Tony Attwood

[Ella Spell]

Both my sons are NT, did my bit for Canadian demographics.

I added a couple of autistic geniuses to the planet.

 

[Ella Spell]

Does Tony still talk about autistic women having "male brains", or has he graduated to saying autistic men have "female brains" ?

I didn't know brains had genitals but I guess he's done special exams.

 

[Boogs]

Does Tony still talk about autistic women having "male brains", or has he graduated to saying autistic men have "female brains" ?

I didn't know brains had genitals but I guess he's done special exams.

I don't know what you're quoting from so can't comment on that (do you have a link?), but could it be he's trying to work on dispelling the old and incorrect idea that men and women has significantly different brains. The modern take on this is more and more that differences between adult genders are much more taken from nuture, not nature.
Just from the sound of what you said:

Does Tony still talk about autistic women having "male brains"

Could it be that's he's working against this old and false notion, still surprisingly held in many area's of academia and medicine? But I'd be interested to see what it is you mean, rather than having to guess, if you can point to some material please?

I didn't know brains had genitals

I presume that was tongue in cheek and not literal, about something he's said?

 

[Neonatal RRT]

What did Tony say about meltdowns that showed he was an expert?

I didn't catch that part. He suggested speaking to people in meltdown state. He didn't seem to know that we'd want an absence of stimuli. He didn't seem to know the difference of meltdowns and tantrums, or the fact meltdowns don't involve emotion.

I respect his research but as far as I could tell, he had nothing to add to the topic and didn't sound any more knowledgable than a lay person.

Ella,
Reggie was speaking from her perspective. Dr. Attwood was primarily listening. However, your example, "He didn't seem to know that we'd want an absence of stimuli." is NOT a universal experience. I think it may be a partial truth. Clearly it's not what you do, but how you do it, sort of thing, but a soft, soothing, supportive voice can certainly help some individuals feel safe and allow the meltdown subside. Keep in mind, Reggie is one of perhaps, thousands of autistic individuals Dr. Attwood has interviewed, so when he says things like that, it's based upon the experience that other autistics have shared with him.
"...or the fact that meltdowns don't involve emotion." My meltdowns are always triggered by emotion. Once again, you're making a leap.
"...and didn't sound any more knowledgable than a lay person." Reggie led the discussion, not the other way around. Dr. Attwood was pretty much there to support her while she discussed her experience. It was not his role in this situation to lend a lot of advice or lecture her on her condition, but rather to listen. Now, had he been standing up lecturing in front of a group of colleagues you would have seen an entirely different side of him.
Be careful of cognitive biases. Even if you have studied a topic, they are mostly shaped by your unique life experience with it. It's your specific perspective and context, not others.

 

[Jonn]

I don't know what you're quoting from so can't comment on that (do you have a link?), but could it be he's trying to work on dispelling the old and incorrect idea that men and women has significantly different brains. The modern take on this is more and more that differences between adult genders are much more taken from nuture, not nature.
Just from the sound of what you said:

I am not sure it was Tony, but I remember researchers, professionals, whatever you want to call them, thinking in terms of autistic women GENERALLY being more rational rather than emotional.
Yes, we are all on a spectrum.
Could we plz not go there?

Personally, I DO think men and women are affected differently due to the evolutionary process.
Different hormones could influence different mindsets, as an example.

E.G., men tend to be more visually influenced when it comes to arousal, whereas women tend to want/need more emotional involvement.
As they say: "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus."

Why is it said that men are from Mars and women are from Venus?

The book states that most common relationship problems between men and women are a result of fundamental psychological differences between the sexes, which the author exemplifies by means of its eponymous metaphor: that men and women are from distinct planets—men from Mars and women from Venus—and that each sex is ...

 

[Jonn]

Could it be that's he's working against this old and false notion, still surprisingly held in many area's of academia and medicine? But I'd be interested to see what it is you mean, rather than having to guess, if you can point to some material please?

I don't think there is a definitive answer to this.
However, there are distinctive/different tendencies in men and women in general.
I am not specifically talking about the ND community, which is simply a small subset of humanity.

Context is important here.
And it is a complex subject to consider, after all.

 

[Boogs]

I don't think there is a definitive answer to this.
However, there are distinctive/different tendencies in men and women in general.
I am not specifically talking about the ND community, which is simply a small subset of humanity.

Context is important here.
And it is a complex subject to consider, after all.

