Though it’s obviously anecdotal, I see that memoir as basically a case study in neuroplasticity. You have a guy who in his early life, is absolutely a pitch-perfect example of what “Asperger’s” is, and has social difficulties because of it… and yet, later in life, as he develops closer social relationships, those social difficulties gradually lessen.

So, basically it’s not unheard of to be an Aspie who’s social! It’s just that normally they have a lot of trouble, at least as kids, figuring out human behavior because it’s so non-intuitive.

It’s also important to not confuse “socially adept” with “talkative and friendly”; as anyone who has worked retail knows, those two things are very different traits that don’t always overlap. Plenty of Aspies are friendly and talkative; the part of social interaction they usually have difficulty with is reading others’ behavior and expressions or reacting in ways a “normal” person would, because they start out wired more for logic than empathy, so it’s usually more difficult for them to figure out others’ thoughts and emotions if they differ from their own. Also, sometimes they will focus on physical objects more than faces, which can be an issue as it’s the opposite from what most others focus on.

But like I said… neuroplasticity gives your brain more flexibility in learning those things than a lot of people give it credit for.

Something can be enormously common, and still be a disorder because it causes problems in their life. Which is not to say all disorders should be treated with medication, of course, but they can still be a disorder.

A really, really good example is depression; it’s so enormously common in reaction to severe stress and loss, and so common in particular with “social stress” triggers (breakups, deaths, etc.), and in fact seems to be possible for EVERY human being, it’s to the extent that some psychologists think it may have a valid evolutionary purpose, for dealing with problems. See, depression causes rumination – obsessive focusing on your misery – and this comes at the, well, depression of other things, such as appetite or urge to get out of bed or well, urge to do anything other than sit around thinking about how miserable you are, really. Which if you are dealing with a social problem… well, sometimes thinking on it obsessively might actually help.

However, that doesn’t mean that the depressed state isn’t a disordered one; it very obviously causes problems in one’s life (for instance, not wanting to get out of bed to go to work), and when severe enough, can lead to self-destructive or even self-harming behavior or suicide. Calling it “acceptable parameters for humanity” would cloak the possible risks and definite problems of depression.

Thing is, most depression is temporary, a reaction to direct circumstances. And almost all treatments – including “mere” talk therapy – seem to help a majority of cases. So yes, we definitely over-medicate for depression.

But that doesn’t mean it’s not a disorder when it happens.

It’s also possible for one disorder or symptom to be mistaken for another; for instance, the number of adult ADHD diagnoses has skyrocketed… but, unfortunately, it is very hard to tell ADHD apart from the effects of sleep loss! So, probably, we have a lot of adults who are on stimulant medications that sure do counteract the symptoms – but who would be better served by getting regular rest instead.

This doesn’t mean there’s not something wrong or that the symptoms are “acceptable” – quite the opposite, as whether it’s sleep loss or ADHD, the symptoms can be outright dangerous in the wrong circumstances; it just means that the symptoms might not be best treated with medication and might be masking an underlying problem that’s mistaken for some other problem.

Also, there ARE conditions that appear to be influenced by epigenetic factors – which means they could easily become “really common” in a particular generation or two, while still not being normal for “humans” as a whole, or a good thing. Epigenetic you see, refers to effects on the epigenome, a biochemical layer that lays on top of the the genome and tells it how to turn genes on and off and to what extent. The epigenome is environmentally-impacted, and the impact on it can be transferred for up to two generations past the original.

ADHD for instance? Much more common in children whose parents have it. But also much more common in children of mothers who were VERY stressed during their pregnancy. So a single stressful period of history – say, the Great Depression – may well lead to a couple generations or so which have a solid up-tick in legitimate ADHD cases. You know, like the current large number?

In other words, while you probably aren’t wrong to question whether medication is always the best treatment, that doesn’t mean that a condition can’t be super common and yet, still a problem enough to require awareness or even treatment.

