BrooxBroox wrote:
That is what I have read. I did a bit of research about how most AS research is based on observations from mostly MALE subjects and also that girls are better at "camoflauging" their "disabilities". I agree with this. Also, though, I have read arguments that when girls show AS it is more severe..... don't know what to say about that one.
Perhaps there was some misunderstanding (either in your reading or in the mind of the author/s of the text/s you refer to).
Generally, it is considered that females in the Asperger category present with less observable indicators of traditional Asperger symptomology (as Aspergers Syndrome is currently recognized and described in the DSM for instance). However, in the Kanner Autistic range, females who are diagnosed tend to be in the more severe range, and tend to have lower IQs.
Two common interpretations of the above are:
A)that females are more resiliant to the effects of Autism and so they are less likely to be Autistic in the absence of intellectual impairment,
and
B)that diagnosis is gender-biased so that the observable symptoms used as a frame of reference reflect male instances more so than female instances, and only those who present sufficiently close to a "male instance" (including those whose severity results in very observably obvious symptoms) are likely to be diagnosed (which feeds back into notions about Autism and reinforces gender bias).