identity that I would submit is mostly experienced by adolescent girls and immature women. It is nothing to do with a battle between the sexes, and I believe most boys that are diagnosed are labelled on spurious grounds, for liking trains a bit too much, and having poor eye contact.
Given the sheer numerical explosion however there is no way it isn’t mostly down to ‘social contagion’. Autism is the new ‘dancing sickness’, a product packaged primarily for nervous mothers of boys and self-hating social media addicted girls.
You’ll have to forgive me if you find my posts distasteful and blunt, but a thousand bad apples have spoiled the well of my trust in the modern industrial-medico complex and it’s ability to diagnose anything.
What a great comment.
It sounds as if you and your family have been dealt a really crap hand and have had a really rough time.
A super succint description of the state of medical research in the twilight zone (psychological / psychiatric disorders and “womens problems” – endometriosis is one that springs to mind)
Glad to hear that you got a decent diagnosis in the end.
Maybe the fact that some of us are uncomfortable about the massive proliferation of psychiatric/psychological diagnoses is because it suggests a culture that patholgises variation in human personality that society should be able to accommodate and has a detrimental effect on the way we see ourselves and each other.
And because it undermines autonomy and agency.
I am 72 yrs old and I am autistic. I was a “tomboy “ when I was young but grew out of it naturally throughout the years. I am married HAPPILY to a man for 50 yrs!!!!!!!
I had a friend who claimed all 3 of her children were ‘somewhere on the autistic spectrum’. But then nowadays we’re all ‘somewhere on the gender spectrum’. Diagnoses always give ‘relief ‘ nowadays but there’s always the placebo effect.
Not anything.
Thank god for your comment. I was feeling a bit unkind for thinking this was a load of victimhood BS.
It feels almost like the author wanted to be autistic to enable her to give a judgement of her social interactions with people so that she could do things that are out of the norm with a caveat.
But nowadays, who is the norm? What does it mean to be perfectly able to deal with every social interaction. I don’t know these people, and likely never will. We all deal with a variety of difficulties at all moments. This isn’t to say that there are autistic people who have real difficulties in life (love, life, job..), but if you’re able to overcome these issues, I’m at a loss to understand why there is a need to wish away your past self. That in its self, is the true demon.
My college roommate’s major required that she work with children with brain function disabilities, one of whom was an autistic boy age about four or five. He couldn’t (or wouldn’t) communicate, sat in his “special” spot and rocked while organizing blocks in multiple configurations over and over, couldn’t stand certain noises, and would scream when touched – even by his parents. It was awful to witness and I coudn’t help imaging how his mother and father coped.
Ms.Tornvall went to university, worked in television, and has a daughter. That autistic boy, if he’s still alive, is probably rocking in an institution somewhere.
It took until mid-30s (& several admissions to A&E and on MH wards) to receive correct treatment (after recieving bipolar diagnosis) after years of incorrectly (and dangerously) recieving mania-inducing antidepressants since 17. My older brother wasn’t so lucky and ended his life 2004 age just 34yrs.
Sometimes, a diagnosis is crucial. To play down just how impactful, is dismissive of genuine suffering.
I was diagnosed with autism (then ADHD) age 51 (Spring 2023) after being on waiting lists for YEARS. The NHS do not fling these diagnoses around, asp at female adults like myself, easily or quickly.
Medical research historically uses the male as the default human. Fact! Until females have suffered unnecessarily, their differing needs don’t get a look in. There’s no reason to think there are fewer (or more, even) females with ASD (or Asperger’s, no longer the preferred term, erroneously, in my view) than males…. because neither hypothesis has been proven.
Why is researching anything from a female angle somehow considered less worthy – we make up half the global population Doing so does not demand that men’s health
(or research into it) suffer as a result.
M/Fs are different (newsflash), including in how our bodies deal with illnesses (developmental, psychological, physical).
Since my diagnoses, I was able to begin to understand why I am the way I am and how ‘hiding’ myself has effected my life and health. As a child, I learned quickly to make myself small (for safety / avoid conflict). I never fully straightened my back or said No and allowed profound isolation to steer me socially, even while to outsiders, I may have seemed to have friends (always the only other ‘weirdo’ in my school year). I learned to sacrifice my desires, my voice, my discomfort and to my ultimate detriment, as adolescence and then adulthood approached, even my safety.
