Aucademy Aucademy Boycott $pectrum 10K, Uncategorized

Regret Is Not Retraction: Simon Baron-Cohen’s non-apology, and the £26m question we should be asking

Dr Chloe Farahar (they/she) | Aucademy CIC©

Please credit when sharing.

On this page you will find two versions of this blog.

There is a blog plain language version and an easy read version.

Click the title of the version you would like to read below.

Regret Is Not Retraction: Simon Baron-Cohen’s non-apology, and the £26m question we should be asking

On 5 July 2026, the Guardian ran an exclusive: the man who gave the world the “extreme male brain” theory of “autism”* now regrets the phrase. Simon Baron-Cohen told the paper that terms like “male brain” and “female brain” are no longer useful, that they invite simplistic headlines, and – importantly – that it is a myth Autistic people lack empathy (Devlin, 2026).

[*autism is in quotation marks as it refers to the abstract concept used to describe “people with autism spectrum disorder”. I reject this term in favour of talking about us as Autistic people – whole Autistic humans]

Read quickly, it looks like a reckoning. Read carefully, it is nothing of the sort.

Because in the same breath, he insisted the underlying science had “stood the test of time” (Devlin, 2026). And he said all of this to the Guardian before the announcement of a £26m gift to Cambridge from the philanthropist Lisa Yang – money that will fund a new centre he will direct, alongside a clinical “autism” centre in a future Cambridge children’s hospital.

This is not an apology. It is a rebrand. And the timing tells us why.

What he conceded – and what he kept

Let us be precise about what has actually changed, because the distinction is everything.

What he gave up is a phrase. “Extreme male brain” was always indefensible – a piece of neurosexism dressed as neuroscience – and abandoning the label costs him nothing now that it has done its work. What he kept is the theory: the empathising–systemising model, and the claim that the science beneath it is sound.

And notice what the empathy concession really is. For two decades, the “empathy deficit” story – built on his own “theory of mind” work – told the world that Autistic people cannot read, or feel for, other minds. Now he tells us that was a myth. A myth that many of us spent those same two decades trying to correct, whilst drowning in other people’s feelings. That is not humility. That is a man conceding a point the community forced on him, and taking the credit for the correction.

The theories, one by one

Here is the harder truth the interview does not sit with: his theories have not “stood the test of time.” One by one, they have buckled – and, tellingly, several were dismantled by Autistic scholars he spent a career talking over.

Take “mindblindness” and the claim that Autistic people lack a “theory of mind.” Damian Milton reframed this entirely with the double empathy problem: the breakdown between Autistic and non-Autistic people is mutual – a two-way failure of understanding, not a defect that sits inside us (Milton, 2012; Milton, Gurbuz, & López, 2022). The evidence has followed. Non-Autistic people misjudge us within seconds and choose not to interact (Sasson et al., 2017); Autistic-to-Autistic communication, meanwhile, can flow perfectly well (Mitchell, Sheppard, & Cassidy, 2021). The “blindness,” it turns out, was never only ours.

Take the “empathy deficit.” A now-substantial body of work shows that the emotional differences once pinned on “autism” are better explained by alexithymia – a difficulty identifying and describing one’s own emotions – which often co-occurs with being Autistic but is not being Autistic itself (Bird & Cook, 2013). Control for alexithymia, and the supposed “Autistic empathy deficit” simply disappears (Cook, Brewer, Shah, & Bird, 2013; Bird et al., 2010). Baron-Cohen now calls the deficit a myth. The science that dismantled it was not his.

Take the “extreme male brain” itself. Even on its own terms – a population-level average dressed up as an individual truth – it fuelled a generation of missed, dismissed, and misdiagnosed Autistic women, girls, non-binary and trans people, because clinicians were trained to look for a “male” profile (and, let us be honest, plenty of Autistic men who did not fit it either). A theory that hides half a community from diagnosis is not a neutral scientific curiosity. It is a harm measured in lost years.

And the “prenatal sex steroid” theory – the foetal-testosterone claim on which his more recent honours rest – remains contested and poorly replicated, however decorated.

