I think you were smart to get it done. I would recommend anyone with the means, to find out, as much as possible, how their mind/brain works. Life is difficult. Knowing why you act/think in certain ways can help you navigate life to the best of your ability. Not everyone is brave enough to delve deep and accept themselves, both strengths and weaknesses. It takes even more to address them. You have done all of this, and continue to do so. We all should, neurotypical or not. I wouldn’t downplay it, or advise people not to follow this path, if then can. Improve yourself, improve the world.
I think that it's a good idea so long as that information doesn't become a dead weight around the individual's neck. If someone gets a diagnosis that could derail their lives later on, I can't say that it's a good idea. I don't think that is reflective on the diagnosis itself, more the social environment and how certain diagnoses are received, or considered.
Oh I agree with that, though. People are far more complicated than their often incorrect DSM label. I’m talking about in-depth investigation, not just so a label is given, and from many competent sources, but to improve oneself. Certainly there are stigmas attached with labels, and people need to be hyper critical with whom they place their trust (and information). Thanks for the caveat - I wasn’t as clear as I should have been.
Getting a diagnosis can be helpful if good science is actually being done on the relevant condition. From what I've read in your writings, Athena, it sounds like a little bit of good science is being done on psychopathy, but the weight of the poor science, social bias, and idiocy is not in that camp.
I've been having that experience in reading on autism too. I spent a couple years post-diagnosis reading, making a few contacts with researchers, etc. The only helpful - and I'd say openminded - contacts have been pretty much been other autistic people, especially women for the issues that differ somewhat based upon sex.
Autism doesn't generally have the "serial killer" connotation in the public mind, though there is a bit of that in the media at least, and some folks lump everything "abnormal" together anyway. There is a strong "only 8-year-old white boys have it" assumption that's connected to a 30-year-old chicken-and-egg problem with scientists assuming false stuff and using terribly selected populations that confirm their bad theories. Plus probably some ego in some of the most "expert" scientists that won't let them repudiate their former theories. So young scientists keep quoting it and studying it. There is tons of money involved in forcing young autistics to act more "normal" so their parents feel less guilt, e.g. forcing camouflaging onto autistic kids without knowing anything about the harm that unacknowledged camouflaging can do. (Yes I am not against having the tools, just forcing people to use them nonstop in some contexts with no support etc. etc., and autistics have very different emotional setups from both NTs and psychopaths on average I think.)
I have come to find this nauseating and am sort of avoiding it all now! Hoping to have the mental energy to get back to it more.
Some things I found bizarre... The researchers I have met at some local autism research symposia etc. didn't want to hear from actually autistic people about our experiences; I think I might have gotten lumped into some sort of "activist troublemaker" category in their brains. Or something totally different. But they didn't want to read or learn about autistic "camouflaging", which has some similarities (I think) to what Athena learned to do with "masking".
For autistics, "camouflaging" can be very emotionally stressful and likely connect with brain responses similar to ptsd. I can dig up some of the articles about that if anyone is interested... since many kids have experiences consistent with what is though to lead to ptsd anyway, it's hard to tease all this apart... but many autistics have such ramped-up sensory input without parents/families/schools/therapists/etc. understanding or "believing" this, that autistics can have many additional avenues to get experiences like that. Numerous autistics I've spoken to concur, I cannot prove anything about this of course and we don't have scientific consensus on our side.
The autism "experts" seem to mostly be concerned with how "normal" we act; so our autism is considered "milder" if we camouflage better, and the standard for ways to help us is always the NT norm no matter how useless it may be... we are not considered experts on ourselves because our perspectives are defective, I guess? Lots of groups have been in that position in the past though.
I would not have said any of this 10 years ago before knowing much of anything about autism (I only researched it post-diagnosis), but I did know that a lot of things weren't helping my stress levels yet some things did. Now I have contacts who can help with ideas on that.
But... how to move the monstrous leviathan blob of terrible science on "neurodivergent" conditions... Youch.
I have noticed this mentality that I have described in psychopathy, and you describe in autism in other places as well. In the medical field I have seen it, in other neuro-functioning I have seen it, and it is unfortunately obvious that there is a divide between the "experts", and the people that actually are the things that the "experts" consider themselves "experts" in.
Another one that I have seen in both psychopathy and autism is the study construction. They assume certain things that become built into the studies, but they are fundamentally wrong for how that neurotype even experiences the world. The mistake wouldn't be there had they consulted one person that had whatever it was that they are studying, but they don't. They construct the study based on the neurotypical understanding, draw their conclusions, and trumpet them to the world.
When people with whatever it is, psychopathy, autism, or something else, they are silenced. It's very perplexing behavior. Who exactly are they studying these things for? Certainly not the people with those things, because if they were, they would ask questions, include them in the study construction, take constructive criticism, etc.
It seems a great deal of research, be it neurological, psychological, or medical, is done for the reputation of the researchers, not the condition that they propose to be "experts" in.
I agree, the reputation is a huge piece for a lot of them. Unfortunately some of those may also be amongst the best at accumulating power in academia. Sometimes that power is from actual excellence but sometimes it's not so much. Imo.
I've gotten the impression that some of the autism research is done to try to protect NTs from autistics; one researcher's talk I attended included tons about the awful effect a male autistic had on women around him. I guess he didn't understand physical boundaries too well. Then, there are the parents of autistic kids... many researchers refer to lots of people as "stakeholders" in their research projects. As an autistic person, I was just one of numerous stakeholder categories -- and the parents of the kids were possibly higher priority (my feeling, no backup for that.) But the parents were more verbally emotive, seemed to get better responses from the researchers (I'm just talking about a small number I met), and are apparently quite organized at this point. Plus many parents tell autistic adults that the adults are "not like their kid" and should not try to speak for all autistics. Well yeah sure, but the parents don't hold themselves to that. Some parents of autistic kids refer to themselves as "autism parents" and are in "autism communities". Autistics are apparently often unwelcome??? There are numerous articles about this... here's one...
There is lots of research on how and why humans (NT humans?) "dehumanize" other humans. It's really common and correlated with all that group/tribe stuff at times. I would guess that a lot of the researchers mentioned, have some dehumanization of neurodivergent folks going on. People do in fact have lots going on our brains of which we're unaware (being discussed in another thread here). An early autism researcher, a founder in the field, seems to have not considered non-camouflaging autistics as fully human...