Not all of my issues or difficulties were ’caused’ by ASD/Aspergers (or ADHD), of course. Although, it’s difficult to determine accurately at this early stage of research. And perhaps in a different family, or decade, or school, or socioeconomic situation, I may not have hated my differences (only the rich & the elite are ‘accepted’ as being ‘eccentric) so compulsively and agreed with my many detractors and abusers.
Researching autism in females is not a ‘labels’ thing or a ‘battle between the sexes’ thing. It’s a health thing / a continuation of the research bias thing. I’m not sure why so many here seem angry and so convinced otherwise.
The author is probably not autistic. Like anorexia, FtM transgenderism, ADHD and various other ills that have emerged in numbers only in the past three decades, an autism diagnosis is thrown at everyone under the sun. A century ago you might merely have been labelled eccentric, except now, armed with a badge from one of the representatives of our technocratic-managerial-bureaucratic nightmare of our modern society, you have the ultimate victimhood point. Anything is better than being a ‘neurotypical’ CIS white British woman. ‘True’ autism renders you unable to function at all.
In an article which proposes such a controversial theory it would have been nice if the author could have links to some of the studies/articles cited. After a bit of digging it seems that Svenny Kopp has been ploughing this furrow since before 2010 – I would suggest that if there is no more up-to-date research than this 78 year-old then there might not be much to back up her findings. The author’s own inability to find books on the subject should (as a layman) have been a red flag. She might consider her reduced use of antidepressants to have had some bearing on her mental wellbeing – ADHD in boys (a topic of interest to Svenny Kopp, though in girls of course) is notoriously highly medicated and as far as I can see does more harm than good – sedation rather than cure. The article doesn’t take into account the overmedicalisation of boys is generally to their long-term detriment. Surely blending in (chameleon-like in her phrase) is preferable to life-long drug use – which can lead to abuse. Heaven forfend that normal behaviour in girls like playing with dolls is pathologized in the way that male play is. I would say that the fact that she has got this far is a credit to her and not to downplay the difficulties she has gone through, just to say that she would not have been the lady she is today without these difficult and character forming experiences. The use of suicide as a point in her favour is sad in that it doesn’t take into account that three quarters of suicides in the UK are men and boys – if it was reversed you can imagine the attention this would garner. It has already been noted the link between transgenderism and autism (and subsequently suicide and autism). The last bit I found distasteful was the diagnosis of historical figures. Psychology is hard enough to do by working on limited evidence, diagnosing the dead would seem to me to be an impossible task – cf. the diagnosis of historical characters as bi/gay/trans. It simply doesn’t work like that. Interesting article though and I would encourage more actual research in the field.
Playing with dolls is not ‘normal’. It is brainless and creepy. I hit mine with sticks and threw them up trees. Books were what I wanted. No labels in the 60s thank goodness.
Hitting dolls with sticks and throwing them up trees is what’s not normal, and very definitely creepy. Did you tear the wings off flies, too?
“Playing” can include hitting dolls with sticks and throwing them up trees. Lucky you weren’t pathologised for doing so. More power to you.
Hitting dolls with sticks and throwing them up trees is what’s not normal, and very definitely creepy. Did you tear the wings off flies, too?
“Playing” can include hitting dolls with sticks and throwing them up trees. Lucky you weren’t pathologised for doing so. More power to you.
Playing with dolls is not ‘normal’. It is brainless and creepy. I hit mine with sticks and threw them up trees. Books were what I wanted. No labels in the 60s thank goodness.
In an article which proposes such a controversial theory it would have been nice if the author could have links to some of the studies/articles cited. After a bit of digging it seems that Svenny Kopp has been ploughing this furrow since before 2010 – I would suggest that if there is no more up-to-date research than this 78 year-old then there might not be much to back up her findings. The author’s own inability to find books on the subject should (as a layman) have been a red flag. She might consider her reduced use of antidepressants to have had some bearing on her mental wellbeing – ADHD in boys (a topic of interest to Svenny Kopp, though in girls of course) is notoriously highly medicated and as far as I can see does more harm than good – sedation rather than cure. The article doesn’t take into account the overmedicalisation of boys is generally to their long-term detriment. Surely blending in (chameleon-like in her phrase) is preferable to life-long drug use – which can lead to abuse. Heaven forfend that normal behaviour in girls like playing with dolls is pathologized in the way that male play is. I would say that the fact that she has got this far is a credit to her and not to downplay the difficulties she has gone through, just to say that she would not have been the lady she is today without these difficult and character forming experiences. The use of suicide as a point in her favour is sad in that it doesn’t take into account that three quarters of suicides in the UK are men and boys – if it was reversed you can imagine the attention this would garner. It has already been noted the link between transgenderism and autism (and subsequently suicide and autism). The last bit I found distasteful was the diagnosis of historical figures. Psychology is hard enough to do by working on limited evidence, diagnosing the dead would seem to me to be an impossible task – cf. the diagnosis of historical characters as bi/gay/trans. It simply doesn’t work like that. Interesting article though and I would encourage more actual research in the field.