I mean jesus, sleep loss is a major issue for our times. You going to tell me we should just ignore it because it’s common behavior? I would assume not.

Common doesn’t and shouldn’t mean “acceptable”. Evolution just simply doesn’t work that way, and frankly, neither does human nature.

A lot of the dudes on message boards who claim to have it, seem to be talking out of their asses.

It’s the latest “in vogue” disorder, basically. A few years ago it was OCD, before that it was ADHD. All of which don’t get taken seriously by the public because of idiots who don’t know what the conditions are actually like. Though OCD has less of those problems than Asperger’s or ADHD, on account of even the ridiculous portrayals tend to show it being kind of a bitch (Monk, anyone?).

They seem to be adding a lot of disorders like shopping addiction, that really are just different versions of other, more straightforward diagnoses (compulsive or addictive disorders for instance).

It is true that some do need to be added or clarified with newer, more up to date information (neuroscience has come a long way!) – but they still, last I checked, were ignoring evidence for known conditions like synestheia… synes… crap, I can’t even spell it and spell check is no help. There’s a condition where the senses are sort of cross-wired, like you always associate apples with the color red or sounds have a color or a shape to them in your head. IIRC, they aren’t planning on including that in the next DSM, and they aren’t planning to include a recently-researched disorder where the senses all are oversensitive and out of whack (which is terrible, because without it being a “real” condition, nobody wants to fund the very necessary research into it, and it can be hell on kids that have it ). I also have yet to hear anything about whether fibromyalgia will be included, which is bothersome, since it seems to have psychological roots or correlations (fibro is pretty terrible; it’s basically constant pain for no damn reason, because of overactive nerves, and also it’s more common in women, especially older women who are depressed, so it’s taken forever for it to even be remotely considered a “real” condition since it’s hard to diagnose and some don’t even believe it happens and assume patients are, I dunno, making it up or something. But it definitely happens, even if there’s no obvious physical cause. Thing is, there is indeed no obvious physical cause, and antidepressant medications tend to alleviate it much more than painkillers, implying that it’s definitely a neurological condition and thus within the purview of the DSM).

Er, long story short, DSM seems to be trimming and adding in weird places, leaving a lot of holes in the next edition. I’m concerned about it for that reason. :\

Especially since the thing the DSM is used for is basically for medical billing coding nowadays. See, every disorder listed in it has a code associated with it; if the insurance company or your family doc needs to know what your condition is, your psychological professional will use those codes to tell them that, and all billing and all that is based on those codes.

As far as the medical industry and insurance industry are concerned, if it doesn’t have a DSM code, it’s not a condition.

This is why the thing actually matters.

Outside of actual forums for Aspies, I rarely see a person loudly and repeatedly claiming to have it, who show much sign of actually having it… I’ll be frank, I don’t disbelieve nightingale up there, because he or she just simply states they have it and don’t mind, which is very different from the whinging that a lot of other self-described “Aspies” do.

It is interesting though. Both from a neurological standpoint, and from the social standpoint… it is definitely true that people can be high-functioning enough that it is more “condition” than disorder. After all, “disorder” is generally defined as something that causes mental and emotional distress, and/or causes you to be a danger to yourself or others, and/or causes problems with attempts to live a normal life.

I sort of liken the higher-functioning Aspies to my bf; he has every sign of having ADHD… except that he CAN focus, like mad, in fact, even doing mental switching between multiple tasks (for instance, watching the news, holding a conversation, and playing WoW all at the same time). He’s even the only person I know capable of actually talking on the phone and driving at the same time. He’s like, practically superhuman in his ability to manage his attention. Clearly, though he can be occasionally irritating and has a bit of a constant need for sound, he’s not actually got any kind of “disorder”, because in fact, he functions better than NORMAL people do.

I actually kind of like the label that I think Aspies came up with, which is “neuro-atypical”. I think that’s the only way to describe folks like him, and like the Aspies who get by with little to no problem. They’re not typical, no, but they may well just be “differently-adapted” as it were.