So my cynical short answer might be, the research is done for the benefit of full humans. Present company not included.
I know just what you mean. There are people that are overtly interested in separating psychopaths from neurotypicals in research. There is research geared at "identifying psychopaths without their knowledge", because psychopaths are of course awful individuals.
I have found that some people in neuroscience and in psychology are very interested in what I write, and others are vitriolic to the point of hysteria. It's totally bizarre to watch. I can't imagine having such a knee jerk reaction to something while claiming to want to have a better understanding of it.
Responding to "An early autism researcher, a founder in the field, seems to have not considered non-camouflaging autistics as fully human..."
In my observation as a non-American, the USA seems to be deeply divided into numerous tribal ingroup/outgroup clusters where people only consider other ingroup members as human. Of course, this isn't exclusive to the USA; however, it seems particularly strongly expressed to me as an outsider, strikingly so.
Only members of the ingroup seem to be regarded as human, meaning - with consideration of their agency, well-being, and dignity.
Also, because of the overlapping nature of these ingroup-outgroup systems, and because belonging to any of a number of outgroups seems to disqualify people from being human, it follows that to most Americans, most other Americans are not human.
Examples of such dichotomies: religious/atheist; liberal/conservative (roughly overlapping with Democrat/Republican); NT/non-NT; white/non-white; older/younger generations; poor/rich; more recently: vax/anti-vax.
I'm sure there are many others, these are just off the top of my head.
edit: for a number of these dichotomies, the separation and enmity are so extreme as to warrant indifference or even glee from the suffering and death of outgroup members (eg. white/non-white, liberal/conservative, and vax/anti-vax ).
Yes, and it is these things, this way of looking at other people, that usher in some truly terrible events, but no one wants to hear it. They are very comfortable in their tribalistic way of thinking.
"vax/anti-vax" Well, you see, vaccines *cause* autism (which is bad, obviously). And probably they cause psychopathy too, because why not.
SARCASM, definitely sarcasm. American (and NT) here, and it's gotten to the point over the past few years where different tribes literally believe alternate realities. It's frustrating.
Although I would say it's more of a viewing the outsiders as "misguided" (if they're a friend/family member) or "corrupt" (if they're anybody else) rather than "not human" per se. Americans as a whole find it, uh, distasteful to consider others "not human." It's more subtle. I would say agency is revered, to the point that outsiders are less "not human" and more "bad human," and it's believed to be based on their choices. That becomes the excuse for dismissing well-being and dignity. They chose it.
I feel like glee at suffering must be part of a two-sided NT coin, because it's tied up in a sense of bond and belonging with one group... through anger at another group. There's lots of anger all around. (And the media and Internet thrive from it.) Indifference and glee are fueled by that anger.
There are some, on the other hand, who would like to just see ourselves as Americans. I... I just don't like suffering. Or death. C-can't we all just get along?
I don't think people realize they are not considering outgroup members as human, but their actions and attitudes kind of point in that direction. If one's fundamental human rights are disregarded, is this person a human being? The Chinese tennis player Peng Shuai who was sexually abused by a party official said that she didn't even feel human afterwards. This is what that means.
The most glaring examples I've seen are in the treatment of people of color, but it seems to cover all sorts of other dynamics as well.
It is, of course, much more subtle usually. It's more of a gradient than a strict binary.
About righteous anger - yes, it is part of the tribal instincts and, as Athena said, addictive.
Is it really only tribalism and othering that causes the glee though? Or is it sometimes that the outsiders may be causing real harm, real consequences, and that demands justice, if only in ones private thoughts.
I would think that there is some basis for the evolution of glee in the suffering of others that are deemed to be a threat. Likely it stems from the eradication of a threat, but that's only my guess.
Certainly there can be harm caused by people in any category. Sometimes there are different perspectives on the "harm" though, especially where it happened as part of a longstanding tit-for-tat chain of events between different groups. We're good at justifying the harm we do inadvertently to others.
I drive my car or take a bus, I need to for my work, etc. Don't I have a right to live?
But I'm pretty definitely contributing to the deaths of future people by doing so (higher CO2 is leading to crop failures, floods of inhabited areas, direct heat deaths too) -- and even if I'm using the car to save current climate refugees, lots of humans worldwide would be justified in saying I'm causing real harm. Jeez future people are going to hate us as they fry... But what else can we do, as individuals, sometimes? This all gets so complicated.
I'm not against the need for justice in all cases though!!!
Non-American here. Where I am, society is very insular and so there is and always has been a lot of derision and cruelty towards all sorts perceived as outsiders, but divisions are getting worse and the hatred is escalating. A death spiral. Makes me want to jump ship.
Excellent and terrifying point... Luckily a lot of folks don't act on these thoughts most of the time; it can be a stress reliever to say things about "those people" sometimes for some. I'd like to think they wouldn't act on the thoughts. There seem to have been recent incidents where people do go over lines though; having media and leaders that encourage that is so dangerous. But profitable? $$$$
The issue isn't acting, it is inaction. It is through passive inaction that horrific things happen. It is one of the steps on the slippery slope of evil which proceeds horror:
Mindlessly taking the first small step
Dehumanization of others
De-individuation of others
Diffusion of personal responsibility
Blind obedience to authority
Uncritical conformity to group norms
Passive tolerance of evil through inaction, or indifference.
Exhibit A: National Socialist Germany. This is exactly what they were teaching in school and on TV about what happened to them as a nation (which happens to be a confederation of various German tribes). Note that Totalitarianism combined with a desire for order and conformity strongly selects for these behaviors.
Note: I lived and went to high school in West Germany during the Raegan years.
Profitable indeed, politically and financially. The unfortunate reality of social media and the internet is that the most effective strategy is provoking the strongest possible emotional response in order to go viral. The two most powerful emotions are awe and anger, and anger is much easier to generate. Hate is easily stoked and effective in deflecting people's attention from real problems.
I'm still struggling to understand this phenomenon because to me outrage entertainment is upsetting, a dumbing down, a frightening intellectual chaos. I think decades of exploitative, lowest common denominator TV paved the way for those who like to jeer along.
"Another one that I have seen in both psychopathy and autism is the study construction. They assume certain things that become built into the studies, but they are fundamentally wrong for how that neurotype even experiences the world. The mistake wouldn't be there had they consulted one person that had whatever it was that they are studying, but they don't. They construct the study based on the neurotypical understanding, draw their conclusions, and trumpet them to the world."
