rule breaker

[Susan]

my son suffers from dyspraxia which is part of the autism spectrum. There is nothing wrong with his brain as he has just graduated with a very good degree in History and Politics. His problems stem from a physical development problem in that the nerves in his shoulders never formed properly before he was born. With the right help, he blossomed and now has a steady job which in this day and age is a miracle.

[Anthony Simon]

Something that Anthony Simon said

"Mild autism" strikes me as kind of like "a little bit pregant". I mean, as I understand it autism means the individual is cut-off from the world in some profound and unreachable way.

I have a daughter who is an Edcuational Assistant with special training for working with Autistic children, and there are mild forms of autism. The trouble is that these cases often go undiagnosed. It is still a very misunderstood ailment. The thing is, all three of my children have spent time working with autistic boys, and each of these children were as differnet as night is from day.

The thing is are these kids described as mildly autistic because it is really a mild form of the thing characterised in something like "Rainman" or is it something else that has just got put in the same box because, as you say below, people don't really understand?

The point is that we do not understand the in's and out's of the brain, and why things like this happen. Why would someone with a penis think like a woman? Cultural convention tells us that they are male, yet these individuals think and act like women. I am not saying it is autism, I am saying that the mind is a wonderful thing, and science still does not understand it.

FWIW I did try, with my two analysts, working with the idea of autism as something that contributes to my problems. I don't think it's that. I think I have problems that come from the oral stage (as in the Freudian idea of there being an oral (up to ca 2years "His majesty the baby"), an anal (ca 2-4years - The "terrible 2s") and a genital stage ( ca 4-7years Oedipus and all that). The oral stage is when the baby hasn't yet separated from the mother, and indeed doesn't really understand that there is a seperate entity called "mother". He just thinks mother and him are one fused thing. The big task of that period is individuation - which is the mother slowly, lovingly, bringing him round to the perception that she's over here and he's over there. "Oral rage" is a characteristic of this period - and I have lots of that. I also have massive problems with separation - and also things did happen to me in that period which almost certainly mean that I have bits of me stuck there. The development of an individual "self" is one of the (If not THE) key element of this period and I know that there's this bit of me that "isn't there" - like it never developed properly.

And on the extremely speculative front...If at this point mother and male child aren't distinguishable, then the male child experiences his mother's - i.e a woman's - body as his own. Maybe, by dressing up in women's clothes - and experiencing myself as a woman - I am just returning to that point, trying to resolves issues left undealt with from then. I know that when I look in the mirror and see this woman looking back "I don't know who it is" - which is the classic moment when I know about my problems of lack of identity. Doesn't prove anything, but it is suggestive.

I know I've always had problems with my rage and now it seems like I'm holding it, or trying to hold it, in the dressing up. Classically (as I understand it) this is the mother's role with the very small child. But now I seem to be trying to play that mother's role with myself, trying to resolve that problem. In the process, it appears, I am recreating the experience of undifferentiated mother and child of the oral period. And I'm doing that (at least part of the time) with the CDing. So...

There is a theory of autism, by Tustin, which revolves around containing massive and vast quantities of rage. But it seems so extreme that I can't really experience it as being connected up with how I feel. I did think about it for quite a while. The other theories of autism just didn't work for me at all.

The stuff about containing oneself within the clothes (in CDing) would work pretty well as an echo of the baby being contained by the mother, held tightly, lovingly - if you were inclined to believe in those theories. Babies do wear "swaddling clothes" and nobody thinks of them as being autistic (at least not that I'm aware).

Sorry to go on and on...

[Ralitsa]

I don't know anything about autism, but it seems to me that a lot of people apply that term rather indiscriminately. I don't mean professional people who know what they are doing, but rather the general populace who seem to use it as a catch-all to pretend they know something that they don't. So I shouldn't comment on it, but I will anyway and say that even though CDing does, to some extent, imply a detachment from the feelings of everyone else, I don't believe it has anything to do with autism.

What I'm really curious about is whether the quality of refusing to unquestioningly accept and follow rules extends beyond the CDing. From the responses, it looks like generally it does. So that would imply that the willingness to go against the grain is a fundamental personality trait, and may be a key reason why we accept it of ourselves even though many around us do not. So whatever may be the underlying motivation, the expression of it is facilitated by our inherent tendency to resist arbitrary rules. I would like to agree with the idea that it is a result of greater intelligence and improper socialization, but maybe that's taking more credit than we deserve
There is however a pretty clear link between higher intelligence and all sorts of "psychological problems", which I put in quotes because it's often applied to people who annoy the dictators. I'm guessing there is also a link between higher intelligence and the tendency to ask why, which I think is because greater intelligence gives one the power to see the flaws, or the problems, or to figure out a better way. But I also know people a lot smarter than me who never think of anything different or try anything new, so it's not the whole answer.

[Anthony Simon]

Ah, but the question is: "Which came first? the 'Free Thinker' or the 'Free Dresser'?"

CJ

In a charity shop once, the lady behind the till made conversation. She was folding up my stuff and was not doing it as easily as she might. She said something to the effect that her problem was that she was never much good at this sort of thing. I thought, well she's picked up that I'm buying these clothes for myself and I'm a crossdresser. So she saying "I'm like you, don't fit into the requisite gender role too well." But, instead of following what she said, and going "Yeah, I never was much good at being masculine", I replied "my problem is I can't keep my mouth shut."

And that's true. Sooner or later if I believe something strongly enough, I'm going to have to say it - even though I know that it's not what other people believe and is going to get me in trouble. There's a compulsion there, like I have to let the idea out to be true to myself. I don't have the same compulsion, for example, to go out into the outside world dressed as a woman - as many people here do. So, in terms of an inner identity, my "freethinker" bit is much more demanding than my "freedresser" bit.

Maybe doesn't answer your question. But I always think that eggs came before chickens anyway (just to freethink annoyingly).

[Anita]

Sooner or later if I believe something strongly enough, I'm going to have to say it - even though I know that it's not what other people believe and is going to get me in trouble. There's a compulsion there, like I have to let the idea out to be true to myself.

I have this same tendency, and your description woke me up this morning: "Oh, yeah, I recognize that."

I don't have the same compulsion, for example, to go out into the outside world dressed as a woman - as many people here do. So, in terms of an inner identity, my "freethinker" bit is much more demanding than my "freedresser" bit.

Your statement above really made me think. Yes, that is the same impulse in me—I had to “speak truth” by becoming a woman in the world, too. And like the other beliefs, when it reaches critical mass, I know that I’m going to have to speak or act. There’s no wiggle room, no “maybe.” It’s both a blessing and a curse to have this, in the way I experience it.