<p>Listening to BBC Radio 4, I heard an interesting theory about the rise of autism.</p>
<p>The scientist proposed that the advent of women’s lib may be linked to the rise in autism. Why?</p>
<p>Previously, like-minded, systematic, scientific, less emotive brains were not as likely to pair up. The opportunities to find each other were limited. Once like-minded women enrolled in science programs, these system oriented brains found and married each other in much higher numbers, possibly resulting in higher numbers of children born with degrees of autism and Aspergers.</p>
<p>Interesting theory. Coed university fiddles with evolution. What happens when a whole bunch of architects marry each other?</p>
<p>oh goodie, post #6, yet I have the opportunity to be the first to say that is one of the dumbest theories on autism I have ever heard.</p>
<p>It wouldn’t even be that hard to test. Just measure the difference in IQ of couples and see if there is any relationship between the difference and the incidence of autistic children, at varying IQ levels.</p>
<p>And backing up a bit, can we first find out if “women’s lib” actually caused or is even associated with, an increase in the coupling (producing offspring) by “like minded” people? So in the old days, smart men used to marry stupid women. Of course, we know this is true. Smart men have traditionally prefered stupid, buxom, blond, barefoot women. Did the smart women used to marry stupid guys? I’m a little less clear on that point, although I seem to recall most if not all women prefered the dumb jock. And nowadays, because of women’s lib, the smart women marry the smart guys and have autistic kids… sure, that makes a lot of sense.</p>
<p>I had to click on this thread, given the provocative title.</p>
<p>I haven’t read the paper, but based on the sketchy information given the “scientist” sounds like a crackpot. I question the assmption that “scientific” is linked with “less emotive”, or with any brain pathology. This one hits home. My husband and I are both physicists and, yes, we met in grad school at HYPM. Our children are not autistic, and the few autistic children I know are not the children of scientists. Anecdotes, of course.</p>
<p>[The</a> Geek Syndrome in Silicon Valley](<a href=“http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/9.12/aspergers_pr.html]The”>The Geek Syndrome | WIRED)The Valley is a self-selecting community where passionately bright people migrate from all over the world to make smart machines work smarter. The nuts-and-bolts practicality of hard labor among the bits appeals to the predilections of the high-functioning autistic mind. The hidden cost of building enclaves like this, however, may be lurking in the findings of nearly every major genetic study of autism in the last 10 years. Over and over again, researchers have concluded that the DNA scripts for autism are probably passed down not only by relatives who are classically autistic, but by those who display only a few typically autistic behaviors. (Geneticists call those who don’t fit into the diagnostic pigeonholes “broad autistic phenotypes.”)</p>
<p>OK, here’s my latest bomb-toss. Has anyone here ever read The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life.? If you haven’t actually read it, I don’t care what you think you think about it–reading NYT reviews doesn’t count. But it remains one of the most interesting and important studies on much of what interests CC parents about class and education–a dozen years later. Of course, most people haven’t actually read it, because of the infamous chapter #13–out of 22–which got into ethnicity, and rendered the whole book taboo. Very unfortunate. The most important part of the book, IMO, was the first four chapters, collectively labeled “The Emergence of a Cognitive Elite,” which described, in more sophisticated and expansive form, the phenomenon of uber-educated (relatively speaking) people marrying each other, and creating a new social class that hadn’t been seen before.</p>
<p>Putting on the good old asbestos armor once again, will man the ramparts tomorrow, if I’m not too busy oppressing the poor and rolling back the clock on women and minorities.</p>
<p>I read it, driver. What a tome that could have been said in 1/3 the trees. Another book on same topic is Guns, Steel and Germs by Jared Diamond, another wordy guy that could have said in 1/3 the space. </p>
<p>I prefer the theory that natuaral blonds are disappearing because there are so many dye jobs (which I myself have done) that blond haired women are having brown haired kids</p>
<p>Uh cheers, guys,
This is not a subject that parents of kids with Asperger’ syndrome or Autism think is funny. I suggest you read the WHOLE article posted by Emmeline, which ran in Wired magazine 5 years ago, when it was discovered that there was an explosion in the number of kids in the SF Bay area being diagnosed with Autism. The article was talking about the possible genetic consequence of highly intelligent people with poor social skills [ which are characteristics of many people with Aspergers Syndrome], a.k.a , many of the engineers and geeks in Silicon Valley ] marrying each other, having kids and suddently there is a HUGE # of kids born with Autism, which is on the the extreme end of the Autism/ Asperger’s spectrum. No, I don’t have a chlld with Autism, but it is terrible secret of Silicon Valley, one that has no happy ending for many brilliant, heartbroken parents. Just thought you should know.</p>
<p>menloparkmom–is the incidence of autism higher in Silicon Valley than elsewhere in the Bay Area? I know the incidence of autism in general has exploded over the past decade, at least that’s what I’ve read.</p>