'Beautiful Young Minds', BBC2, 9pm-10.30pm, on tonight

[Mumble]

In order to hyper-focus on one thing, you need to filter an awful lot of stuff out, e.g. background noise, thinking about other people, other things you may be interested in, worries in general, hunger, thirst whatever is goin on and focus purely on the job in hand. Most people (myself included) are too easily distracted to be able to focus to this degree, you have to be really, really interested in what you are doing.

Do you not think that this is a skill that could be learnt? I have never learnt a need for social interaction to the extent that many NTs seem to require it. I am quite happy with my own company doing my own thing (but this is very different from saying that at times of my choosing and under my control I don't want some interaction). NTs I think, perhaps unconsciously learn to need lots of different things (social contact, worrying about others). Can you 'turn off' this need to allow focussed concentration? I'm only speculating here, I just don't know, but I do worry about an idea that only certain people (and I'm not segrating ASD/NT here) have the capacity to hyper-focus.

 

Evidence suggests that being able to focus to this degree is an area of strength for autistic people. You don't have to be autistic, but it helps! Simon Baron-Cohen theorises that this is due to Autistic people being better at systemising (e.g. organising things according to a system ir set of rules) at the expense of empathising which requires a different set of skills. He also says that men are (in general) better at systemising than empathising, which gacve rise to his 'extreme maleness' theory of Autism.

 

The attendees did seem to be overwhelmingly male!

A difficult one, this and I think there are two competing issues.

 

Firstly, my interpretation of SBC's (OGB's!) theory is not of males being better at systematizing over empathising. I think it's very difficult that this is the general view of his theory - that autism and systematizing is male - I don't think he's helped himself with his 'lay-persons' book which talks about an 'extreme difference'. What his theory does is take pre-natal invitro testosterone levels and compare these with systematising and empathizing quotiants. The suggestion is that (and it is still a theory undergoing various research strands) exposure to higher levels of testosterone in the womb (as you would get in males, hence more males - but see below) predisposes the individual to potetial ASD traits which when combined with environemental triggers may result in an ASD diagnosis. So the extreme male brain theory relates to brain development and to higher than average levels of testosterone, not to anything 'male'. I am not 'more male' than other females because of being AS.

 

The second point I find far more interesting - that of males in maths. You are absolutely correct that there are more males taking, studying and making careers out of mathematics at the higher levels (although this is not true now earlier on). This however does not equate with males being 'better' at maths but with a whole host of (mainly) societal factors and a fascinating history to the subject (do you know how female mathematicians were treated not so long ago? - think witch torture and you won't be far off). You only have to look at images we have in the media to see why such a male image is perpetuated. There is, actually, nothing cognitive to perpetuate mathematics in males over females.

 

If we start to bring these ideas together, and others, and thinking that it is important to look holistically, be might begin to see where some of these ideas stem from and how they are reinforced by societies actions. And if I'm not careful I'm going to waffle on for hours so I'll stop there and go and find another distraction for this evening.

[Jester]

Hi all

 

Teaching maths at a special school has definitely shown me that maths ability is not 'linked' to any position on the spectrum.

 

In schools in general, girls outperform boys in maths with mathematical application and word problems. When maths becomes symbolic and 'pure' they seem to fall behind.

 

If 'society' is preserving some form of male bias in higher maths then it is ALL societies; almost all the competitors in the olympiad were male and I, for one, can't believe that societies as diverse as China, South America and India all have some agreed secret plan to keep girls out of maths.

 

Societies have their prejudices...but why given the overall 'geek' stereotype of mathematicians, would us blokes WANT to own it!?

 

I believe that, if society has a bias, it is inherent in the approach to education that favours communication skills. Girls are outperforming boys across the curriculum on a regular basis except in maths and some sciences and it gives me a bleak smile to find people worrying that this is evidence of bias.

 

I don't believe anyone is worrying about the generally poor performance of boys in Modern Foreign Languages.

 

Edited October 15, 2007 by Jester

[Kathryn]

In schools in general, girls outperform boys in maths with mathematical application and word problems. When maths becomes symbolic and 'pure' they seem to fall behind.

 

That's really interesting. L, who is certainly untypical of her gender in many ways, (which may be linked to AS) finds it is precisely the word problems she has most trouble with: the purer kind she can do easily.

 

At school, she was consistently in the bottom set for maths, now free from all the stress, I am realising she may actually have an aptitude for certain aspects of it. She always struggled with mental arithmetic at school - now she is a whizz at it!

 

Incidentally, she also loves words and is very good at English and foreign languages!

