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 overwhelm

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'.