Could be Feminism have been setup via undiagnosed aspies?

Post Reply New Topic

First of all, i believe we all know how hard is to diagnose a female aspie. They don't show the symptoms as us the males, but they end with tremendous ammount of burnout.

Second thing, in those moments where this movement is stirring every aspect of society, the figure of Asperger Syndrom is being wiped from DSM-5 / 6 and upcoming CIE11. By chance?

Third thing: remember those ww2 ads of women making unfemenine jobs and duties during ww2? Normal women would barely never try to take them given how physical and mentally demanding uses to be, many of them even today, but some kind of women seems willing to do so, but those women uses to say they're "rare" or that they seem to have "male brain in female body".. doesn't this fit with Baron Cohen findings?

Fourth thing: once the world rules found out there's a small fraction of women really able to cope with heavy jobs historically made by men and in the mid of 20th century having a tremendous industrial expansion.. could be or not a "nice" experiment to use those likely aspie women as a propaganda for the rest of femenines to join workforce? Also.. when "normal" women tries and they see they can't fit or stand the workplace they have been scammed to join.. doesn't it make sense to hide the neurological lie using ghosts like "patriarchy" and "cristal / glass ceiling" when the real hidden limitator would be that they have passed asperger women as "strong and independent" by corrupted mass media to cause the societal and economical effects we knew today?

Also than also: doesn't it make sense a generation of two later to start pitting psychiatry, education system and others to betray male aspergers pathologizing them and turning us into second class citizens while at the same time fostering female aspies so each one cancels the other and no one understands the scam, instead it looks like "autism epidemics" when it's "social engineered disfunction"?

Didn't you notice how strong are maleist movements like mgtow and how they seem to be turning into union of betrayed aspies fighting feminism likely they were able to start smelling a tremendous conspiracy like the one i suspect it has been done manipulating both genders into a diabolical manner?

Baron Cohen's extreme-male-brain hypothesis is misleadingly labelled.
What's an extreme male brain? it's systematizing, object-oriented etc.
What's male about it? it occurs more iften in men, but also in women.
Is it male, then, if it's also occurring in women?
Hmm.
Is calling it a male brain useful, if it's also occurring in women, and if it means systematizing, object-oriented etc. - properties that in itself are not "male"? Probably not.

Regarding women with "a male brain" - they behaved more like men, so that mainly means they were comfortable with male sicial behaviour. Not more.
And to be honest, I don't see how extremely physically taxing work would qualify them for being autistic.

Personally, I prefer socializing with women. Because I'm weird, but among other men, it's more noticable. While among women - well, they expect me to behave differently from them.
I also suck at workplaces, because I don't understand hierarchical behaviour.
But by your definition, that means I have both a male brain and don't, because I'm both autistic yet am not a "good" male.

Erm, no, not all female aspies are buff, physical workers.

Then you slide into some conspiracy theory about female aspies keeping men down. Whaaat?

I enjoy the company of men. Just because I do doesn't mean I'm oppressing them. This is a very strange idea.

Those of us who have more analytical, factual oriented perspectives just want men to accept having us around and treat us as part of the team. That's it. We're not trying to steal your jobs or keep you down. We want to work along side you.

Sure, let's blame feminism on a group of people that is mostly composed of men who cannot get a date.

We had four years of "Rosie the riveter" women building ships, tanks, and planes, during WWII.

That showed that women can do industrial jobs.

And that spawned modern feminism.

Okay..I am with you so far. There prolly is some truth in that.

But then you're saying that all of those women doing those jobs were "female aspies". Ergo female aspies spawned feminism.

Even if aspergers/autism had an even sex ratio and were not predominantly male it would still mean that less than one percent of the population were female aspies. There is no way that the majority of women working in industry during the war were aspies. Or even a significant percentage of them were. So there is no way that the "aspie women" by themselves could have spawned "feminism".

The OP's claim reads like a half-baked conspiracy theory.

It makes me sad that feminism has gotten a bad rap. I came to it hard, totally not interested. I was forced to do some deep reading in college and had some eye opening moments. I do see how it can be misused to be sexist against men and to make things harder for women too. But there is definitely a point in the women’s movement and in academic feminism.

Cue the hair-splitters, the mansplainers, and the general misogynists....

I wonder just how true that statement is, that autism is more common in men rather than women. I know that men are diagnosed at rate of four times more than women, but women have common traits that would make autism harder to diagnose. It's possible that just as many women have autism as men but men are easier to diagnose because of biological differences, like for example women are more likely to have social anxiety than men, social anxiety being one symptom of autism.