Am I claiming every strand is settled and dead? No – and I will not overstate it, because his defenders will pounce on any exaggeration. Some empathising–systemising findings do replicate on his own very large datasets (Greenberg et al., 2018). But what those self-report questionnaires actually measure, and the deficit story stacked on top of them, are precisely what has not held. The direction of travel is unmistakable – and in conceding the label and the empathy myth, Baron-Cohen is quietly walking it whilst insisting he is not.

Why now? Follow the aims, not the apology

Here I want to be careful, and honest, about the difference between what we know and what we suspect.

We have been here before. In 2021, Baron-Cohen’s Spectrum 10K set out to collect the DNA of 10,000 Autistic people. The Autistic community organised – I was part of that organising – under the banner Boycott Spectrum 10K and the slogan “Nothing about us, without us.” And we did the one thing the press releases never invite: we read the actual grant. Its stated aims were not the warm language of “wellbeing” on the website. In the funder’s own words, the study set out to identify genetic variants that “contribute to the development of “autism”,” to “investigate if there are any genetically-defined subgroups of people with “autism”,” and to “improve on existing methods for diagnosing “autism”” (Aucademy, 2021). Subtyping. Earlier diagnosis. That is what the money was for. After a two-year fight, the project was dropped (Gray-Hammond, 2025; Devlin, 2026).

So, forgive me if I do not applaud a regret delivered on the doorstep of a £26m centre – one whose stated priorities are, once again, earlier diagnosis and a clinical arm inside a children’s hospital.

Let me be clear about the limits of what I can prove. The Guardian piece does not say the new Yang centre is a genetics or subtyping project, and I will not tell you that it is. What I can tell you is that the last time this researcher received a major grant, the friendly public framing and the actual aims were two different documents – and the community only found the gap by reading the paperwork, not the press.

So the questions write themselves. What, precisely, are the Lisa Yang Centre’s research aims – in the funding agreement, not the interview? Who governs them? Are Autistic people partners and decision-makers in setting those priorities, with the power to say no – or are we, once again, to be “consulted” after the cheque has cleared? What happens to any data collected? And what does “earlier diagnosis” of children mean to someone who has always returned to attempting to subcategorise us?

Follow the aims, not the apology.

The harm was never abstract

We must not let a softer new tone quietly erase what the old theories did.

The empathy myth did not stay in a journal. It was baked into diagnostic criteria, school reports, relationship counselling, and the private self-image of every late-discovered Autistic person who spent decades believing they were cold, broken, or unlovable. It taught non-Autistic people that we were the ones who could not connect – and then blamed us for the disconnection. This is not abstract damage: it is exactly the isolation, self-blame, and minority stress that erode Autistic wellbeing (Botha & Frost, 2020; Farahar, 2022). Meanwhile, “autism” research poured its funding into causes, genes, and mechanisms, and starved the things our community actually asks for – support, services, and a decent quality of life.

What accountability would actually look like

I am, as ever, more interested in repair than in point-scoring. So, what would a genuine reckoning look like – not a rebrand, but accountability?

It would mean retracting the theory, not merely the terminology – stating publicly that the deficit models were wrong, and why. It would mean putting £26m where the community’s priorities actually are: the healthcare, the mental health support, and the premature-mortality crisis Autistic people have been naming for years. (And yes – if his own team’s cardiovascular findings hold up to peer review, that is precisely the kind of work worth funding: led by us, not merely conducted about us.) It would mean lived experts as researchers, co-researchers, partners and decision-makers, with the power to shape and to veto, from the first line of the grant. And it would mean transparency: the aims, the governance, and the data pathways, published where we can read them.

We are still here

Every major theory this man built has been challenged, reframed, or quietly abandoned – much of it by the very Autistic people his theories rendered voiceless. He has been knighted, medalled, and prized for that body of work, and now, as the honours and the millions arrive, he tells us the phrasing was “unfortunate”.

Regret is not retraction. A softer sentence is not a safer science. And an apology delivered alongside a £26m grant is not an apology – it is a strategy.

We read the aims last time. We will read them again.

#BoycottSBC · #BoycottSpectrum10K · Nothing about us, without us.

