4 ms·

Indeed, it's unfortunate that he's insisting on "boys" and using the masculine pronouns in this piece. This is, however, an excerpt from a book, focusing specif

Indeed, it's unfortunate that he's insisting on "boys" and using the masculine pronouns in this piece. This is, however, an excerpt from a book, focusing specifically on one case study. I would hope and expect -- though I cannot confirm -- that the book looks at children of both genders. "Making light of issues like this, or narrowing them to "boys will be boys", is a sad misinterpretation of a real issue." I didn't read either of those things in the article. Agree completely that his focus on "boys" in this excerpt is limiting and probably misguided, but I don't see him "making light" of any of these subjects. Nor did I see him categorically tying these behaviors to masculine behaviors ("boys will be boys"). Again, keep in mind that he uses one case study to illustrate the points made in a much longer book. And the headline, while certainly gender-limited, may not have been written by the author (Salon's editors, like the editors of many other publications, probably wrote it).

jacalata 13y ago
You didn't see either of those things? His main argument seemed to be "we can mistake traditional masculine behavior for high-functioning autism." The overwhelming presence of quotes like "Is he high-functioning autistic or really a more masculine-identified boy?" "Brainy, introverted boys beware", "... these behaviors might be characteristic of both willful male toddlers and autistic children", "....it is tough to distinguish between early signs of autism spectrum disorder and indications that we have on our hands a young boy who is a budding intellectual" combine to make it pretty unlikely that we just happen to be reading the single part of the book where he overwhelmingly focuses on the association of autism and 'normal masculine behaviour'.
ericabiz 13y ago
> I would hope and expect -- though I cannot confirm -- that the book looks at children of both genders. I haven't read the book either, but the article doesn't give me much hope. All of the following are direct quotes from the article: "That’s not autism: It’s simply a brainy, introverted boy" <--This is the title. "How boys communicate and socialize" <--This is one of the subheadings. > Nor did I see him categorically tying these behaviors to masculine behaviors ("boys will be boys"). FTA: "As educated people, we don’t want to believe in overarching differences in communication styles between the sexes. When I was in college in the 1980s and ’90s, “essentialism” was a dirty word. To believe that males and females might be different in essential ways was akin to admitting that you were unenlightened. There’s still a pervasive sense in our culture that to be educated is to be gender-blind, and there is something of a taboo against voicing aloud explanations for a child’s behavior in terms of his or her gender. If you don’t believe me, try uttering some version of the following statements at your son’s next parent-teacher conference: Jamal is so logical and brusque when he talks. I know he needs all our help to ease up. But these are traditional masculine behaviors, after all, and we might need to accept him more for who he is. Or, Billy overtalks and really needs an audience, especially when he has a new favorite hobby or interest. He needs to be a better listener. But he’s not unlike a lot of boys I know. It’s this public discomfort with discussing children’s gendered behavior that gets many traditionally masculine boys inappropriately labeled as high-functioning autistic. Poor eye contact, long-winded monologues about one’s new favorite topic, being overly serious and businesslike, appearing uninterested in other’s facial expressions, and restricting friendships to those who share one’s interests, may all be signs of Asperger’s syndrome or high-functioning autism. However, these same traits typify boys who are traditionally masculine in their behavior. Parents somehow have to ask the uncomfortable question in the doctor’s office: Is he high-functioning autistic or really a more masculine-identified boy?" Or...you know...a girl. Who just so happens to have strange interests, be introverted, and struggle socially.
- jonnathanson 13y ago
  ""That’s not autism: It’s simply a brainy, introverted boy" <--This is the title. "How boys communicate and socialize" <--This is one of the subheadings." As I mentioned, it's entirely possible, if not highly likely, that both the title and the subtitles were chosen by editors at Salon and not by the author himself. For example: I've rarely been able to write my own headline whenever I've been published. I've also been heavily edited, and occasionally even pigeonholed in a certain direction, by my editors. It depends on the publication, the editor's chosen focus, etc. (Curiously enough, in fact, I didn't even write this link's headline for HN; I submitted this article under a different headline). "Or...you know...a girl. Who just so happens to have strange interests, be introverted, and struggle socially." But discussing a particular aspect of masculine behavior that's misunderstood does not necessarily imply that only masculine behavior is at issue, nor does it imply that only boys exhibit such behaviors. It may well be the case that boys are more often disciplined or misdiagnosed for these issues in classrooms. I don't know. There are any number of reasons why he could have chosen this focus -- and while that focus is a limitation, I am choosing to give him some benefit of the doubt until reading further. If indeed his focus in the book is purely on boys, then that's a very serious limitation. And it would be a very unfortunate one. I have not read the book, so I cannot say for certain whether his book itself is only about boys. I hope it's not.

