14 Feb 2007, 3:46 pm
Tim_Tex wrote:
Melantha wrote:
Women in our society are not thought of as dysfunctional if they "choose" not to work and instead stay home; men, on the other hand, are still often thought of as strange or inferior if they can't enter the work force, and very few have the option of being supported by a working wife while they stay at home. (This one does tie in to what Jerry says.)
I am 27 years old (and thus, about 5 years older than the traditional college student), and I will be attending college full-time beginning this fall. To an NT woman, would this be more likely to be seen as a sign of responsibility (because I would be advancing in my career, and preparing for a better job), or would this be more likely to be seen as strange/inferior (because I would not be in a full-time paid position at that time)?
Tim
Well, I can't really answer that, as I am not an NT woman... but in my opinion, I make no judgment about a person being a full-time student. But then again, I've never cared much about what people do with their lives, as long as they're doing what they want to be doing. The only person whose career concerns me is my husband's, because my daughter and I rely on him.
I guess it would depend on the NT woman, really. Either she will think it's not good because she wants someone with money and status, or she will think it's fine because she is an independent woman with her own money.
Who knows?
14 Feb 2007, 5:40 pm
ZanneMarie wrote:
Melantha wrote:
ZanneMarie wrote:
Actually, the fact of the matter was in my case that it was not considered acceptable and people did raise an eyebrow. So, that is not a blanket truism and the fact is that people did say things to you and it was not acceptable to them. By your own words, you simply chose to reject their opinion. That isn't the same thing as it being an acceptable choice. That particular action was only you choosing to make it an accpetable choice for you. Not the same thing. You also had a child eventually and you probably took care of the house in the meantime as well (I'm only getting that from you saying it was old-fashioned which indicates to me you were a 'housewife' because I never would have labeled what I did as old-fashioned).
No, I am a terrible housekeeper. I stayed home because my AS makes it nigh-impossible for me to hold down a job.
ZanneMarie wrote:
Staying home when you are not going to have children and you are not the "housekeeper" is not an acceptable choice. Whether you went out or not, your husband would have gotten it and you yourself said you did get comments. I lived that life as someone who was not the mother or the housekeeper. It was not acceptable. End of story. Writing all day and night while he works, is not accepted. It might have been, if I'd had any intention of publishing or if I had lied and said I was going to. I did not. It was not acceptable. I would also hazard a guess (and it's just a guess, but a pretty strong one) that if people asked if you were going to have children, you did not tell them no, not under any circumstances.
No, up until the six months before I got pregnant I had been adamant about not having children. I never wanted kids until those friggin' hormones kicked in and made me all weird.
ZanneMarie wrote:
At which point they would have badgered you until, if you were me, you said something like, I'll take a hanger to myself first. That is not acceptable. It didn't change my mind, but it was not acceptable. The fact that you had a child indicates you were probably, at the least, ambivalent about it. What I did was most assuredly not acceptable in the 50's and 60's. I grew up in the 60's and it was not acceptable. If you couldn't have children, that was one thing, but you didn't choose not to and not to take care of the house. You'd have been living in the Valley of the Dolls in short order.
Yes, I can see how that would have been quite unacceptable in the 50s and 60s. I didn't have that time-frame as a reference. Now I understand what you're saying. (In my case, there is no one to badger me about anything.)
ZanneMarie wrote:
Steve K might have been right if you could marry into a high enough income bracket where your husband could hire a nanny and social event planner. That might make it invisible.
Hehe. We are pretty poor. And we don't even "do" social events, let alone require a planner.
The thought alone is enough to make me shudder.Barely anyone would ever KNOW that I didn't take care of the house. We don't have visitors beyond perhaps two or three a year, and if we do, my husband cleans up for it. They'd never know I wasn't the perfect stay-at-home mom and housewife, unless I told them.
ZanneMarie wrote:
And while we're on the subject, I would caution you strongly to add 'tend' to what you say about females. You do it when you write about males, but you do not tend to do it when you write about females. Females might tend to be one way, but it doesn't necessarily make it so.
Well, sorry, but I considered it obvious that not all females are exactly the same. Any statement about men or women is, of course, a generality, and there are always exceptions.
ZanneMarie wrote:
I think it's wonderful that you suddenly became an instant mom-type when you had a child (even on an intellectual level as you did), but that doesn't always happen.
Of course it doesn't always happen. I never stated that my experience related to anyone other than myself. I was simply telling what happened to me.I'm certainly far from the stereotypical "soccer mom" image one is supposed to aspire to, which I find completely repugnant. I am as much an outcast for my mothering style as I am for anything else.
ZanneMarie wrote:
Society thought the exact same thing of my mother, that having a child would miraculously make her kind and patient. It didn't. She was a Sociopath and we paid the price of that Societal influence that was sexist based. My mother had no business being a mother and what's more, she didn't want to be. But THAT was not an acceptable choice back then. I'm sure they thought my mother was hard-wired differently because she was a female as well.
All I can say to this is, "society" is an ass. I don't think I need to point out how insanely ridiculous it is to:
1. Assume all women are exactly alike.
2. Believe one can confidently apply a generality to one specific woman and have it be true.
I know many women have gone through this kind of social-pressure-induced motherhood, and I think it's the same as any gender-based expectation of lifestyle: stupid and unnecessary. The sooner we rid ourselves of such expectations the better.
