I am getting more and more convinced that the "boys have autism more than girls, and when girls have it, their form is more severe" thing is not true. There's starting to be more studies on females with high-functioning autism/Aspergers. I've even realized, looking back, that some of my ex-high school classmates have it - one of them is very likely undiagnosed, and she shows so many signs of it that she's gotta have it, while at the same time, I can also see why she'd be undiagnosed.
The idea is that females are far better at faking fitting in, and mimicking other people's behaviors and speech patterns, while at the same time their condition makes it hard for them to actually connect on a personal level and truly understand why
other people do what they do exactly. They are more likely to have friends in high school but lose them afterwards.
Aspergers is finally being diagnosed more in females, and they're finding that many of them have done things like assume different "roles" to try to fit in - one example given was a woman who joined a biker gang, a conservative church, and a traveling circus, all while looking for a place where she "belonged".
Now when I look up "female Aspergers" or "female autism", I'm finding both articles (even recent ones) that parrot the whole "boys have it more than girls, with girls who have it more likely to be low-functioning", and (a smaller number of) articles that present the more recent discovery that high-functioning girls usually go undiagnosed - thus presenting the illusion
that girls are more likely to be low-functioning, when it may be more like low-functioning girls are easier to spot. Adding to this new hypothesis is that low-functioning boys and low-functioning girls that have been diagnosed are about equal in number, whereas high-functioning boys overwhelmingly outnumber high-functioning girls that have been diagnosed
. Better diagnosis is starting to come.
What do you think?