References

Aucademy. (2021, September 3). Boycott Spectrum 10K – please sign. https://aucademy.co.uk/2021/09/03/boycott-spectrum-10k-please-sign/

Bird, G., & Cook, R. (2013). Mixed emotions: The contribution of alexithymia to the emotional symptoms of “autism”. Translational Psychiatry, 3(7), e285. https://doi.org/10.1038/tp.2013.61

Bird, G., Silani, G., Brindley, R., White, S., Frith, U., & Singer, T. (2010). Empathic brain responses in insula are modulated by levels of alexithymia but not “autism”. Brain, 133(5), 1515–1525. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awq060

Botha, M., & Frost, D. M. (2020). Extending the minority stress model to understand mental health problems experienced by the Autistic population. Society and Mental Health, 10(1), 20–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/2156869318804297

Cook, R., Brewer, R., Shah, P., & Bird, G. (2013). Alexithymia, not “autism”, predicts poor recognition of emotional facial expressions. Psychological Science, 24(5), 723–732. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612463582

Devlin, H. (2026, July 5). Pioneer of ‘extreme male brain’ theory of “autism” now says phrase unhelpful. The Guardian.

Farahar, C. (2022). Chapter Nineteen – Autistic identity, culture, community, and space for wellbeing. In D. Milton, & S. Ryan (Eds.), The Routledge International Handbook of Critical Autism Studies (1st ed.). Routledge.

Gray-Hammond, D. (2025, January 31). Spectrum 10K closed: The power of community organising. Emergent Divergence.

Greenberg, D. M., Warrier, V., Allison, C., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2018). Testing the empathizing–systemizing theory of sex differences and the extreme male brain theory of “autism” in half a million people. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(48), 12152–12157. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1811032115

Milton, D. E. M. (2012). On the ontological status of “autism”: The ‘double empathy problem’. Disability & Society, 27(6), 883–887. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2012.710008

Milton, D., Gurbuz, E., & López, B. (2022). The ‘double empathy problem’: Ten years on. “autism”, 26(8), 1901–1903. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613221129123

Mitchell, P., Sheppard, E., & Cassidy, S. (2021). “autism” and the double empathy problem: Implications for development and mental health. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 39(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12350

Sasson, N. J., Faso, D. J., Nugent, J., Lovell, S., Kennedy, D. P., & Grossman, R. B. (2017). Neurotypical peers are less willing to interact with those with “autism” based on thin slice judgments. Scientific Reports, 7, 40700. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep40700

Did Simon Baron-Cohen really say sorry?  –  An Easy Read blog

Written by Dr Chloe Farahar

What has happened?

🔬 Simon Baron-Cohen is a scientist. He has studied autism for a long time.

💬 He has just said sorry for one of his phrases. The phrase was “extreme male brain”.

But saying sorry for one phrase is not the same as saying his ideas were wrong.

What did he say about empathy?

❤️ He said it is a myth that Autistic people have no empathy.

Empathy means caring about how other people feel. Autistic people do care about other people.

Did he say his ideas were wrong?

⚠️ No. He still says his science is right.

But many of his ideas have been shown to be wrong.

How have his ideas caused harm?

💔 For many years, his ideas told people that Autistic people do not understand or care about others.

This hurt many Autistic people. Some felt broken or unloved.

Many women and girls were not told they are Autistic, because people looked for the wrong things.

What is the truth?

🤝 Autistic and non-autistic people can find each other hard to understand. This goes both ways.

Autistic people often understand each other very well.

This idea is called the double empathy problem. An Autistic scholar, Damian Milton, first explained it.

Why is he saying this now?

💰 At the same time, he is getting a lot of money. It is £26 million.

He will be the boss of a new autism centre. It will also work with Autistic children in a new hospital.

Has this happened before?

🧬 Yes. A few years ago he got big money for a study called Spectrum 10K.

He wanted to collect the DNA of 10,000 Autistic children.

DNA is tiny information inside our bodies. It helps make us who we are.

The study wanted to find “types” of autism. It also wanted to find out earlier which children are Autistic.

What did Autistic people do?

🛑 Many Autistic people were worried. We were scared the DNA could be used to stop Autistic people being born.

We started a campaign called Boycott Spectrum 10K. We worked together, and the study was stopped.

What are we asking now?

❓What is the new money really for?

Who is in charge? Are Autistic people helping to make the choices?