I was being extremely literal. I think you may have gone somewhat further than my questions.
I just found the comments to be difficult to rationalise and make a proper meaning, were some exaggerations to give a better impression of the thoughts on the matter? Or were they intended as very literal comments? If they were, they missed a lot of context, that without which, the comments could be taken in a number of ways, some of which I would definitely disagree with, without more evidence.

The male/female brain issue (in general, not ASD specific) is an old and frankly, crap position, taken by meny a medic and researcher, simply because that's the prevailing yet unexamined opinion (and in a misogynistic society, this would be hardly surprising), but more and more, this is being challenged by more forward and modern thinging scientists. They have many obstacles to overcome with this sort of prejudice, and often messaging has to be subtle and carefully planned, to avoid a baclash that could put science back years in this area.

There's much politics (small p, and large P) involved, and power to make and break peoples careers, and much more. It's not all logic and rationality in some areas! Anyway, I was just very curious as to where this came from with respect to Atwood, as the (admittedly small) amounts of material I've seen, did not give me that impression.

 

[Neonatal RRT]

I don't know what you're quoting from so can't comment on that (do you have a link?), but could it be he's trying to work on dispelling the old and incorrect idea that men and women has significantly different brains. The modern take on this is more and more that differences between adult genders are much more taken from nuture, not nature.
Just from the sound of what you said:

Could it be that's he's working against this old and false notion, still surprisingly held in many area's of academia and medicine? But I'd be interested to see what it is you mean, rather than having to guess, if you can point to some material please?


I presume that was tongue in cheek and not literal, about something he's said?

Another interesting topic: Gender differences in ASD. There are differences, but perhaps not in the way that some may think.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...rum-disorder/23D058B59E5B837C55C6F9F174C7BD24
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213158221002552
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41398-020-0699-8
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13229-015-0067-3

 

[Jonn]

Well, I watched the video just now.
Here is my assessment:

Tony was doing a lot of paraphrasing, which is taught in communication classes.
He was supportive.
He was validating what was being said.
Reggi was very appreciative.
I had no problem with the interview.

 

[Jonn]

The male/female brain issue (in general, not ASD specific) is an old and frankly, crap position, taken by meny a medic and researcher, simply because that's the prevailing yet unexamined opinion (and in a misogynistic society,

You could be right, but without a definitive consensus, it is simply an opinion, as is mine.

but more and more, this is being challenged by more forward and modern thinging scientists.

I think that is a subjective position to take.
Who determines who is more forward-thinking and modern?

I am not disagreeing with you.
I am simply making the point that what we are saying are opinions, not facts.

There's much politics (small p, and large P) involved, and power to make and break peoples careers, and much more. It's not all logic and rationality in some areas!

I agree, and topics like the ones we are talking about here are often politicised.
Hence, the need to maintain a sceptical mindset, imo.

 

[Boogs]

You could be right, but without a definitive consensus, it is simply an opinion, as is mine.

Its's not my comment, but from a few reports I've watched or read, of academic research, in particular involving the use of functional mri of the brain, and other scan methods, and doing comparisons between the two genders.
From what I've read, it seems there is little definitive evidence that there are physical differences at birth between the genders, and most assumptions that there is a difference, have usually been just that - assumptions! Think about how discriminatory our culture and society are towards females, and how deeply embedded and systemic it is, it would be more surprising if this was not an factor!? Personally, I believe it's the environment (including hormonal of course) that effects many of the differences.

For example, it's a sad fact that in general males will be pointed towards more engineering type learning and careers than females are likely to be (or at least this has been the case in some places for some period of time, even if not continuing right now), and this, among with many other directly and indirectly related matters, can have a major impact on that persons neural development, and it's certainly a fact that the brain is far more dynamically flexible and changeable than was recently thought by most experts. It's something that's difficult to prove, but equally, so is the alternative, and I haven't yet seen anything that I could use to differentiate the two, that's independant and empirical.

I think that is a subjective position to take.
Who determines who is more forward-thinking and modern?

See above?

I am not disagreeing with you.
I am simply making the point that what we are saying are opinions, not facts.

If you read carefully, you'll see I'm not actually making claims (unless I've mistyped somewhere - not impossible!), I'm asking questions that matter to me in making a better appraisal of the post.

I agree, and topics like the ones we are talking about here are often politicised.
Hence, the need to maintain a sceptical mindset, imo.