Yes, when "science" ignores important info, that's a huge problem. And I agree that a person's experience of themselves is both important and relevant to scientific understanding. Too many scientists get caught up in ego trips and not being open to challenges to their ideas. The light Athena sheds on what's wrong with the "official" opinions about psychopathy is enlightening on these grounds. Especially when she grounds it in new, evidence-based research. I hear you on saying that autism has the same problem issues.
I agree, and really that amazes me. There are plenty of places that this is an issue, and through researching psychopathy I learned so much about how studies are done. It's am absolute mess.
Yet sometimes research has some good effects, and the norms among the scientists involved can make a huge difference. In the UK, there is much more of a norm among the autism researchers in a few institutions to include adult autistics as collaborators in research design and such. There is a good spot in the western U.S. too, in Portland OR. One of my favorite researchers...
I'd think most researchers would read this stuff, maybe read a couple of the zillions of blogs by autistics, etc. Pretty much nope. It also seems obvious to me that autistics must spend most of their lives as... ADULTS. (gasp.) Someone had the idea that "helping" autistics as kids is the best or maybe only way to change anything, so no need to talk to actual autistic adults. We do a lot more with late-maturing brain areas, I think, than some NTs, so I think they are very very wrong... but whatever.
I don't know how they hope to help the kids without consulting the adults who were kids once. It encouraging that you say the UK is including the adults.
This is a good explanation of the problems where the scientists just d'on't want to know' as it complicated their research. Its the same with mental illnesses and at least used to be with eating disorders (all the complexity reduced to either a cry for attention or wanting to look fashionable).
I did not know that there was such emphasis on forcing autistic kids to 'do normal or that parents felt so much guilt. I don't think people realise how psychically exhausting camouflaging can be, they think it must feel just, because it's the 'normal' way to act. But it has a utility and a cost.
I had to laugh at the 'activist troublemaker confronts monstrous leviathan blob' image! Keep troublemaking....
As you say, interesting. Thank you for sharing this; it was fascinating.
Looking at your experience here from the outside, it seems to me the cost-benefit is definitely in your favor because, if nothing else, it gives you a slew of information about how and why you are different from NT's -- which is something that puzzled the bejesus out of you for pretty much your whole life. If I were in your shoes, I would definitely be glad of knowing that.
Interesting too, that Dr Joe thought during your first session(s) with him that there might be "something bigger" going on. Did he ever elaborate on what specifically gave him that impression?
Interesting too that you were such an observer of micro-expressions from an early age. I've read a bunch of Ekman's work on micro-expressions, and am wondering if either you learned to mimic them and/or if you have a different set of micro-expressions: ie, a hidden absence of feeling tends to leak out, or annoyance that you try to hide leaks out (leaks out around a mask that you are presenting as "I'm not annoyed"). Especially since micro-expressions have essentially two causes: first when people are trying to hide something they truly feel, second when people are unaware of a subconscious feeling and that leaks out.
I think it had to do with whatever impression I made on him when I was younger. At the time of the first evaluation I do recall my parents being perplexed with how nothing bothered me. No matter what it was, it barely registered with me as important. If there was a problem that I had to deal with, I would. However, there was no upset from it. Not a normal teenage girl in their minds. I never had mood swings, I never was upset by ending of relationships, friends being angry with me. When there was significant family upset, I just rolled with it without there being an emotional response.
I theorize that the reason that he thought something else was going on was because of that recall of me, as it was part of the original evaluation, and at the beginning of this one. Especially when it came to my legal issues. My lack of concern or worry about them probably led him to think that there was a reason that I didn't care. I also think that he might have been looking for some kind of disassociation from those things in me at first, but came to the conclusion that I wasn't disassociated from them, I genuinely wasn't perturbed by them, which seems to be abnormal.
I know how I react to things is unusual, and I suppose in a clinical setting, it is even more so.
I have learned to mimic microexpressions, but here is an interesting tidbit. Because my emotions are quite shallow, my facial response to them is as well. Mask off is definitely a "flat affect", and even when I find something funny, or am inclined to smile mask off, I have noticed that I don't actually noticeably smile. I think that I do, but when seen in a mirror, I don't. The mechanism of smiling for me when I don't have a mask is so minute in appearance, I have to intentionally exaggerate it. It seems my microexpressions are on a lower registry than most.
What makes this even more interesting is when I was dealing with another psychotherapist on Quora, they had a little test for me. Thee wanted to see if I could tell which CEOs out of a group of six older men I believe, were high in psychopathic traits. I nailed all of them, and she wanted to know how. It was the lack of deep wrinkles that tipped me off. I look much younger than I am, and I think that flat affect, and lower degrees of microexpressions have partially to do with that.
Yes, physical and mental pain, and in many ways, not just the extra facial expressiveness causing wrinkles. Hence the expressions about someone looking like they've had a hard life, or that a bad time has 'aged one ten years'. The look in the eyes can change permanenently and acquire an 'oh the things I've seen' hauntedness rather than a lively freshness. The repeated stress basically poisons the body and ruins skin health and interferes with proper regeneration, as any factor of poor health can do like smoking, long term insomnia etc. And facial expressions can become basically permanent, and lines aside, ones resting face is no longer neutral even when relaxed.
My own face had a forehead deeply crumpled in a look of anguish, heavily lined, even once things had long changed for the better in my life. There was no way to consciously relax it, and further crumpling accompanied every random facial expression. I'd see photos and think, that's not who I am anymore, nor something I want to be reminded of, it's extreme. Answer, botox. Fixed it brilliantly. 'Vanity' aside, an unexpected bonus of botox was that it actually makes me calmer by breaking the negative feedback loop- if you can't move the muscles that usually accompany stresses, the stress lessens. Nobody seemed to expect this with botox but it turned out to be a thing. (Apparently it applies in reverse if you botox freeze your happy expressions. And now it's a treatment for neuropathic headaches. Amazing.) So yeah, suffering can really make people look old before their time.