What will happen to any information they collect?

What would make things better?

✅ Say the old ideas were wrong.

Spend the money on what Autistic people need, like good health care and support.

Let Autistic people lead and make the decisions.

Be open and honest about the plans.

What is the main message?

👀 Saying sorry for a phrase is not the same as saying the ideas were wrong.

We will keep watching.

Nothing about us, without us.

End

Aucademy Aucademy Aucademy in the news, Autistic Resources, Uncategorized

What are the outcomes for the Autism Act 2009 review, held 2025?

Aucademy’s Dr Chloe Farahar was invited to a closed session to contribute to the Autism Act 2009 review, held between April and June 2025 – and we wrote about what their session discussed, here, and the more detailed Westminster meeting notes and questions asked can be found here.

In this blog, we summarise what the 254 page report of the review sessions found.

Time to Deliver: Making the Autism Act Work for Autistic People

November 2025 | The Aucademy Team

The Verdict: Progress Without Purpose

A landmark House of Lords report has delivered a powerful verdict on sixteen years of autism policy in England. The message is clear: whilst awareness has grown, outcomes for Autistic people have not improved. It’s time for genuine transformation, not just tweaks around the edges.

When the Autism Act was passed in 2009, Autistic people were largely invisible to services. We fell through gaps between mental health and learning disability provision. The Act changed that – or at least, it was supposed to. The Select Committee’s findings tell a different story.

Simply put, the system isn’t working. Over 172,000 people are waiting for autism assessment, with many facing delays of two years or more. The NICE guideline says thirteen weeks. The reality? Some people wait five years. And when they finally get that diagnosis, post-diagnostic support is virtually non-existent. As one witness told the Committee: “You get your diagnosis and fall off a cliff.”

What Actually Matters: Beyond Awareness

The report exposes a fundamental problem with how autism is approached in public services. We’ve moved from invisibility to awareness, but awareness without acceptance is meaningless. Autistic people still face a 20-year life expectancy gap. Eight in ten experience mental health issues. Only three in ten are in employment. These aren’t just statistics – they represent lives constrained by systemic failures.

The Committee heard powerful testimony from Autistic people and those who support them. The message was consistent: public spaces remain inaccessible, healthcare is often traumatic, education excludes rather than includes, and support arrives only at crisis point. One particularly striking finding? Autistic children are five times more likely to be excluded from school. This isn’t about “challenging behaviour” – it’s about environments that disable.

A New Strategy: From Crisis to Prevention

The current autism strategy (2021-26) set ambitious goals but, after its first year, successive governments produced no implementation plan or funding. The Committee demands better for the new strategy launching in July 2026.

Their vision is transformative: a shift from crisis-driven to preventative support, from diagnosis-dependent to needs-based provision, from segregation to genuine inclusion. Importantly, they insist that Autistic people must be meaningfully involved at every stage – not just consulted, but leading the change.

Key Changes That Matter

The Committee makes over 80 recommendations. Here are the ones that could genuinely transform Autistic people’s lives:

Public Understanding: A government-led campaign to improve understanding and acceptance, with mandatory training for all public-facing staff. Aiming to move from “autism awareness” to creating accessible environments and challenging damaging misconceptions.

Healthcare Revolution: Digital flags in patient records, hospital passports, and mandatory Oliver McGowan training. The goal? Making reasonable adjustments standard practice, not special favours. The Committee also demands action on the shocking statistic that Autistic people die 20 years younger than non-autistic people.

Education Transformation: An end to off-rolling and illegal exclusions, whole-school approaches to inclusion, and accountability measures with teeth. Schools must become places where neurodiversity is valued, not punished.

Employment Support: A specialist jobs service, expanded supported employment, and incentives for employers to make genuine adjustments. The economic case is clear: every pound invested in employment support returns four pounds to the economy.

Community Support: Investment in preventative, stepped support that keeps people out of crisis. The Committee found that crisis-driven approaches cost more in both money and lives. Early intervention isn’t just humane, it’s economically essential.

Making This Information Accessible

At Aucademy, we believe information about Autistic people should be accessible to Autistic people. That’s why we’ve created two summary versions of this important report:

• Standard Summary: A comprehensive two-page overview covering key findings, recommendations, and implementation requirements. Perfect for professionals, advocates, and anyone wanting detailed insights.