My central position is to doubt as much as I possibly can (to the limit of my ability), to generate the questions I need to answer, to come to my best understanding. That includes myself, probably more than anything else, often to my own detriment, but that's all subjective rubbish; point is, without doubt, there's no self-knowledge, just the adoption of someone else's opinions, however they've filtered through (imho - of course! ). Maybe that's not the case, but how can anyone know that, without asking, and answering empirically. Not to doubt, is to not ask, that puts your opinion in the realm of uncertainty. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but very much depends on how it's subsequently used.

 

[Jonn]

From what I've read, it seems there is little definitive evidence that there are physical differences at birth between the genders, and most assumptions that there is a difference, have usually been just that - assumptions!

It is generally accepted that female brains mature faster than male brains.
Where do you stand on that?

 

[Boogs]

It is generally accepted that female brains mature faster than male brains.
Where do you stand on that?

That goes back to what I was suggesting, that from birth (for want of a more specific and relevant starting point), it's environmental rather than genetic influences, that will cause a diversion of development between the two genders.
Some are going to be directly related to their genetic gender encoding, so things like hormonal influences on physical and psychological brain development are not going to be very comparable between the two - for a start, each person will likely have different hormonal balances (and imbalances) to others of their gender.

On top of which, the gender itself will have certain weighting factors at least in the distribution of the various hormones involved in brain development. Boils down to - there's no worthwhile comparisons we can make here. Requires controlled laboratory experiments with a suitable group to get anywhere near being able to say anything definitive about that, but we have to acknowledge it's a factor.

But many other factors too. Maybe females mature faster due to their treatment socially and educationally (bit of cross-over there too, I'd imagine). Maybe they are forced to have to deal with some things that males are less effected by, possibly by dint of not being expected to, while there could be higher expectations of females?
And of course, this is all on a scale of age, and culture, and so many other things, again, we can't make any definitive conclusions, rather we can only see possible trends to investigate?

Finally (although there's lots more to discuss on this, but time and space and all that are imposing ...) how would we be measuring this? You say it's generally accepted, but by whom, how, and where and when?
Is this an example of what I mentioned about assumption's long embedded in our culture, and hence rarely acknowledged. Have you got any actual evidence to support that? (I'm not trying to be personally critical, this is a trap most of us fall into at some time or other, myself included. We have to accept our brains, ASD or not, are pretty poor devices when it comes to logic and rationality).

If you do have evidence, what's it's nature? What is it actually measuring? How do we even define maturity as it relates to that question? Has that been done in relation to any evidence about the matter being true in the first place?
I know my point of view (as separate to my opinions) isn't the most common, simply from experience of discussions, but it does have it's own relevancy and value, when correctly viewed with the right context.

So in the end, all I've pretty much done, is ask you a bunch of questions. Does any of that take you any closer to where I'm coming from? (as if I knew that myself! ).

 

[Magna]

Clearly it's not what you do, but how you do it, sort of thing, but a soft, soothing, supportive voice can certainly help some individuals feel safe and allow the meltdown subside.

It would be interesting to see a poll here on this subject to see how many autistic people experiencing an actual autistic meltdown prefers to have people talking to them, trying to reason with them, etc during the meltdown or how many want to be left alone so it can run its course.

I watched the vid and when Tony suggested that you tell an autistic person who is actively experiencing an autistic meltdown: "It will go.", I couldn't believe that because I thought it was absolutely horrible advice. I thought it was basic knowledge of autistic meltdown 101 that reasoning is short circuited in a meltdown. You don't talk a person down from a meltdown. You don't try to explain things. You don't try to tell them they're overreacting, etc.

If someone said to me, calmly or otherwise: "It will go." if I'm in a meltdown, I would take that as:

>I know you better than you know yourself.
>Your current situation isn't as big of a deal as you're making it out to be and you'll be back to "normal" soon.
>I'm directing you and your situation.
>I know more than you do.

And, holy hell if someone were to touch me during a meltdown.

 

[Neonatal RRT]

It would be interesting to see a poll here on this subject to see how many autistic people experiencing an actual autistic meltdown prefers to have people talking to them, trying to reason with them, etc during the meltdown or how many want to be left alone so it can run its course.

I watched the vid and when Tony suggested that you tell an autistic person who is actively experiencing an autistic meltdown: "It will go.", I couldn't believe that because I thought it was absolutely horrible advice. I thought it was basic knowledge of autistic meltdown 101 that reasoning is short circuited in a meltdown. You don't talk a person down from a meltdown. You don't try to explain things. You don't try to tell them they're overreacting, etc.