I have a cousin who is a clinical psychologist who thinks I am "interesting". I am quite sure that I do not want to be officially diagnosed nor even evaluated. Quite a bit of my life sounds like you though I spent time using various cultural things like religion to draw on for my masks
So I've spent much of my life running around rebelling against the social norms by not wearing a mask ultimately leading me into complete isolation I'm in my early thirties now just realizing how necessary a mask is yet I lose interest and just about everything I become interested in when it comes to having to deal with people and their emotions nothing seems to matter to me anymore or ever for that matter my dog is very important to me although she died today I wouldn't feel it tomorrow people don't understand this you don't understand me I don't understand me I think I'm cool I'm very talented extremely intelligent like a human lie detector but I don't like people and people don't like me my emotions I just not there and a mask I've never really wanted to wear it still don't I think the way that world is ran is absolutely ridiculous I think all decisions should be made intelligence over emotion whether it comes to poverty or publicity I think that neurotypicals are the reason this world is in such distress if we would did the band together to take over Control of the downward spiral this world has going on human race my survive but the way it looks it looks like it's going to implode I don't think we should have to wear masks I think that we should be accepted same as everyone else I don't know why we started to wear masks I've always known I was different as a child I knew I was different I've been in and out of mental institutions I survived off of disability income with no desire to make money when having to deal with people because of their disgusted reaction to the fact I have no reaction to their emotions I'm so talented and I deserve a chance but I'm not giving one because I refuse to wear mask so I sit here on whatever day today is posting a post on a website for whatever reason I don't think I'll ever get a brain scan I want one I know what I am I know the world has gotten psychopathy all wrong the word psychopath should be deleted from the English language cuz the description given when the words brought two light never give the reaction of a person with actual psychopathy is movies made about this I think we should have a lawsuit go on discrimination it's crazy were depicted as individuals that are evil when the only reason any of us go to the links a being evil it's because of the way the world treats us not wearing a mask it's exhausting
I know what you mean. Masking sucks, but neurotypicals make up the vast majority of the world, and they can be very murdery. I agree that most problems are indeed caused by neurotypicals, but I think that psychopaths would cause their own problems if we had greater numbers.
Emotion over logic makes no sense to me. It seems that it hampers the ability to lead a peaceful life. I can't imagine getting so worked up over some of the trivial things that people find world ending. I also find it amusing how often the problems that people cause for themselves are hoisted onto the shoulders of psychopaths like we have anything to do with it.
No argument that the way the world is run is ridiculous and it looks like it is doomed to implode, but I'd take some convincing that just removing all emotion from decisions would solve things, as psychopaths have their own motivations and can create their own problems. I'm with you that it would be nice if psychopathy were better understood and neurotypicals could accept the unmasked version as they are now starting to accept the previously unnerving quirks of other neurodivergent types. Well, Athena is contributing to that future, fingers crossed.
Interesting why it was expected to add your attitude to the test in the answer to the question about the test itself, not about how the test made you feel.
As for emotive words, I have asked several neurotypical people and all of them said that they had no reaction to emotive words. It was very weird to me why I was supposed to have it and so it was to them. Though it could be that they had it, it was too little to be noticed and would only show up on the scans.
Great to have this personal story. My response has a parallel to your clinician fishing for emotive language in your descriptions of the diagnostic process. When you refer to times you knew you didn't think or react like other people, I'm thinking, yes? Examples please? That time when this happened..., and that other incident when..., and after he said that, I thought.... etc etc. These details are not necessary to make your point, and as you have said before they have no emotional weight for you, but I am here wanting those specifics because they are so much a part of neurotypicals' anecdotes, even though in your case they would be what you thought rather than felt.
I will see if I can compile a list of examples. It may take some time, as I don't tend to remember things easily. It takes there being something that brings forth that memory for me to know it's there.
For myself I am wondering what diagnosis would be suitable (schizoid, autist, psychopathy linked etc.), but there is probably zero benefit in actually pursuing one. My psychology though, is completely hidden because it has been massively complicated by a physical condition that will have had unpredictable effects on brain chemistry. That used to be very bad and cause constant physiological fight or flight, as well as a host of other physical problems, but has improved now with technology.
I was going to make a joke about emotional thinking but I will not do that because it makes it look like I'm trying to be a psychopath!
I estimate that it is less likely than a diagnosis of schizoid. But this is not certain. I will avoid all diagnosis as much as possible. When I have seen counsellors connected to the medical system here in the UK, I have reflexively lied to them - the mask became like a "4D chess" mask or something.
It's very strange because, as I said my medical condition gave me a purely physiological stress response. Which massively confused and changed my personality. Now I am left wondering how much of my personality is not what I thought it was, and parts of it feel to definitely have not been correct. This will take several years to work out most likely.
However, if really, like... really. The true story for me is psychopath or some variation thereof. Then your writing has helped a great deal. Even if not, your general reflection on NT's and such. Understanding ourselves thereby using the best tools, is very practically important in life. I would hate to not have a correct label. Our writing style and humour are very similar.
I really think it is a very good technique to be able to cry at the drop of a hat for a young woman. I would hate to have a situation that is worse than it needs to be because a young woman will not engage in that manipulation.
As for your theory about answering honestly in tests, it’s interesting. I had to take the same test many times once and it only made me answer at random at the end, not be honest, because it requires concentration as well, I think.
Were you honest during the diagnostic process? How valid do you think these tests are?
I was honest, yes. Otherwise, it would have been a waste of my time and money. I was doing the evaluations because I was curious. Lying would have been counterproductive.
Obviously the tests were accurate as my brain scans demonstrated exactly the same thing.
Ah okay I just found another post about being diagnosed from you on Quora and you wrote there that you were mask on during the diagnostic process. I think I got confused what exactly you meant.
Thank you for writing about this experience. I find it valuable to me as I have my diagnostic clarification testing coming early April. I have been looking and collecting information as to what I could expect before I have my getting to know introductions. It's been surprisingly difficult to find information from someone who has actually had the testing done.
Also, I appreciate your answers on Quora as well, which is where I found the link to your writings.
I think you were smart to get it done. I would recommend anyone with the means, to find out, as much as possible, how their mind/brain works. Life is difficult. Knowing why you act/think in certain ways can help you navigate life to the best of your ability. Not everyone is brave enough to delve deep and accept themselves, both strengths and weaknesses. It takes even more to address them. You have done all of this, and continue to do so. We all should, neurotypical or not. I wouldn’t downplay it, or advise people not to follow this path, if then can. Improve yourself, improve the world.
I think that it's a good idea so long as that information doesn't become a dead weight around the individual's neck. If someone gets a diagnosis that could derail their lives later on, I can't say that it's a good idea. I don't think that is reflective on the diagnosis itself, more the social environment and how certain diagnoses are received, or considered.