ZanneMarie wrote:
But, aside from all of that. What studies did you see? I've seen one article like that, but it was written by a PhD in education. I didn't give her much credence for Scientific study and in fact she said it was based on her observations (some of which I found accurate for me and others I did not). Did you see an actual study or abstract of results? Can you post it here?
I'm sorry, can you specify which kind of studies you're referring to? Do you mean the ones about language and social skills in women and spatial abilities in men? Those I have read about in numerous sociological and anthropological books; I would be hard-pressed to dig them up now, but I can have a look...
Once again, I have to stress that just because you found some of her conclusions inaccurate for you, does not mean that they aren't true overall as a general rule. No generality will be 100% true for any individual woman, unless she is the perfect "average" woman (who does not exist). They are statistics and are only meaningful as such. They cannot be applied to individuals with the expectation of perfect conformity.
Terrible housekeeper does not equate to not keeping the house at all. They are separate things. That aside, are you saying you did not work because your AS caused basically a disability situation but that people just assumed you stayed home to be an "old-fashioned wife?" Now I'm thinking I'm responding to a completely different thing. (Although what I said was definitely true and I don't know of anyone who finds that acceptable. In fact, they talk pretty harshly about women who do stay home even when they take care of the house, have children or have disability. And that's been pretty universal in the 20 some places I have lived.)
I think that you are probably right about not having people around and also six months isn't really that long a time frame. It might also depend on your age. I was 22 then and I was viewed as basically taking advantage of my husband. LOL Maybe they thought he was helpless or naive. They were actually harder on him and said things to him. He's the one I felt bad for in the end. I also think much of it stemmed from the fact that he also took care of the house and cooking. I wouldn't have noticed if the thing fell in around me. He picked it out, furnished it, moved me in and took care of it. What I noticed was him saying, this is where we live now. That was the extent of it for me. But, based on what you say next, it makes me believe it is your social seclusion that is probably keeping it under wraps. Personally, if it works for you, keep it up. Works a pain. Too many people want to talk to you.
I can understand how you feel like that about mothering. I think my touchiness there with making sure you said tend is because such absolutes, even implied led to disaster with my own mother. I just hate to see anyone even go near that with semantics. Does that make sense? I'd hope never to see that again. You are right that society can be an ass. So, I know I'm touchy about those words, but that is why.
So the studies were not AS studies specifically. I find that interesting from the perspective that I wonder what they will find in the brains when the Neurology field finally does studies.
As to that woman? Catherine Faherty? Is that whose article you saw? Her article is anecdotal, if you saw the same one I did. She said as much. The reason I questioned saying it was in any way fact is because she never cited a Scientific study, she said it was anecdotal and she is only an Educator who wasn't performing a study. So, by her own admission those weren't facts but observations of her own particular setting. As I said, some I agreed with personally, some did not fit me, but they were all just observations on her part and not facts. She doesn't claim they are. This is the one I saw, which may or may not be what you saw. http://www.autismtoday.com/articles/Asp ... _Women.htm
That's what I was asking about. I thought perhaps you saw a real scientific study on specifically Asperger's in addition to that article and that is why I asked. The Neurology studies I've seen have talked about gender differences. The only thing I've seen on that subject have been from Psychiatrists and even they say that it is theory and not fact right now. They just haven't done enough research at this point to say for certain. That is what I've seen. So, if you've seen something different regarding AS, I'd like to see that.
I haven't seen any statistics regarding gender based differences in AS. So, I'm not sure what you think I should be paying attentionn to whether I fit the mold or not. I'm not discounting it based on that, I'm discounting anecdotal observations until I actually see some concrete studies done on the brain and not some NT Psychiatrist's subjective observations or some Educators stories from her one group. I need facts based on more than that. And, I guess I'm kind of with the Scientific (and even the Psychiatric) community...they haven't seen enough cases yet to do more than theorize. I'd want to see a bigger sample tested first.
So, that was where I was coming from.
Well, I never claimed AS changed Women differently than men. Looking at posts here, the IQ ranges and common symptoms are the same. Women DO still develop differently, and at least US culture puts them in a better position socially. The only studies I would accept in something like this are ones were a straight AS male interviews and observes AS females. An NT person, or other AS person wouldn't have the experience, etc... A pure AS female view would be tainted, because their expectations would be different, etc... And you couldn't just look at the brain, or merely observe. THAT is why so many stereotypes exist.
Steve
14 Feb 2007, 6:08 pm
14 Feb 2007, 7:06 pm
14 Feb 2007, 7:58 pm
14 Feb 2007, 9:16 pm
14 Feb 2007, 9:19 pm
dgd1788 wrote:
I think the ratio isn't static
So are you saying we are fluctuating between NT & AS? Hmmm I thought so. I'm feeling more AS today than usual.
14 Feb 2007, 9:21 pm
15 Feb 2007, 6:33 am
Ticker wrote:
dgd1788 wrote:
I think the ratio isn't static
So are you saying we are fluctuating between NT & AS? Hmmm I thought so. I'm feeling more AS today than usual.
Hmmmm. If I have NT feelings, I will let you know.
15 Feb 2007, 10:46 am
Ticker wrote:
dgd1788 wrote:
I think the ratio isn't static
So are you saying we are fluctuating between NT & AS? Hmmm I thought so. I'm feeling more AS today than usual.
I think he's referring to the ratio of male to female aspies. It may fluctuate if it's truly a gender-blind condition, striking more boys some years and more girls another, depending on whatever causes it.