Are Women with Autism Getting Overlooked?

Females Are More Anxious Than Males: a Metacognitive Perspective

I see how it could just be more tricky to diagnose women than men with autism, men tend to be a lot more social on average making them stick out like a sore thumb when they have social disorders which often lead to a diagnosis for autism. Women tend to be less social in person yet very socially involved on the internet, just as most autistic people find it much easier to be social when hidden behind a computer.

As far as the OP's theory, I would say it is unlikely that feminism is mostly a result of women with autism. About the only credit I could give to that is my experience here, is it likely that most females with autism happen to hold feminist views, certainly seems true here. But in all honesty, what is the basis of feminism in general? When not taken to an extreme, feminism beliefs are mostly just standing for women's rights to stand for equality. I would imagine that is more of a common human trait rather than solely a common female trait. Who really wants to feel like they shouldn't have equal rights??

To me feminism gets a bad wrap mainly because of the extremists within feminism. There is traditional feminism, and there are the extremist feminists which generally get the spotlight more often because like typical extremists within any belief system they tend to make the most noise. I have heard many feminists denounce being labeled as a feminists because of extremists who like to put themselves above men rather than equal too, the typical man hater ideologies which traditional feminists did not hold. This tends to happen with most groups who focus on protecting one a specific class, it invites extremists in who hijack the movement, in other words, it's not just a feminist bad wrap, more of a specific protected identity bad wrap. It's best just to stand for equality for all to separate one's self from extremists.

Not exactly sure what you're saying here. Are you saying that there are a minority of extremists who get mocked, or that a minority of extremists don't like feminism?

I don't think either statement is true. Weirdly, one of the most common criticisms of feminism I see is that the first and second waves were alright but the third and fourth waves are too extremist. Except frankly, it's the surviving second wavers who are the extremists. They're the ones who incorporate a narrow Marxist perspective on the world in which women are "an oppressed class", they're the ones who wrote the SCUM Manifesto, they're the ones who believe in political lesbianism and trans exclusion, they're the ones who focus on rich white women in their own countries. Third wave feminism doesn't really do the things that people like to complain about, and fourth wave feminism is ideologically very similar.

Feminism has a negative reputation in part due to the first and second wave harbouring quite a lot of nasty ideas, but by far the overriding factors are ignorance and misogyny. Amongst young people, who tend to have more positive views of feminism (which I think you could put down to the second wavers being perceived as conservative bullies rather than representatives), ignorance explains people who don't really have opinions but the vitriol comes from bigots. Amongst older people, there's more ignorance, which may be justified by negative experiences with Dworkin or Greer or whoever, but of course the bigotry is still there. But anti-feminism isn't a fringe perspective amongst the population at large. Even many people who hold entirely feminist beliefs have misconceptions about what feminism is which causes them to not identify as feminists.

"Egalitarianism" is a much more appropriate word than "Feminism". The former is defined as "Equality", while the latter carries with it connotations of a society established by and for women only.

^This^

What some of us (men and women) have experienced is more like militant misandry -- men and women who blame and shame all men everywhere for just about everything imaginable while simultaneously expecting men to agree and submit to every "feminist" demand.

Basic feminism (as I understand it) boils down to getting men to allow women to exercise the same rights and have the same privileges as men -- the rights to personal safety, respect, and opportunity in education, employment and housing. This is actually Egalitarianism -- simple equality under the Law. I'm in line with that.

I don't think the fringe element are either the loudest or particularly prominent. Yes there are still some nasty second wavers with national newspaper columns (Bindel and Greer for example), but most prominent feminists are friendly and reasonable people, and that doesn't explain the particular hate for the third wave.

The militant misandry that Fnord points to, for example, to all intents and purposes doesn't exist.

deleted my post as it said it wasn't me who posted it

Anyway what I said was

I don't think either statement is true either.

I'm talking about the perception of feminism because the extremists usually have the loudest mouth or are the most controversial. I believe feminism gets a bad rap due to people's experience of this fringe element i.e. If that's feminism , I don't want to know.

People within the "Third Wave" talk about "rape culture," "Patriarchy," and "male privilege."

And "intersectionality." Oppression which cuts across gender-racial lines.

I have experienced abrasiveness on the part of people who profess "Third Wave Feminism."