Oh I agree with that, though. People are far more complicated than their often incorrect DSM label. I’m talking about in-depth investigation, not just so a label is given, and from many competent sources, but to improve oneself. Certainly there are stigmas attached with labels, and people need to be hyper critical with whom they place their trust (and information). Thanks for the caveat - I wasn’t as clear as I should have been.
Yeah, of it had been me I'd have wanted to know, but wouldn't want the file sitting somewhere.
Exactly, but they aren't kind enough to burn the evidence for you.
This reply got really long! Oops.
Getting a diagnosis can be helpful if good science is actually being done on the relevant condition. From what I've read in your writings, Athena, it sounds like a little bit of good science is being done on psychopathy, but the weight of the poor science, social bias, and idiocy is not in that camp.
I've been having that experience in reading on autism too. I spent a couple years post-diagnosis reading, making a few contacts with researchers, etc. The only helpful - and I'd say openminded - contacts have been pretty much been other autistic people, especially women for the issues that differ somewhat based upon sex.
Autism doesn't generally have the "serial killer" connotation in the public mind, though there is a bit of that in the media at least, and some folks lump everything "abnormal" together anyway. There is a strong "only 8-year-old white boys have it" assumption that's connected to a 30-year-old chicken-and-egg problem with scientists assuming false stuff and using terribly selected populations that confirm their bad theories. Plus probably some ego in some of the most "expert" scientists that won't let them repudiate their former theories. So young scientists keep quoting it and studying it. There is tons of money involved in forcing young autistics to act more "normal" so their parents feel less guilt, e.g. forcing camouflaging onto autistic kids without knowing anything about the harm that unacknowledged camouflaging can do. (Yes I am not against having the tools, just forcing people to use them nonstop in some contexts with no support etc. etc., and autistics have very different emotional setups from both NTs and psychopaths on average I think.)
I have come to find this nauseating and am sort of avoiding it all now! Hoping to have the mental energy to get back to it more.
Some things I found bizarre... The researchers I have met at some local autism research symposia etc. didn't want to hear from actually autistic people about our experiences; I think I might have gotten lumped into some sort of "activist troublemaker" category in their brains. Or something totally different. But they didn't want to read or learn about autistic "camouflaging", which has some similarities (I think) to what Athena learned to do with "masking".
For autistics, "camouflaging" can be very emotionally stressful and likely connect with brain responses similar to ptsd. I can dig up some of the articles about that if anyone is interested... since many kids have experiences consistent with what is though to lead to ptsd anyway, it's hard to tease all this apart... but many autistics have such ramped-up sensory input without parents/families/schools/therapists/etc. understanding or "believing" this, that autistics can have many additional avenues to get experiences like that. Numerous autistics I've spoken to concur, I cannot prove anything about this of course and we don't have scientific consensus on our side.
The autism "experts" seem to mostly be concerned with how "normal" we act; so our autism is considered "milder" if we camouflage better, and the standard for ways to help us is always the NT norm no matter how useless it may be... we are not considered experts on ourselves because our perspectives are defective, I guess? Lots of groups have been in that position in the past though.
I would not have said any of this 10 years ago before knowing much of anything about autism (I only researched it post-diagnosis), but I did know that a lot of things weren't helping my stress levels yet some things did. Now I have contacts who can help with ideas on that.
But... how to move the monstrous leviathan blob of terrible science on "neurodivergent" conditions... Youch.
I have noticed this mentality that I have described in psychopathy, and you describe in autism in other places as well. In the medical field I have seen it, in other neuro-functioning I have seen it, and it is unfortunately obvious that there is a divide between the "experts", and the people that actually are the things that the "experts" consider themselves "experts" in.
Another one that I have seen in both psychopathy and autism is the study construction. They assume certain things that become built into the studies, but they are fundamentally wrong for how that neurotype even experiences the world. The mistake wouldn't be there had they consulted one person that had whatever it was that they are studying, but they don't. They construct the study based on the neurotypical understanding, draw their conclusions, and trumpet them to the world.
When people with whatever it is, psychopathy, autism, or something else, they are silenced. It's very perplexing behavior. Who exactly are they studying these things for? Certainly not the people with those things, because if they were, they would ask questions, include them in the study construction, take constructive criticism, etc.
It seems a great deal of research, be it neurological, psychological, or medical, is done for the reputation of the researchers, not the condition that they propose to be "experts" in.
I agree, the reputation is a huge piece for a lot of them. Unfortunately some of those may also be amongst the best at accumulating power in academia. Sometimes that power is from actual excellence but sometimes it's not so much. Imo.
I've gotten the impression that some of the autism research is done to try to protect NTs from autistics; one researcher's talk I attended included tons about the awful effect a male autistic had on women around him. I guess he didn't understand physical boundaries too well. Then, there are the parents of autistic kids... many researchers refer to lots of people as "stakeholders" in their research projects. As an autistic person, I was just one of numerous stakeholder categories -- and the parents of the kids were possibly higher priority (my feeling, no backup for that.) But the parents were more verbally emotive, seemed to get better responses from the researchers (I'm just talking about a small number I met), and are apparently quite organized at this point. Plus many parents tell autistic adults that the adults are "not like their kid" and should not try to speak for all autistics. Well yeah sure, but the parents don't hold themselves to that. Some parents of autistic kids refer to themselves as "autism parents" and are in "autism communities". Autistics are apparently often unwelcome??? There are numerous articles about this... here's one...
https://neuroclastic.com/the-difference-between-the-autism-community-and-the-autistic-community/
There is lots of research on how and why humans (NT humans?) "dehumanize" other humans. It's really common and correlated with all that group/tribe stuff at times. I would guess that a lot of the researchers mentioned, have some dehumanization of neurodivergent folks going on. People do in fact have lots going on our brains of which we're unaware (being discussed in another thread here). An early autism researcher, a founder in the field, seems to have not considered non-camouflaging autistics as fully human...
So my cynical short answer might be, the research is done for the benefit of full humans. Present company not included.
I know just what you mean. There are people that are overtly interested in separating psychopaths from neurotypicals in research. There is research geared at "identifying psychopaths without their knowledge", because psychopaths are of course awful individuals.
I have found that some people in neuroscience and in psychology are very interested in what I write, and others are vitriolic to the point of hysteria. It's totally bizarre to watch. I can't imagine having such a knee jerk reaction to something while claiming to want to have a better understanding of it.