 

Perhaps pupils are subtly pressurised early in their school careers into Being Good At either English or Maths -but not both?

 

K X

[Cariad]

I really enjoyed this programme, I wanted to give Daniel a hug as I really felt for him and lived through it all with him. Jos made me laugh, he was almost on a par to Alan Partridge with his comments, I could see he was very hard to get along with and enjoys his company more as aposed to Daniel.

 

BTW my DS is awful at Maths too

[oxgirl]

I take your point about Jos Simon, but what bothered me is that he didnt appear to have been taught (or wasnt bothered about) some very basic interactions which would have made his life easier.

 

One thing that really jumped out at me. The interviewer congratulated him on getting through to the next round. No response. So a minute or so later he said it again (maybe thinking Jos hadn't heard). Yes, you already said that, he replied. Logical to him, but came across very rude. If he'd been taught to say "thankyou" to a positive comment or compliment (or he may have been but decided not to follow this rule) he woud have come across so much better. We all have to do this, AS or NT.

 

I felt very uncomfortable during the scene when all the others were criticising him behind his back. I would have been very upset about that if I was his mum. But again it helped people understand the many different personality types in AS & that he didn't represent everyone there.

 

 

This is a really difficult one, isn't it, Pearl. I didn't see the prog, only about the last five mins, so I can't comment, but I can say that my lad is constantly being told that he is rude. It's certainly not that I don't continually discuss it with him and try and help him to understand about his tone and inflection and the way that he says things to people, because I could explain it to him until I am blue in the face, and usually do, but he still isn't able to 'get it', iyswim.

 

Only today, he was totally purplexed in the car on the way home because his TA had told him AGAIN that she is fed up with his rudeness. We discussed it fully and I tried to explain to him about how the way that he had spoken to her could have hurt her feelings and that she wasn't trying to annoy him, only trying to help him, etc. etc. for the whole half-hour journey home. The trouble is that intellectually he does understand what I'm explaining to him and he does feel bad that he might have upset his TA by his abrupt tone, but when he is in that situation he just reacts verbally and doesn't think about how he is saying something might come across to others. He isn't intentionally being rude, he'd never upset anyone intentionally, but, despite my best efforts, I have failed, if you like, to teach him how he needs to speak to people in order to not alienate them.

 

I do feel quite strongly really that if an AS child does not get his tone of voice or wording just right, then he is 'rude', whereas nobody would dream of describing a non-verbal child in this way.

 

~ Mel ~

[pearl]

<'> mel

Sorry if I upset you.

JP has been able to learn pretty good manners, in fact is complimented on them. But the only two criticisms he has had so far at work concern his social skills - making inappropriate comments, and talking too much.

 

Interesting that I had talked to him about these areas many, many times, like you with your lad - but its only having received "outside" criticism that he is finally realising how he impacts on people, & he is so upset.

 

I felt for Jos. The other aspies on the programme didnt get on with him either, & I just felt so sad that in an environment where he should have flourished, he still didnt "fit in". Honestly not sure whether it bothered him or not.

 

I was browsing an AS only forum the other day (looking for somewhere safe for JP) & had a look at their thread on the programme. Without exception they all thought Jos was fantastic & the interviewer was an idiot!

[Bard]

<'>

I know what you mean Mel.

B has good manners when he remembers, but it's not instinctive, natural or any other description you wish to use. He knows the correct responses to certain things, just as he can use cutlery correctly when he thinks. If anything else is at the forefront of his mind, he concentrates on that.

It's not rude, in my opinion being truly rude is like a sin, it has to be a conscious choice.

It's thoughtless, that's all, and remembering how other people feel is also something that B has to concentrate on remembering.

He doesn't smile much, my B, unless he's actually laughing about something. Otherwise he can look quite intimidating, and brusque, and that can lead others to be quick to judge his motivation for an action or inaction.

There's a lovely line from Kipling that reminds me of my son...

' He trod the ling like a buck in Spring, and he looked like a lance in rest '

 

Nearly had a problem today with a lad that was winding him up after PE.

B walked right up to him, looked down and said " What's your problem with me?" and then stood in glowering silence whilst the other boy stammered and backed off. Then he went back and finished changing. Teacher asked what had happened, and B said 'Nothing' with his usual closed-down face.

Idiot teacher thought he was being insolent, but B's escort for the next lesson showed up and the situation calmed down.

[baddad]

Hi oxgirl -

 

firstly, It does make me uncomfortable talking about Jos specifically rather than making general observations because one of the big problems about any TV programme is that you're looking at an "edit" which may or may not be representative, but...