I’m not sure there is any such thing as ‘high-functioning autism’. As to ‘the spectrum’ I think if you look hard enough, everyone is on the spectrum. In fact, everyone is on a hundred spectra. I’m supposed to be a high-functioning autistic based on:
-not being interested in people’s shoes.
-not enjoying pointless chit-chat.
-preferring honesty.
-having an attention span longer than a goldfish.
-preferring to communicate in words rather than ‘social cues’.
-having non-typical interests. (Can a person who’s interested in phonetics be anything but disturbed?)
-not being particularly happy.
A child who cannot make eye contact very well, is acutely distressed by some noises or changes of routine but who can tell you, by the age of 4, what day of the week any date is within a decade, (later any date in 100 years by 8) who knows tables up to 20×20 at 6 and can draw detailed maps of where he has walked any week, but can’t make friends or join in….. That is my experience of high functioning Autism. We had no diagnosis until he was 23, but it was recognised as a disability before he was 4.
It goes to showya that ‘the spectrum’ is a very nebulous idea. Everybody has some talents and some deficits, sometimes these are noticeable enough to merit attention. But what’s more real about the autism spectrum than the friendliness spectrum or the intelligence spectrum or the attention span spectrum? If someone has some actual disability or other, it seems to me it simply is what it is. We should beware labels that have questionable validity.
It goes to showya that ‘the spectrum’ is a very nebulous idea. Everybody has some talents and some deficits, sometimes these are noticeable enough to merit attention. But what’s more real about the autism spectrum than the friendliness spectrum or the intelligence spectrum or the attention span spectrum? If someone has some actual disability or other, it seems to me it simply is what it is. We should beware labels that have questionable validity.
A child who cannot make eye contact very well, is acutely distressed by some noises or changes of routine but who can tell you, by the age of 4, what day of the week any date is within a decade, (later any date in 100 years by 8) who knows tables up to 20×20 at 6 and can draw detailed maps of where he has walked any week, but can’t make friends or join in….. That is my experience of high functioning Autism. We had no diagnosis until he was 23, but it was recognised as a disability before he was 4.
I’m not sure there is any such thing as ‘high-functioning autism’. As to ‘the spectrum’ I think if you look hard enough, everyone is on the spectrum. In fact, everyone is on a hundred spectra. I’m supposed to be a high-functioning autistic based on:
-not being interested in people’s shoes.
-not enjoying pointless chit-chat.
-preferring honesty.
-having an attention span longer than a goldfish.
-preferring to communicate in words rather than ‘social cues’.
-having non-typical interests. (Can a person who’s interested in phonetics be anything but disturbed?)
-not being particularly happy.
Simon Baron-Cohen at Cambridge University has gathered a lot of evidence linking autism to a hyper-masculinisation of the brain caused by exposure to high levels of testosterone in the womb. His theory therefore is that autism is an extreme form of the male brain. Could that not be a simple explanation of why autism is more prevalent in men than in women? Why should we assume that autism is equally prevalent in women and that it is simply under-diagnosed, rather than accepting that autism is more common in men?
That’s a good point. I’m a woman with Asperger’s (diagnosed when I was 20) and whilst I do ‘mask’ I see little reason to believe there are just as many autistic women as men. Perhaps, that’s also why masking is so prominent in Asperger and autistic girls. You do truly feel alone while growing up.
That begs the question as to whether there is such a thing as ‘hyper-masculinisation’ of the brain in the first place. I thought a lot of the excess male-diagnosed-with-autism might be down to boys with autism being socially isolated, whereas people tend not to let girls be isolated so much.
That’s a good point. I’m a woman with Asperger’s (diagnosed when I was 20) and whilst I do ‘mask’ I see little reason to believe there are just as many autistic women as men. Perhaps, that’s also why masking is so prominent in Asperger and autistic girls. You do truly feel alone while growing up.
That begs the question as to whether there is such a thing as ‘hyper-masculinisation’ of the brain in the first place. I thought a lot of the excess male-diagnosed-with-autism might be down to boys with autism being socially isolated, whereas people tend not to let girls be isolated so much.