24.11.2025 Autism_Act_Report_SummaryDownload

• Easy Read Summary: An accessible version using clear language, visual symbols, and simple tables. Designed specifically for people with a learning disability and/or Autistic people who prefer information presented simply and clearly.

24.11.2025 Aucademy Autism_Act_Report_Summary_EasyReadDownload

Please share them widely – this information belongs to our community.

What Now? From Report to Reality

Reports don’t change lives – action does. The Committee has provided the evidence, the framework, and the mandate. Now it’s up to all of us to demand implementation.

For Autistic people and our allies, this report is validation and ammunition. It confirms what we’ve been saying for years: the problem isn’t autism, it’s the disabling environments and systems we navigate. Use this report in your advocacy, your complaints, your campaigns for change.

For professionals, this report is both challenge and opportunity. It demands we move beyond awareness to genuine culture change. It requires us to centre Autistic voices, not just consult them. And it insists we stop treating reasonable adjustments as optional extras.

The Time is Now

The report’s title – “Time to Deliver” – captures the urgency. Sixteen years after the Autism Act, Autistic people are still fighting for basic rights and recognition. The Committee has thrown down the gauntlet to government, to services, to society.

As the report states: “Autistic people are as diverse as our country and represent an integral, valuable part of it.” It’s time that diversity was celebrated, that value was recognised, and that Autistic people could thrive, not just survive.

The new autism strategy launches in July 2026. Between now and then, we have a window to influence its development. The Committee has given us the evidence and the framework. Now we must ensure the government delivers genuine transformation, not more empty promises.

Because quite simply, Autistic people have waited long enough.

Access the Summaries

Download our accessible summaries of the House of Lords Select Committee report “Time to Deliver: The Autism Act 2009 and the new autism strategy” from the Aucademy website. Available in standard and easy-read formats.

Reference

Select Committee on the Autism Act 2009. (2025). Time to Deliver: The Autism Act 2009 and the new autism strategy (HL Paper 205). House of Lords.

About Aucademy CIC: Aucademy provides Autistic-led support, education, and advocacy. We believe in Autistic culture, community, and the power of lived experience to drive change.

Aucademy Aucademy Aucademy in the news, Uncategorized

From Postcode Lottery to Policy Change: Autistic Voices at Westminster

What Autistic People Say About NHS and Council Services

Parliament Asked. We Answered.

Dr Chloe Farahar of Aucademy CIC was invited as one of three Autistic experts to a private, closed meeting with the House of Lords Committee on the Autism Act 2009. The committee asked experts to share their views on how the Autism Act 2009 and national autism strategy have worked in practice, what hasn’t been effective, and what the government should prioritise next.

Find here the published notes of the meeting.

As this was a private committee session, the findings below reflect general themes discussed during the meeting and are not attributed to any individual participant. Here are the key points raised:

The Current Picture

Whilst some excellent services exist, there’s still a “postcode lottery” of support. Many NHS and council staff lack practical training on working with Autistic people, and when training is available, uptake can be limited by time and resource constraints.

Barriers to Good Care

Participants highlighted several ongoing challenges:

  • Long diagnostic waiting times (the NICE guideline of 13 weeks has never been consistently achieved)
  • Emergency services that don’t make adjustments for Autistic people’s needs
  • Professionals sometimes dismissing Autistic people’s understanding of their own bodies and needs
  • Particular barriers for Autistic people from ethnic minority backgrounds and LGBTQ+ communities

The Involvement Gap

Too often, decisions are made “about” rather than “with” Autistic people. Families report fighting for promised support that doesn’t materialise, and services don’t always listen when placements or treatments aren’t working.

However, there are positive examples where Autistic people have genuine power in service design and delivery, leading to better outcomes for everyone.

What Needs to Change

Experts called for:

  • Early support rather than crisis response
  • Needs-led support that doesn’t require a diagnosis
  • Real decision-making roles for Autistic people in permanent positions
  • Better training that goes beyond basic awareness to practical skills
  • Accountability for organisations that engage in tokenistic consultation

The Bottom Line

The Autism Act has raised awareness of duties to Autistic people, but implementation remains patchy. With some people spending decades in inappropriate hospital settings, and many struggling to access basic support, there’s an urgent need for properly funded, Autistic-led service transformation.