 

While it's undoubtedly true that our kids can appear rude unintentionally, this was slightly different because Jos actually appeared to know what was "expected" of him socially (he said things like 'I know what you want me to say', and 'I know what you're getting at, but') but was actually making a choice not to make those compromises. That's perfectly reasonable, and I''d very much promote his right to such freedom of choice, but in any situation where anyone makes personal choices of that nature there are consequences. Jos seemed happy enough about those consequences, so that's fine too - but from another perspective i personally found myself wondering how much of it was simple 'choice', and how much of it could have been the result of no other expectations from his immediate networks.

As the other guy in the programme said when asked why he didn't know how to make a cup of tea 'I've never needed to before'...

In some ways it can seem like "we" are being very supportive if we say to our children 'It's OK, you don't have to do that stuff for me', but the reality is the rest of the universe (and I don't think there'll be any major social shifts in our lifetimes) won't be so accommodating, so if we don't help those who can (very important, those italics) to see the benefits of such compromises we actually disempower them and significantly narrow their life opportunities. That in no way implies that we should make their choices for them or force our own upon them, but to not empower them to make informed choices for themselves when they are able is (IMO) wrong.

 

On the hypothetical matter of whether similar expectations would be placed on a non-verbal child I can only answer that, IMO if the child is capable of understanding the underlying concepts - yes. I can't think of any disability where rudeness, inconsideration and arrogance would be acceptable if and where alternative forms of behaviour were an achievable option. Again, in adulthood the person might make an informed choice to reject those social niceties, but again it goes without saying that they do, in that case, have to accept the consequences too.

 

Of course, your own post is saying very much the same thing, so none of the above is a comment on that! It was just to make the point about 'unconscious' AS behaviours and 'conscious' behaviours arising from other influences like the influence of social networks and/or psychological imperatives of the individual concerned.

 

 

 

L&P

 

BD

 

PS: just thought of a good example: Ben and eye contact... i know it can be uncomfortable for him, so don't expcect it, but do ask him to 'appear' to make eye contact for the benefit of others (by looking at chins/noses etc) If at some point he says 'No i'm not prepared to do that and other people can like or lump it' that's fine, but he will do so knowing that those who 'lump it' are the consequence of that decision (?)

 

[oxgirl]

Hi baddad, thanks for that.

 

I don't disagree at all, it's just that I feel that I DO really, really try and instill manners into my lad and I don't let him 'get away with it', as such, and he STILL cannot grasp it. The implication that his rudeness is somehow my fault because I haven't taught him properly or haven't tried hard enough or expected better of him fills me with despair.

 

I had a 'friend' with an AS lad who was doing fantastically and coping really well and she was very fond of telling me that he was only doing so well because of her hard work, the implication being that anyone who had a child who wasn't doing so well was somehow responsible because they just hadn't tried or worked hard enough. I really started to resent it and in the end stopped seeing her, because I can do without that kind of backhanded insult, I guess.

 

I very much do expect my lad to be polite, but he just isn't and I don't know what else I can do other than take all the blame for his 'rudeness'. Just makes me sad.

 

~ Mel ~

[oxgirl]

Cheers Bard. <'>

 

Jay doesn't intend to be rude, it just comes out wrong. I guess I'm just sick of being the one who is to blame. I remember his old TA lecturing me about how "I brought my children up to say please and thank you", as if I hadn't!! Another TA has said to him, "No wonder you haven't got any friends", which really helps!

 

I suppose it feels a bit like having a child like that you get all the blame for the problems but none of the credit for all the great stuff.

 

Sorry, didn't mean to take over this post, I'm probably being too oversensitive, I'll go now.

 

~ Mel ~

[oxgirl]

JP has been able to learn pretty good manners, in fact is complimented on them.

 

Pearl <'>

Jay hasn't been able to learn them, well not yet anyway. Maybe it will come one day, but it makes me feel sad to think that people might genuinely dislike him when he's an adult.

 

~ Mel ~

[baddad]

I had a 'friend' with an AS lad who was doing fantastically and coping really well and she was very fond of telling me that he was only doing so well because of her hard work

 

 

Oooooooooooohhhhhhh, don't you just hate 'em???

 

No, peeps come in all shapes and sizes, and having an AS kid who 'doesn't' get it isn't the parents fault at all (or the kids, come to that).

 

Guarantee that the 'friend' who's willing to take all the credit from her child for all of the positives will quickly switch back if and when it all goes pear shaped...

 

L&P

 

BD

[pearl]

Pearl <'>

Jay hasn't been able to learn them, well not yet anyway. Maybe it will come one day, but it makes me feel sad to think that people might genuinely dislike him when he's an adult.