Responding to "An early autism researcher, a founder in the field, seems to have not considered non-camouflaging autistics as fully human..."
In my observation as a non-American, the USA seems to be deeply divided into numerous tribal ingroup/outgroup clusters where people only consider other ingroup members as human. Of course, this isn't exclusive to the USA; however, it seems particularly strongly expressed to me as an outsider, strikingly so.
Only members of the ingroup seem to be regarded as human, meaning - with consideration of their agency, well-being, and dignity.
Also, because of the overlapping nature of these ingroup-outgroup systems, and because belonging to any of a number of outgroups seems to disqualify people from being human, it follows that to most Americans, most other Americans are not human.
Examples of such dichotomies: religious/atheist; liberal/conservative (roughly overlapping with Democrat/Republican); NT/non-NT; white/non-white; older/younger generations; poor/rich; more recently: vax/anti-vax.
I'm sure there are many others, these are just off the top of my head.
edit: for a number of these dichotomies, the separation and enmity are so extreme as to warrant indifference or even glee from the suffering and death of outgroup members (eg. white/non-white, liberal/conservative, and vax/anti-vax ).
Yes, and it is these things, this way of looking at other people, that usher in some truly terrible events, but no one wants to hear it. They are very comfortable in their tribalistic way of thinking.
People don't think they need the lessons of history, they think everything they need to assess things is already in their head.
Indeed true.
"vax/anti-vax" Well, you see, vaccines *cause* autism (which is bad, obviously). And probably they cause psychopathy too, because why not.
SARCASM, definitely sarcasm. American (and NT) here, and it's gotten to the point over the past few years where different tribes literally believe alternate realities. It's frustrating.
Although I would say it's more of a viewing the outsiders as "misguided" (if they're a friend/family member) or "corrupt" (if they're anybody else) rather than "not human" per se. Americans as a whole find it, uh, distasteful to consider others "not human." It's more subtle. I would say agency is revered, to the point that outsiders are less "not human" and more "bad human," and it's believed to be based on their choices. That becomes the excuse for dismissing well-being and dignity. They chose it.
I feel like glee at suffering must be part of a two-sided NT coin, because it's tied up in a sense of bond and belonging with one group... through anger at another group. There's lots of anger all around. (And the media and Internet thrive from it.) Indifference and glee are fueled by that anger.
There are some, on the other hand, who would like to just see ourselves as Americans. I... I just don't like suffering. Or death. C-can't we all just get along?
That would be fantastic. Hopefully people will remember that their neighbors are just as human as they are, and vice versa.
I don't think people realize they are not considering outgroup members as human, but their actions and attitudes kind of point in that direction. If one's fundamental human rights are disregarded, is this person a human being? The Chinese tennis player Peng Shuai who was sexually abused by a party official said that she didn't even feel human afterwards. This is what that means.
The most glaring examples I've seen are in the treatment of people of color, but it seems to cover all sorts of other dynamics as well.
It is, of course, much more subtle usually. It's more of a gradient than a strict binary.
About righteous anger - yes, it is part of the tribal instincts and, as Athena said, addictive.
Quite so, and very intoxicating.
Is it really only tribalism and othering that causes the glee though? Or is it sometimes that the outsiders may be causing real harm, real consequences, and that demands justice, if only in ones private thoughts.
I would think that there is some basis for the evolution of glee in the suffering of others that are deemed to be a threat. Likely it stems from the eradication of a threat, but that's only my guess.
Certainly there can be harm caused by people in any category. Sometimes there are different perspectives on the "harm" though, especially where it happened as part of a longstanding tit-for-tat chain of events between different groups. We're good at justifying the harm we do inadvertently to others.
I drive my car or take a bus, I need to for my work, etc. Don't I have a right to live?
But I'm pretty definitely contributing to the deaths of future people by doing so (higher CO2 is leading to crop failures, floods of inhabited areas, direct heat deaths too) -- and even if I'm using the car to save current climate refugees, lots of humans worldwide would be justified in saying I'm causing real harm. Jeez future people are going to hate us as they fry... But what else can we do, as individuals, sometimes? This all gets so complicated.
I'm not against the need for justice in all cases though!!!
Non-American here. Where I am, society is very insular and so there is and always has been a lot of derision and cruelty towards all sorts perceived as outsiders, but divisions are getting worse and the hatred is escalating. A death spiral. Makes me want to jump ship.
I can completely understand that
Excellent and terrifying point... Luckily a lot of folks don't act on these thoughts most of the time; it can be a stress reliever to say things about "those people" sometimes for some. I'd like to think they wouldn't act on the thoughts. There seem to have been recent incidents where people do go over lines though; having media and leaders that encourage that is so dangerous. But profitable? $$$$
The issue isn't acting, it is inaction. It is through passive inaction that horrific things happen. It is one of the steps on the slippery slope of evil which proceeds horror:
Mindlessly taking the first small step
Dehumanization of others
De-individuation of others
Diffusion of personal responsibility
Blind obedience to authority
Uncritical conformity to group norms
Passive tolerance of evil through inaction, or indifference.
Boy are we in trouble then.
Exhibit A: National Socialist Germany. This is exactly what they were teaching in school and on TV about what happened to them as a nation (which happens to be a confederation of various German tribes). Note that Totalitarianism combined with a desire for order and conformity strongly selects for these behaviors.
Note: I lived and went to high school in West Germany during the Raegan years.
Profitable indeed, politically and financially. The unfortunate reality of social media and the internet is that the most effective strategy is provoking the strongest possible emotional response in order to go viral. The two most powerful emotions are awe and anger, and anger is much easier to generate. Hate is easily stoked and effective in deflecting people's attention from real problems.
Yes, and it is addictive to people. Highly addictive.
I'm still struggling to understand this phenomenon because to me outrage entertainment is upsetting, a dumbing down, a frightening intellectual chaos. I think decades of exploitative, lowest common denominator TV paved the way for those who like to jeer along.
Thanks for the link, I see now that this is a crucial distinction.
"Another one that I have seen in both psychopathy and autism is the study construction. They assume certain things that become built into the studies, but they are fundamentally wrong for how that neurotype even experiences the world. The mistake wouldn't be there had they consulted one person that had whatever it was that they are studying, but they don't. They construct the study based on the neurotypical understanding, draw their conclusions, and trumpet them to the world."
100 times yes.