The Committee’s final recommendations could be crucial in shaping the next phase of autism policy beyond 2026.

Based on consultation with Autistic experts by experience, and experts with a learning disability/need facilitated by NDTi, May 2025

autisticltd Autistic Resources, Book Reviews

Meghan Ashburn & Jules Edwards – I will die on this Hill

Book review by Katie Munday (they / them)

[Trigger warning: talk on filicide, suicide and death.]

Book cover: cartoon illustrations of Meghan, a white person, with long blonde hair, thick framed glasses, wearing a black hoodie. They are stood back-to-back with a light-brown skin Jules, who is wearing a black low-cut t-shirt. They are against a green grass back drop, with a slither of light blue sky at the top. Yellow text reads: I will die on this Hill: Autistic adults, autism parents and the children who deserve a better world. Artwork by Nathan McConell (Growing Up Autie).

Written by Meghan Ashburn and Jules Edwards, I will die on this Hill looks at the struggle between Autistic people, ‘autism parents’ and the children who often get caught in the middle.

Meghan Ashburn (Not an Autism Mom) is an educational consultant, trainer and writer, passionate about helping schools create more inclusive and accessible environments for children.

Jules Edwards (Autistic, typing) is an Indigenous Autistic mother of Autistic children, passionate about sharing knowledge, healing trauma, and building community in alignment with her cultural values.

Nathan McConell (Growing Up Autie) illustrated the front cover and pictures of individual chapter writers.

The book collects brilliant reflections from some of the most important people in Autistic advocacy and activism including Kieran Rose, Kristy Forbes, Tiffany Hammond, Cole Sorenson and Danny Whitty. These are sprinkled throughout the book, between Meghan’s and Jules’ chapters, under headings such as ‘The Worst of Each other’, ‘Let’s get to Work’ and ‘Where do I fit in?’.

Meghan and Jules reflect on the division between Autistic activists and ‘autism mums’ through their own relationship which began with consistent and often strained (mis)communication. Through this persistent need to teach and learn with each other Meghan and Jules were unwittingly creating a template of how we can all work together to protect and champion the lives of Autistic children. So, they wrote a book about it!

There are too many good parts of this book to list but I wanted to highlight two particular favorite chapters of mine, Cara and Danny Whitty’s chapters. Cara wrote of how her ‘mother’ struggled with looking after her Neurodivergent children and how this ultimately ended with her killing her son, trying to kill her daughter and then herself. This chapter is a brave confirmation of the very real harm that Autistic people face, often from within our own families. Cara finishes her chapter by saying “if you ever feel like you can’t parent them [your children] safely, get help.” (p.172). There is no shame in needing or asking for help, parenting is beyond overwhelming and difficult and we all need support some times.

Danny Whitty’s chapter was just as eye-opening, he wrote about the pathology around autism and being non-speaking and how this “harms whole families, not just the Autistic individuals. It deprives them of the opportunity to fully know and love their Autistic family member. Which is a tragic loss.” (p.114). Unfortunately, ideas such as ‘curing’ Autistic people are often filtered down to parents who believe autism to be a big baddy taking over their children. This can be worse still for Autistic people who have different ways of communicating and do not get their communication needs supported.

The writers throughout I will die on this Hill do not shy away from the interconnection of autism and trauma, they understand that being Autistic is another part of human diversity which comes with both unimaginable struggle and deep joy. Intersectionality is reflected on throughout the book, especially Jules’ Ojibwe heritage and culture.

I saw myself reflected in these pages, from Morenike Giwa Onaiwu’s view of being Autistic as neither good or bad: just being, to Kimberly Collins’ experience of being shut-down by other parents in parent groups due to being Autistic. Autistic and non-Autistic experiences of activism and support groups are explored critically, appreciating that they are equal parts powerful, frustrating, intimate, bleak and empowering.

I will die on this Hill can be read in stages and makes a great reference book, with key points and resources at the end of each chapter. I would recommend this as a go-to book for Autistic people and those who love and support us.