If someone said to me, calmly or otherwise: "It will go." if I'm in a meltdown, I would take that as:

>I know you better than you know yourself.
>Your current situation isn't as big of a deal as you're making it out to be and you'll be back to "normal" soon.
>I'm directing you and your situation.
>I know more than you do.

And, holy hell if someone were to touch me during a meltdown.

It would be interesting. Agree.

Having said that, I found your example of "I would take that as:...." I guess, those thoughts would have never entered my mind. To each, their own.

 

[Magna]

It would be interesting. Agree.

Having said that, I found your example of "I would take that as:...." I guess, those thoughts would have never entered my mind. To each, their own.

Have you ever had an actual autistic meltdown?

In my adult life I can thankfully count the number of times I've had an actual autistic meltdown on one hand. However, I think the word "meltdown" (ie nuclear meltdown) is the best descriptor because it connotes the absolute intensity of the situation. It's like the brain short circuits and has to go through the reboot process. For me if someone tried to intervene, talk me out of it, reason with me, etc it would be no different than forcing a power down in the middle of the reboot. Not constructive.

 

[Ella Spell]

They'd enter my mind. ^^

When I'm having a meltdown I'm in fight or flight mode. My primitive nervous system takes over. I go within myself for safety by trying to purge myself of the outside world, whilst my BP and adrenaline surge. Having someone intercept me, talk to me as if they know better, or heaven forbid touch me, would be a disaster. My friend and I are both quite low functioning ASD. She's dx at Level 3 and I'm a 2, although my scores are actually worse than hers in many areas and it's likely I'm a 3 as well - especially when it comes to meltdowns or neurological control.

Having a Neurotypical man tell me what his research says I need is, quite frankly, offensive.

 

[Ella Spell]

Ella,
Reggie was speaking from her perspective. Dr. Attwood was primarily listening. However, your example, "He didn't seem to know that

I'd prefer if you didn't refer to me as "Ella", thanks.

@Ella Spell is fine.

"Ella" seems personal, despite the fact I don't know you.

Same with "Reggie".

 

[Neonatal RRT]

@Boogs, I find your thoughts on "brain gender" interesting. I have heard these talking points discussed before. However, as some have pointed out, when discussing gender differences, as we know, there appears to be a continuum from say, a very feminine, petite, soft-spoken, agreeable, low aggression, physically weak female with low testosterone at one extreme, and the very masculine, thickly muscled, thickly boned, physically strong, disagreeable, dominant behavior, high testosterone male. Certainly, simply observing many people in our environment, there is a lot of cross-over, and supports this idea that for the majority of the population, this idea of "a female brain and a male brain" becomes a bit muddled and supports your argument. No doubt, there are masculine females and feminine males. Furthermore, within the mean of the curves, there may be some truth to nurture being an important influencer of behaviors. However, the differences are at the extremes of the bell curve that 10% or so at either end, not the middle. So, to both arguments, nurture vs nature and male vs female brain, it's a bit of partial truths going on and it's about context and perspective. Both arguments can be correct or wrong depending upon the context and perspective.

Specifically, regarding autism, Dr. Baron-Cohen's initial theory of autism being an example of the "extreme male brain" has been disproven with larger sample sizes. In fact, as you probably know, with larger sample sizes, it was shown that ASD males tend to be LESS masculine and ASD females tend to be MORE masculine in terms of behavior and hormone levels than neurotypical controls, and does support the observation that gender dysphoria, LGTBQ+ individuals are disproportionately represented within the ASD community. Having said that, personally, I would fit into that "extreme male brain" category. I am at the far end of the bell curve. My wife is not a "girly-girl", but there is a huge difference between my personality, my build and physical strength, how I carry myself, the way I think, and hers.

Context and perspective. I agree that the literature regarding this has not been sufficiently studied with large enough sample sizes, or even sample sizes comparing the extremes of the bell curves. I am sure, as time goes on, and more information becomes available, we will be able to discuss these topics with more accuracy.

Take care

 

[Neonatal RRT]

I'd prefer if you didn't refer to me as "Ella", thanks.

@Ella Spell is fine.

"Ella" seems personal, despite the fact I don't know you.

Same with "Reggie".

Fair enough. Noted.