Yes, when "science" ignores important info, that's a huge problem. And I agree that a person's experience of themselves is both important and relevant to scientific understanding. Too many scientists get caught up in ego trips and not being open to challenges to their ideas. The light Athena sheds on what's wrong with the "official" opinions about psychopathy is enlightening on these grounds. Especially when she grounds it in new, evidence-based research. I hear you on saying that autism has the same problem issues.
I agree, and really that amazes me. There are plenty of places that this is an issue, and through researching psychopathy I learned so much about how studies are done. It's am absolute mess.
Yet sometimes research has some good effects, and the norms among the scientists involved can make a huge difference. In the UK, there is much more of a norm among the autism researchers in a few institutions to include adult autistics as collaborators in research design and such. There is a good spot in the western U.S. too, in Portland OR. One of my favorite researchers...
https://www.pdx.edu/profile/christina-nicolaidis
I'd think most researchers would read this stuff, maybe read a couple of the zillions of blogs by autistics, etc. Pretty much nope. It also seems obvious to me that autistics must spend most of their lives as... ADULTS. (gasp.) Someone had the idea that "helping" autistics as kids is the best or maybe only way to change anything, so no need to talk to actual autistic adults. We do a lot more with late-maturing brain areas, I think, than some NTs, so I think they are very very wrong... but whatever.
I agree. That seems like an exceptionally limited way of seeing things.
I don't know how they hope to help the kids without consulting the adults who were kids once. It encouraging that you say the UK is including the adults.
Not many laypeople know how studies are done or are able to see flaws in the methodology. Good on you.
This is a good explanation of the problems where the scientists just d'on't want to know' as it complicated their research. Its the same with mental illnesses and at least used to be with eating disorders (all the complexity reduced to either a cry for attention or wanting to look fashionable).
I did not know that there was such emphasis on forcing autistic kids to 'do normal or that parents felt so much guilt. I don't think people realise how psychically exhausting camouflaging can be, they think it must feel just, because it's the 'normal' way to act. But it has a utility and a cost.
I had to laugh at the 'activist troublemaker confronts monstrous leviathan blob' image! Keep troublemaking....
As you say, interesting. Thank you for sharing this; it was fascinating.
Looking at your experience here from the outside, it seems to me the cost-benefit is definitely in your favor because, if nothing else, it gives you a slew of information about how and why you are different from NT's -- which is something that puzzled the bejesus out of you for pretty much your whole life. If I were in your shoes, I would definitely be glad of knowing that.
Interesting too, that Dr Joe thought during your first session(s) with him that there might be "something bigger" going on. Did he ever elaborate on what specifically gave him that impression?
Interesting too that you were such an observer of micro-expressions from an early age. I've read a bunch of Ekman's work on micro-expressions, and am wondering if either you learned to mimic them and/or if you have a different set of micro-expressions: ie, a hidden absence of feeling tends to leak out, or annoyance that you try to hide leaks out (leaks out around a mask that you are presenting as "I'm not annoyed"). Especially since micro-expressions have essentially two causes: first when people are trying to hide something they truly feel, second when people are unaware of a subconscious feeling and that leaks out.
I think it had to do with whatever impression I made on him when I was younger. At the time of the first evaluation I do recall my parents being perplexed with how nothing bothered me. No matter what it was, it barely registered with me as important. If there was a problem that I had to deal with, I would. However, there was no upset from it. Not a normal teenage girl in their minds. I never had mood swings, I never was upset by ending of relationships, friends being angry with me. When there was significant family upset, I just rolled with it without there being an emotional response.
I theorize that the reason that he thought something else was going on was because of that recall of me, as it was part of the original evaluation, and at the beginning of this one. Especially when it came to my legal issues. My lack of concern or worry about them probably led him to think that there was a reason that I didn't care. I also think that he might have been looking for some kind of disassociation from those things in me at first, but came to the conclusion that I wasn't disassociated from them, I genuinely wasn't perturbed by them, which seems to be abnormal.
I know how I react to things is unusual, and I suppose in a clinical setting, it is even more so.
I have learned to mimic microexpressions, but here is an interesting tidbit. Because my emotions are quite shallow, my facial response to them is as well. Mask off is definitely a "flat affect", and even when I find something funny, or am inclined to smile mask off, I have noticed that I don't actually noticeably smile. I think that I do, but when seen in a mirror, I don't. The mechanism of smiling for me when I don't have a mask is so minute in appearance, I have to intentionally exaggerate it. It seems my microexpressions are on a lower registry than most.
What makes this even more interesting is when I was dealing with another psychotherapist on Quora, they had a little test for me. Thee wanted to see if I could tell which CEOs out of a group of six older men I believe, were high in psychopathic traits. I nailed all of them, and she wanted to know how. It was the lack of deep wrinkles that tipped me off. I look much younger than I am, and I think that flat affect, and lower degrees of microexpressions have partially to do with that.
That would certainly unnerve parents, especially as having known you since birth, they knew that you weren't just dissociating from being bothered.
Interesting thought about the wrinkles, as pain really changes ones face over time. For you we need the term nano expressions.
Pain does? Really that's so interesting. Makes sense now that I think about it.
Yes, physical and mental pain, and in many ways, not just the extra facial expressiveness causing wrinkles. Hence the expressions about someone looking like they've had a hard life, or that a bad time has 'aged one ten years'. The look in the eyes can change permanenently and acquire an 'oh the things I've seen' hauntedness rather than a lively freshness. The repeated stress basically poisons the body and ruins skin health and interferes with proper regeneration, as any factor of poor health can do like smoking, long term insomnia etc. And facial expressions can become basically permanent, and lines aside, ones resting face is no longer neutral even when relaxed.
My own face had a forehead deeply crumpled in a look of anguish, heavily lined, even once things had long changed for the better in my life. There was no way to consciously relax it, and further crumpling accompanied every random facial expression. I'd see photos and think, that's not who I am anymore, nor something I want to be reminded of, it's extreme. Answer, botox. Fixed it brilliantly. 'Vanity' aside, an unexpected bonus of botox was that it actually makes me calmer by breaking the negative feedback loop- if you can't move the muscles that usually accompany stresses, the stress lessens. Nobody seemed to expect this with botox but it turned out to be a thing. (Apparently it applies in reverse if you botox freeze your happy expressions. And now it's a treatment for neuropathic headaches. Amazing.) So yeah, suffering can really make people look old before their time.