 

~ Mel ~

 

Aww mel. JP used to be awful. His favourite greeting around the age of 7 was, "shut up you idiot" Manners came with maturity, & he has learned that a polite "formula" like, hello, how are you, nice to see you etc. gets results, as he really does like communicating. Its almost natural now, but he still struggles with nuances & boundaries, hence the work feedback.

 

We ALL work hard with our children - you are better off without that "friend".

 

Baddad, what you said about Jos appearing to choose not to co-operate - yes, I think you hit the nail on the head there. He seemed quite aware of what was expected but wasnt interested in conforming - which, as you said, has consequences in terms of how he is perceived.

[Mumble]

PS: just thought of a good example: Ben and eye contact... i know it can be uncomfortable for him, so don't expcect it, but do ask him to 'appear' to make eye contact for the benefit of others (by looking at chins/noses etc) If at some point he says 'No i'm not prepared to do that and other people can like or lump it' that's fine, but he will do so knowing that those who 'lump it' are the consequence of that decision (?)

I'm going to be very careful here having picked a quote out of a longer interesting post. I'm just a bit unsure about this. I think unless you (generic 'you') actually know the physical pain that some action (in this case eye-contact) can cause (and I don't think it is possible for anyone to know what this is like for [/i]anyone[/i] else - AS of AS, NT of AS, etc, because everyone has very different reactions to different stimuli, it's potentially problematic to expect something that is potentially painful from someone for the social comfort of another person. It's one I find very difficult, and difficult to understand, myself. Does this make any sense? Giving a way to cope with this (such as looking at lips etc if this works - I have other problems here to can't comment) is useful but it is the individual's perogative to decide. I don't think we should have to think about such consequences when all we are doing is avoiding (sensibly) something painful to us. Is society ever going to become more tolerant of difference if there is such constant pressure on us to conform (or pretend to conform) for the benefit of the social comfort of NTs?

[baddad]

I'm going to be very careful here having picked a quote out of a longer interesting post. I'm just a bit unsure about this. I think unless you (generic 'you') actually know the physical pain that some action (in this case eye-contact) can cause (and I don't think it is possible for anyone to know what this is like for [/i]anyone[/i] else - AS of AS, NT of AS, etc, because everyone has very different reactions to different stimuli, it's potentially problematic to expect something that is potentially painful from someone for the social comfort of another person. It's one I find very difficult, and difficult to understand, myself. Does this make any sense? Giving a way to cope with this (such as looking at lips etc if this works - I have other problems here to can't comment) is useful but it is the individual's perogative to decide. I don't think we should have to think about such consequences when all we are doing is avoiding (sensibly) something painful to us. Is society ever going to become more tolerant of difference if there is such constant pressure on us to conform (or pretend to conform) for the benefit of the social comfort of NTs?

 

Hi mumble -

 

Ben, at 10 is already reaching a point where he can explain to others the difficulty he has in making eye contact, and the strategies he uses to overcome that. At the optician's recently for an eye test he independently explained that he has difficulty making eye contact but that he was aware of the necessity for the optician to look into his eyes. This is the benefit of negotiation, discussion and explanation over an expectation for society without those cues to be more 'tolerant' ... society is more likely to be tolerant if it is given the opportunity to understand, rather than being taken to task for something that is beyond it's current understanding...

I did state elsewhere in my post that the process of negotiation should be within the autistic persons 'comfort zone' - that it should be an achievable goal for them, and that no negative judgement should be applied when it isn't. You said in your own post that it should be 'the individuals prerogative to decide' - which is almost word for word what I said... the only difference is i added that they should always be aware of the consequences of that decision, rather than projecting the 'blame' for it onto what may effectively be an 'innocent party' who has no idea of the internal struggle the individual might be facing because it is totally alien to their (the viewers) nature and it hasn't been explained.

It is perfectly acceptable/reasonable for Ben to say 'I don't want to come to you party because I find parties difficult' and not to be judged for it... it is NOT reasonable for ben to say 'It is abusive of you to not make your party accessible to me on my terms, even though they have not been explained to you and they would severely impact on the experience of your party for 98% of the other guests involved.' (and BTW it is also NOT reasonable for Ben's NT friends to make the assumption that he would not want to attend for the reasons detailed - that should be his decision)

In a nutshell; Yes avoiding something potentially painful is sensible. Meeting somebody halfway in a compromise that is mutually acceptable is also sensible. Saying 'I shouldn't have to negotiate or compromise' isn't sensible if the individual wants social networks that extend beyond those that will accommodate him/her exclusively on his/her terms.

 

L&P

 

BD