I will die on this Hill is an important – and sometimes difficult –  book to read. Meghan, Jules and the other writers look at our history of infighting and explore how this doesn’t help any of us. The writing is insightful, personal, intersectional and brutally honest.

Hopefully, this book marks a rise in all of us working together against the real enemy of oppressive, racist and ableist systems which hold us down whilst asking us why we can’t do better.

“Our children think autistically, feel autistically and live autistically.”

Meghan Ashburn, p.118
autisticltd Uncategorized

Autistic shields, Autistic communities

By Katie Munday (they / them)

I have spent most of my life creating and maintaining a shield for myself (see Autistic realisation and shielding). It allows me to protect myself from toxic neurotypicality – the insistent need for society to make everyone comply to the ideals of the neuro-majority.

The shields are protective, some of the time they are unconsciously created and sometimes they are more of a thoughtful struggle to maintain. Sometimes they are created alone and sometimes they are created together  – Autistic communities often make shared shields which protect and validate all of us lucky enough to be underneath them. In these safe spaces we can talk honestly and in a manner that suits us, we can stim, tic, behave and present ourselves in authentic ways. Community shielding isn’t just about making friends with others it’s about making friends with ourselves too, especially for those of us who have experienced trauma and those of us who are new to our Autistic realisation.

These shields allow us a space to explore our neurodivergent embodiment. The way we think, talk and fit into a world which is not set up to support or validate us. Shields are used in community building, they are safe places where we can come together, create and recreate ourselves, look after each other and challenge ideas of neuro-normativity.

Community and individual shields are cyclical, we need them to feel safe and joyful but the more we need and seek these, the more we need the shields. Shields aren’t always easy to create or maintain and they can become faulty during times of intense stress or burnout. They are a useful tool, but they can be exhausting to maintain. Creating shields with other Autistic people means we can share the load, allowing us to look after our mental health and stamina. 

This is particularly important during intense bouts of advocacy and activism – when one of us can no longer hold our part of the shield someone with more energy can take our place. We can replenish so that we can once more contribute through writing, speaking, protesting, sharing information and challenging policy makers. These shields are made up of all sorts of people with different experiences and skills, and we are all the better for it.

autisticltd Guest Autistic blog posts

De-centering the ‘male’ Autistic experience

By Katie Munday (they / them)

Historically, being Autistic was considered a male childhood experience, with boys more readily diagnosed than girls. This trend is still prevalent in many areas of autism research but thankfully the gap between male and female diagnosis and realisation is slowly closing. As is the access to diagnosis and realisation for transgender, non-binary and gender divergent individuals.

There have been many reasons why many girls and women have been overlooked for diagnosis including (but not limited to); systemic misogyny and transphobia, autism research which favours ‘male’ traits and cultural gender stereotypes.

Systemic misogyny and transphobia

Misogyny across medical systems, which upholds ideas of female ‘hysteria’ and over-emotionality, means women are more likely to be disbelieved or wrongly diagnosed with personality differences and mental health issues. These diagnosis can then cause access issues to Autistic identification.

Professionals are not seeing the very real connection between what would be considered ‘disorders’ (what I prefer to call embodied self-preservation) and Autistic experience, which often includes consistent trauma. So, even when females are diagnosed with personality differences they are often overlooked for also being Autistic.

Access to diagnosis is also difficult for transgender and gender divergent individuals who wish to transition medically. Often these people are left to choose between being supported with their Autistic diagnosis or gender affirmation, but very rarely are they given the opportunity for help with both. Unfortunately, Autistic people are still seen as children who do not understand gender and therefore are not ‘really’ transgender. This infantilsation denies Autistic people gender affirming healthcare and many forgo an autism diagnosis so they can get help with the more immediate need of living their authentic gender.

Many people turn up to gender identity health clinics because they are confused by their gender and need help untangling it all, some of us live in gender flux and fluidity and this confusion should never mean punishment. All gender experiences are relevant, and all people should have access to gender affirming and diagnostic healthcare, this means creating more support for people of colour, queer people, physically Disabled people and all other marginalised groups.