Simon Baron-Cohen at Cambridge University has gathered a lot of evidence linking autism to a hyper-masculinisation of the brain caused by exposure to high levels of testosterone in the womb. His theory therefore is that autism is an extreme form of the male brain. Could that not be a simple explanation of why autism is more prevalent in men than in women? Why should we assume that autism is equally prevalent in women and that it is simply under-diagnosed, rather than accepting that autism is more common in men?
The autism diagnostic criteria have been expanding, so it’s inevitable that more people (of either gender) would be caught in the net. I think the issue is that autism (certainly in its less debilitating forms, e.g Asperger’s syndrome) is seen as something a bit male, nerdy and geeky, and God-forbid that females be excluded from that exclusive club. I remind myself of a 50-something couple I know whose 21 year old son is autistic, but in fact autistic in the “old money” sense. They haven’t enjoyed an undisturbed night’s sleep, or a family holiday, or time away as a couple since he was a toddler. He is extremely demanding, uncommunicative, and now, worryingly, aggressive (and quite strong); they fear for the future as they age. Although they are too polite to admit it, I suspect that they are somewhat irritated by people “boasting” about their own autism diagnosis, because they’ve now taken to describing their son as “severely autistic”.
The autism diagnostic criteria have been expanding, so it’s inevitable that more people (of either gender) would be caught in the net. I think the issue is that autism (certainly in its less debilitating forms, e.g Asperger’s syndrome) is seen as something a bit male, nerdy and geeky, and God-forbid that females be excluded from that exclusive club. I remind myself of a 50-something couple I know whose 21 year old son is autistic, but in fact autistic in the “old money” sense. They haven’t enjoyed an undisturbed night’s sleep, or a family holiday, or time away as a couple since he was a toddler. He is extremely demanding, uncommunicative, and now, worryingly, aggressive (and quite strong); they fear for the future as they age. Although they are too polite to admit it, I suspect that they are somewhat irritated by people “boasting” about their own autism diagnosis, because they’ve now taken to describing their son as “severely autistic”.
Its funny the difference it makes to name something.
Yes, though sometimes people are sold the wrong name, led to embrace a wrong concept. As when girls who are autistic are led to believe that what they feel should be labelled ‘gender dysphoria’, and that they should harm their healthy bodies, deny their sex, pretend they’re men.
Yes, or even to name nothing. Create a semantic box and people will want to put something in it and before you know it, it looks real. Or consider ‘white fragility’: a previously unknown condition invented for political reasons and signifying nothing real. Yet, it has become real by virtue of being named.
The nominal fallacy
Yes, though sometimes people are sold the wrong name, led to embrace a wrong concept. As when girls who are autistic are led to believe that what they feel should be labelled ‘gender dysphoria’, and that they should harm their healthy bodies, deny their sex, pretend they’re men.
Yes, or even to name nothing. Create a semantic box and people will want to put something in it and before you know it, it looks real. Or consider ‘white fragility’: a previously unknown condition invented for political reasons and signifying nothing real. Yet, it has become real by virtue of being named.
The nominal fallacy
Its funny the difference it makes to name something.
Still not sure what ASD really means. Anyone who doesn’t ‘fit in’ at any point in their lives? Anyone who is not hyper-social, or has some level of introspection involving anxiety?
It can sometimes seem a bit too vague to be meaningful
Well you can always educate yourself on the subject like here :
https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/facts.html
Yes, the article, predictably, is extremely vague and provisional .. ‘differences in the brain’, ‘we don’t yet know’, incorporation of two completely contradictory definitions — extremely verbal or entirely non-verbal, etc. It can mean anything you want it to mean basically.
Yes, the article, predictably, is extremely vague and provisional .. ‘differences in the brain’, ‘we don’t yet know’, incorporation of two completely contradictory definitions — extremely verbal or entirely non-verbal, etc. It can mean anything you want it to mean basically.
Yup. Catch anyone on a bad day and they’re ‘on the spectrum’.
Well you can always educate yourself on the subject like here :
https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/facts.html
Yup. Catch anyone on a bad day and they’re ‘on the spectrum’.
Still not sure what ASD really means. Anyone who doesn’t ‘fit in’ at any point in their lives? Anyone who is not hyper-social, or has some level of introspection involving anxiety?