jacalata 13y ago

You didn't see either of those things? His main argument seemed to be "we can mistake traditional masculine behavior for high-functioning autism." The overwhelming presence of quotes like "Is he high-functioning autistic or really a more masculine-identified boy?" "Brainy, introverted boys beware", "... these behaviors might be characteristic of both willful male toddlers and autistic children", "....it is tough to distinguish between early signs of autism spectrum disorder and indications that we have on our hands a young boy who is a budding intellectual" combine to make it pretty unlikely that we just happen to be reading the single part of the book where he overwhelmingly focuses on the association of autism and 'normal masculine behaviour'.

ericabiz 13y ago

> I would hope and expect -- though I cannot confirm -- that the book looks at children of both genders. I haven't read the book either, but the article doesn't give me much hope. All of the following are direct quotes from the article: "That’s not autism: It’s simply a brainy, introverted boy" <--This is the title. "How boys communicate and socialize" <--This is one of the subheadings. > Nor did I see him categorically tying these behaviors to masculine behaviors ("boys will be boys"). FTA: "As educated people, we don’t want to believe in overarching differences in communication styles between the sexes. When I was in college in the 1980s and ’90s, “essentialism” was a dirty word. To believe that males and females might be different in essential ways was akin to admitting that you were unenlightened. There’s still a pervasive sense in our culture that to be educated is to be gender-blind, and there is something of a taboo against voicing aloud explanations for a child’s behavior in terms of his or her gender. If you don’t believe me, try uttering some version of the following statements at your son’s next parent-teacher conference: Jamal is so logical and brusque when he talks. I know he needs all our help to ease up. But these are traditional masculine behaviors, after all, and we might need to accept him more for who he is. Or, Billy overtalks and really needs an audience, especially when he has a new favorite hobby or interest. He needs to be a better listener. But he’s not unlike a lot of boys I know. It’s this public discomfort with discussing children’s gendered behavior that gets many traditionally masculine boys inappropriately labeled as high-functioning autistic. Poor eye contact, long-winded monologues about one’s new favorite topic, being overly serious and businesslike, appearing uninterested in other’s facial expressions, and restricting friendships to those who share one’s interests, may all be signs of Asperger’s syndrome or high-functioning autism. However, these same traits typify boys who are traditionally masculine in their behavior. Parents somehow have to ask the uncomfortable question in the doctor’s office: Is he high-functioning autistic or really a more masculine-identified boy?" Or...you know...a girl. Who just so happens to have strange interests, be introverted, and struggle socially.

jonnathanson 13y ago
""That’s not autism: It’s simply a brainy, introverted boy" <--This is the title. "How boys communicate and socialize" <--This is one of the subheadings." As I mentioned, it's entirely possible, if not highly likely, that both the title and the subtitles were chosen by editors at Salon and not by the author himself. For example: I've rarely been able to write my own headline whenever I've been published. I've also been heavily edited, and occasionally even pigeonholed in a certain direction, by my editors. It depends on the publication, the editor's chosen focus, etc. (Curiously enough, in fact, I didn't even write this link's headline for HN; I submitted this article under a different headline). "Or...you know...a girl. Who just so happens to have strange interests, be introverted, and struggle socially." But discussing a particular aspect of masculine behavior that's misunderstood does not necessarily imply that only masculine behavior is at issue, nor does it imply that only boys exhibit such behaviors. It may well be the case that boys are more often disciplined or misdiagnosed for these issues in classrooms. I don't know. There are any number of reasons why he could have chosen this focus -- and while that focus is a limitation, I am choosing to give him some benefit of the doubt until reading further. If indeed his focus in the book is purely on boys, then that's a very serious limitation. And it would be a very unfortunate one. I have not read the book, so I cannot say for certain whether his book itself is only about boys. I hope it's not.