Autism research which favours ‘male’ traits

Across 70 years of autism research the most researched group of people have been young white males. This means that all criteria for diagnosis, and the supposed ‘support’ which comes with it, is based on ‘male’ behaviours. Anyone who does not present these traits are not considered Autistic and may be misdiagnosed with another form of neurological difference.

The very few Autistic people who fit the stereotype of Rain Main and Sheldon Cooper have the privilege of far fewer barriers to diagnosis. However, girls and women, transgender and non-binary folk and males who do not show these traits are often overlooked as we do not live up to the standard of male stereotyped Autistic traits.

This is further complicated for those of us who are people of colour, physically Disabled, Queer and trans because our social ‘difficulties’ are often understood as a common ‘impairment’ of our other marginalised identities. This is a glowing indictment of the racism, ableism and queerphobia within medical systems but also within places of education, work and anywhere else we are seen as being ‘problematic’ or ‘too much.’

These male stereotypes are based around white western ideals of behaviours; giving eye contact, staying still, keeping quiet, but ideas of ‘appropriate’ behaviour vary across different cultures. There are many indigenous cultures, for example, which deem eye contact as incredibly rude, but this is not accounted for in white western medicine.

Autism research has focused on male stereotypes for so long that the idea of a ‘female autism phenotype’ has arisen. Not only does this create even more barriers for those of us outside the binary but it also continues to other female Autists, favouring males as the ‘real’ Autistics. (I could, and probably will, write a piece on the ‘female phenotype’ but I lack the spoons to write about that particularly misogynistic, racist and transphobic idea at the moment).

Cultural gender stereotypes

Criteria for diagnosis, which favours males and is steeped in misogyny, are based on the undeniable inequality that all of us who aren’t cisgender male face.

Girls and women are often overlooked as Autistic as they often (strangely!) fit western female stereotypes. Many of them are either quiet: “she’s so shy!” or very talkative: “they’re quite the chatter box!” These vast differences in communication, confidence and the need to talk are both seen as inherently female: potential non-speaking or hyper-verbal traits are often considered as just a ‘girl thing’ and therefore often overlooked.

In many Western cultures, girls are kept young, virtuous and innocent for as long as possible. This can run parallel with the interests of Autistic people who often stay loyal to their hobbies for longer than their neurotypical peers. This is often misunderstood and pathologised as developmental regression but it is just the lack of fear we have about enjoying what we enjoy loudly and proudly!

Heteronormativity also plays a big part in gender stereotypes; girls are to grow into women who have children with a man and keep the household. Girls are explicitly and implicitly told that they are to grow up to be the main caregiver of children, do all the housework and most times squeeze in a full or part time job. Due to this many women are exhausted beyond measure; this is considered a cultural norm and does not consider neurological differences.

As we know, burnout between neurotypical people and Autistic people are vastly different, add in the overwhelming responsibilities placed upon women and we are sure to suffer poor mental health. Unfortunately, these cultural norms feed into misogynistic medical systems, which suggest that mums simply need to ‘rest more’ or pop a few Xanax and carry on exactly as they are. There never seems to be any understanding that this burnout is due to being Autistic, as well as living in a garbage heteronormative world. Less still can it be seen for what it often is: an Autistic person raising other Autistic young people in a world that is simply not made to support or enrich us at all.

So how can we de-centre the ‘male’ Autistic experience?

Firstly, challenging oppression benefits us all and this is in no way a fight against men and boys who also deserve diagnosis, support and acceptance. I want to create a world in which we can all reach understanding and support earlier in our lives.

Unfortunately, systemic misogyny and transphobia, focusing on ‘male’ traits and cultural gender stereotypes are all reciprocally determinant, they reinforce each other and are a difficult cycle to break.

Difficult, but not impossible.

Change won’t come overnight. It comes from the writings of brilliant Autistic academics and those of us who continue to put pressure on politicians and policy makers, the advocates and activists who show up every damn day to fight our oppression.

No contributions from any of us who stand up to oppression is small – we are all part of a bigger movement to change systemic ableism, racism, transphobia and bigotry. We can change things through our anger, through our writing, for showing up for one another, through social media, protests, pride events, Autistic run conferences, supporting Autistic artists, activists and writers.

These acts can and will invoke change so that the Autistic kids of tomorrow have more of a chance at Autistic joy, pride and acceptance.