It can sometimes seem a bit too vague to be meaningful
Great article. I was diagnosed at aged 55 (am 57 now) and it was like the clouds had parted for me. A lifetime of being ‘different’ in every way. Even when you tell people you are autistic they don’t understand most of it is inside your head. The confusion, anxiety, misunderstanding and hopelessness is invisible. Most people said to me well you don’t seem autistic, expecting me to behave in some kind of odd way (which actually I believe I do to the norm). Although all my family said ‘that makes sense’ or ‘about time’. Having someone say something earlier to me would have made a huge difference to the suffering I have experienced. Like many girls, I am a highly skilled professional in my field and have honed my passions into a successful career.
How is it that there are autistic people who are highly skilled and professional in their fields, and have a successful career, but there are other autistic people who can barely communicate, have violent mood swings, etc etc, for whom a career, or for that matter a normal life, is an impossibility? It really does suggest there is something wrong with the definition of autism.
Isn’t it just OK to be a bit different? We are all individuals after all. Do you really need a label?
Perhaps the diagnostic method should involve a checklist of things that any “normal” person can effectively do, for example, hold a conversation, watch a film or read a novel and interpret the characters, comfort someone when they’re crying, hold down a job without getting fired etc etc. If none of those boxes are ticked, then hey-presto! You’re not autistic.
There is actually a lot of sound commentary on here about why Asperger’s syndrome is a better descriptor than using the word autistic. It is unfair to the many children and adults for whom anything resembling a normal life, even with limitations, is impossible. I am also seeing people who had relatively normal childhoods and work lives claiming to be on the spectrum. My childhood was hellish and at 61 I still manage to embarrass myself in those situations which I can’t avoid. My son is an educated, experienced professional with a photographic memory and has trouble with social situations at work which limit his potential, but these are nothing more than inconvenient when compared with non verbal autism.
There is actually a lot of sound commentary on here about why Asperger’s syndrome is a better descriptor than using the word autistic. It is unfair to the many children and adults for whom anything resembling a normal life, even with limitations, is impossible. I am also seeing people who had relatively normal childhoods and work lives claiming to be on the spectrum. My childhood was hellish and at 61 I still manage to embarrass myself in those situations which I can’t avoid. My son is an educated, experienced professional with a photographic memory and has trouble with social situations at work which limit his potential, but these are nothing more than inconvenient when compared with non verbal autism.
How is it that there are autistic people who are highly skilled and professional in their fields, and have a successful career, but there are other autistic people who can barely communicate, have violent mood swings, etc etc, for whom a career, or for that matter a normal life, is an impossibility? It really does suggest there is something wrong with the definition of autism.
Isn’t it just OK to be a bit different? We are all individuals after all. Do you really need a label?
Perhaps the diagnostic method should involve a checklist of things that any “normal” person can effectively do, for example, hold a conversation, watch a film or read a novel and interpret the characters, comfort someone when they’re crying, hold down a job without getting fired etc etc. If none of those boxes are ticked, then hey-presto! You’re not autistic.
Great article. I was diagnosed at aged 55 (am 57 now) and it was like the clouds had parted for me. A lifetime of being ‘different’ in every way. Even when you tell people you are autistic they don’t understand most of it is inside your head. The confusion, anxiety, misunderstanding and hopelessness is invisible. Most people said to me well you don’t seem autistic, expecting me to behave in some kind of odd way (which actually I believe I do to the norm). Although all my family said ‘that makes sense’ or ‘about time’. Having someone say something earlier to me would have made a huge difference to the suffering I have experienced. Like many girls, I am a highly skilled professional in my field and have honed my passions into a successful career.
It’s interesting to note that Turner’s Syndrome, which affects females exclusively, can cause those affected to have above average language skills, but impaired mathematical and spatial reasoning skills, almost like it’s the antithesis of autism. “Fortunately” this syndrome has sound diagnostic criteria: the affected have an additional X chromosome, so it’s unlikely there’s an epidemic of undiagnosed males. What’s interesting is how having an additional X (female sex chromosome) causes such clear gender-biased issues.
It’s interesting to note that Turner’s Syndrome, which affects females exclusively, can cause those affected to have above average language skills, but impaired mathematical and spatial reasoning skills, almost like it’s the antithesis of autism. “Fortunately” this syndrome has sound diagnostic criteria: the affected have an additional X chromosome, so it’s unlikely there’s an epidemic of undiagnosed males. What’s interesting is how having an additional X (female sex chromosome) causes such clear gender-biased issues.
