Aperger's is both a different state, and in many contexts, a sub optimal state. In some limited contexts, it is a superior state. Its undeniable that a dominan

Aperger's is both a different state, and in many contexts, a sub optimal state. In some limited contexts, it is a superior state. Its undeniable that a dominant part of both the human experience and survival depends on social interaction success. In this context, its undeniable that autism is sub-optimal. It doesn't go both ways, for the vast majority of interactions, because the vast majority of the population is not autistic. And they can easier cooperate with one another against you than you can gain any cooperation. Therefore, the playing field is not equal and your impairment is much more of a disadvantage than their impairment in communicating with you. "Aspie supremacists" who think that their state is undeniably superior are ironically failing in logic. Insofar as they are actually aspie. No adult true aspie (with inevitable comorbidities) with a lifetime of experience would want to repeat it. They'd opt out at the first opportunity. Rare exceptions aside, like for individuals with an engineer for a father who tracked them into the Ivy's and beyond. My theory is that Asperger's individuals are perhaps a human genetic mechanism for slowly integrating genes for certain types of intelligence. With immense deselection pressure on those genes that assures that growing intelligence doesn't spread like wildfire in the population, perhaps to bad outcomes for other portions of what it means to be human (like reproduction speed, perhaps). So I get the views of the aspies who want to recenter what it means o be normal on themselves. It just isn't the case. That's fine. There are worse lots.