I’ve resisted reading this research for fear of immediately diagnosing myself, but for all the wrong reasons. If you’re exceptionally intelligent as a young girl–particularly until very recently–and come from an abusive home, you’ll probably be bullied and you’ll probably be resented by most of your classmates and have few friends, no matter how nice or invisible you try to be. And God help you if you turn out to be conventionally attractive–then you’re really misunderstood, because beautiful babes can’t be brilliant. What if you just have intense interests and high standards and really try to be nice to people but they keep resenting and misunderstanding you when you say the same thing older men say, but to applause? Isn’t that just life as a really smart woman?
I’m just concerned that “autism” is medicalizing high intelligence in women, just as they’ve been trying to apply Bipolar II to any highly intelligent person, male or female, who’s quick at making verbal connections. And if you’re familiar w/ relational frame theory, you’ll understand that all human symbolic functioning comes down to quick abilities to run out a range of framed connections. I think it’s a way for insecure psychiatrists to label what they find threatening, esp if the “patient” has the “grandiosity” to question the DSM (and who hasn’t?)
I get it if your kid is banging her head against the wall and blurts out really rude statements, but what if she’s just highly intelligent and no matter how kind or invisible she tries to be she’s targeted for bullying because really smart kids, esp girls, are “weird” and easy targets?
Sorry if I’m being unfair. I just feel I’ll open this up and find another “this will finally explain everything” diagnosis when in fact it’s about the fact that if you’re toward the top of the 3rd +SD, you’re going to rub people the wrong way as a woman unless you’re highly skilled at hiding it and come from a seriously emotionally intelligent family capable of shielding you from the worst until you’re mature enough to handle it.
I’ve resisted reading this research for fear of immediately diagnosing myself, but for all the wrong reasons. If you’re exceptionally intelligent as a young girl–particularly until very recently–and come from an abusive home, you’ll probably be bullied and you’ll probably be resented by most of your classmates and have few friends, no matter how nice or invisible you try to be. And God help you if you turn out to be conventionally attractive–then you’re really misunderstood, because beautiful babes can’t be brilliant. What if you just have intense interests and high standards and really try to be nice to people but they keep resenting and misunderstanding you when you say the same thing older men say, but to applause? Isn’t that just life as a really smart woman?
I’m just concerned that “autism” is medicalizing high intelligence in women, just as they’ve been trying to apply Bipolar II to any highly intelligent person, male or female, who’s quick at making verbal connections. And if you’re familiar w/ relational frame theory, you’ll understand that all human symbolic functioning comes down to quick abilities to run out a range of framed connections. I think it’s a way for insecure psychiatrists to label what they find threatening, esp if the “patient” has the “grandiosity” to question the DSM (and who hasn’t?)
I get it if your kid is banging her head against the wall and blurts out really rude statements, but what if she’s just highly intelligent and no matter how kind or invisible she tries to be she’s targeted for bullying because really smart kids, esp girls, are “weird” and easy targets?
Sorry if I’m being unfair. I just feel I’ll open this up and find another “this will finally explain everything” diagnosis when in fact it’s about the fact that if you’re toward the top of the 3rd +SD, you’re going to rub people the wrong way as a woman unless you’re highly skilled at hiding it and come from a seriously emotionally intelligent family capable of shielding you from the worst until you’re mature enough to handle it.
Thanks to all those commenters who have given their own lived take on this problem. It is beautifully illuminating.
It is a little strange to me why one needs a diagnosis. There is no independent test, so all you have is looking at your life situation – which you know already and which does not change with a diagnosis. Sure, if you are incapable of working or loving or interacting socially you have handicap that justifies a diagnosis. Which puts you into a category of people that deserve special consideration and by the same token cannot claim full equality with the rest of humanity. But if you can manage a more or less normal life – even if it takes a lot of masking and additional mental work and adaption – what does a diagnosis give you? Except some kind of permission to be the person you are and an excuse to demand more adaption from your surroundings – and why do you need that? Is there sometimes an element that it just helps to find an external reason to blame your problems on – whether it the right reason or not?
For myself I have sometimes suspected that I might qualify somewhere on the Aspergers spectrum – socially inept, missing cues, a feeling that what others simply know automatically I must carefully analyse my way through (and, yes, intelligent). Others have suggested it, but I have never sought a diagnosis. For one thing I have a career, a family and friends, so I can manage. For another it is unlikely to be helpful (or fair) for me to play the diagnosis card. If it really helps you, go for it. But for me, I am who I am. Why would I need to go beyond that?
Yet another “male space” being invaded by females.
What goes around comes around.
Yet another “male space” being invaded by females.
What goes around comes around.