That is super interesting
I have a cousin who is a clinical psychologist who thinks I am "interesting". I am quite sure that I do not want to be officially diagnosed nor even evaluated. Quite a bit of my life sounds like you though I spent time using various cultural things like religion to draw on for my masks
Religion certainly can be a good place to pick up mask aspects. I have done the same.
So I've spent much of my life running around rebelling against the social norms by not wearing a mask ultimately leading me into complete isolation I'm in my early thirties now just realizing how necessary a mask is yet I lose interest and just about everything I become interested in when it comes to having to deal with people and their emotions nothing seems to matter to me anymore or ever for that matter my dog is very important to me although she died today I wouldn't feel it tomorrow people don't understand this you don't understand me I don't understand me I think I'm cool I'm very talented extremely intelligent like a human lie detector but I don't like people and people don't like me my emotions I just not there and a mask I've never really wanted to wear it still don't I think the way that world is ran is absolutely ridiculous I think all decisions should be made intelligence over emotion whether it comes to poverty or publicity I think that neurotypicals are the reason this world is in such distress if we would did the band together to take over Control of the downward spiral this world has going on human race my survive but the way it looks it looks like it's going to implode I don't think we should have to wear masks I think that we should be accepted same as everyone else I don't know why we started to wear masks I've always known I was different as a child I knew I was different I've been in and out of mental institutions I survived off of disability income with no desire to make money when having to deal with people because of their disgusted reaction to the fact I have no reaction to their emotions I'm so talented and I deserve a chance but I'm not giving one because I refuse to wear mask so I sit here on whatever day today is posting a post on a website for whatever reason I don't think I'll ever get a brain scan I want one I know what I am I know the world has gotten psychopathy all wrong the word psychopath should be deleted from the English language cuz the description given when the words brought two light never give the reaction of a person with actual psychopathy is movies made about this I think we should have a lawsuit go on discrimination it's crazy were depicted as individuals that are evil when the only reason any of us go to the links a being evil it's because of the way the world treats us not wearing a mask it's exhausting
I know what you mean. Masking sucks, but neurotypicals make up the vast majority of the world, and they can be very murdery. I agree that most problems are indeed caused by neurotypicals, but I think that psychopaths would cause their own problems if we had greater numbers.
Emotion over logic makes no sense to me. It seems that it hampers the ability to lead a peaceful life. I can't imagine getting so worked up over some of the trivial things that people find world ending. I also find it amusing how often the problems that people cause for themselves are hoisted onto the shoulders of psychopaths like we have anything to do with it.
No argument that the way the world is run is ridiculous and it looks like it is doomed to implode, but I'd take some convincing that just removing all emotion from decisions would solve things, as psychopaths have their own motivations and can create their own problems. I'm with you that it would be nice if psychopathy were better understood and neurotypicals could accept the unmasked version as they are now starting to accept the previously unnerving quirks of other neurodivergent types. Well, Athena is contributing to that future, fingers crossed.
We shall see
Interesting why it was expected to add your attitude to the test in the answer to the question about the test itself, not about how the test made you feel.
As for emotive words, I have asked several neurotypical people and all of them said that they had no reaction to emotive words. It was very weird to me why I was supposed to have it and so it was to them. Though it could be that they had it, it was too little to be noticed and would only show up on the scans.
It is interesting. Apparently people have reactions that they are completely unaware of.
Probably the degree of reaction exists on a spectrum, like so many things.
If not, just throw an example in here and there if it's relevant, I'm sure I'm not alone in being interested.
I will keep it in mind while I write
Great to have this personal story. My response has a parallel to your clinician fishing for emotive language in your descriptions of the diagnostic process. When you refer to times you knew you didn't think or react like other people, I'm thinking, yes? Examples please? That time when this happened..., and that other incident when..., and after he said that, I thought.... etc etc. These details are not necessary to make your point, and as you have said before they have no emotional weight for you, but I am here wanting those specifics because they are so much a part of neurotypicals' anecdotes, even though in your case they would be what you thought rather than felt.
I will see if I can compile a list of examples. It may take some time, as I don't tend to remember things easily. It takes there being something that brings forth that memory for me to know it's there.
That was a great post. Especially done with your first person perspective. I think many would find it valuable.
Thank you
This is very interesting.
For myself I am wondering what diagnosis would be suitable (schizoid, autist, psychopathy linked etc.), but there is probably zero benefit in actually pursuing one. My psychology though, is completely hidden because it has been massively complicated by a physical condition that will have had unpredictable effects on brain chemistry. That used to be very bad and cause constant physiological fight or flight, as well as a host of other physical problems, but has improved now with technology.
I was going to make a joke about emotional thinking but I will not do that because it makes it look like I'm trying to be a psychopath!
If the diagnosis ended up being psychopathy, it is not something that I would recommend pursuing, no.
I estimate that it is less likely than a diagnosis of schizoid. But this is not certain. I will avoid all diagnosis as much as possible. When I have seen counsellors connected to the medical system here in the UK, I have reflexively lied to them - the mask became like a "4D chess" mask or something.
It's very strange because, as I said my medical condition gave me a purely physiological stress response. Which massively confused and changed my personality. Now I am left wondering how much of my personality is not what I thought it was, and parts of it feel to definitely have not been correct. This will take several years to work out most likely.
However, if really, like... really. The true story for me is psychopath or some variation thereof. Then your writing has helped a great deal. Even if not, your general reflection on NT's and such. Understanding ourselves thereby using the best tools, is very practically important in life. I would hate to not have a correct label. Our writing style and humour are very similar.
I really think it is a very good technique to be able to cry at the drop of a hat for a young woman. I would hate to have a situation that is worse than it needs to be because a young woman will not engage in that manipulation.
As for your theory about answering honestly in tests, it’s interesting. I had to take the same test many times once and it only made me answer at random at the end, not be honest, because it requires concentration as well, I think.
Were you honest during the diagnostic process? How valid do you think these tests are?
I was honest, yes. Otherwise, it would have been a waste of my time and money. I was doing the evaluations because I was curious. Lying would have been counterproductive.
Obviously the tests were accurate as my brain scans demonstrated exactly the same thing.
Ah okay I just found another post about being diagnosed from you on Quora and you wrote there that you were mask on during the diagnostic process. I think I got confused what exactly you meant.
I was in the beginning
Were you mask on in your answers or just your presentation? I am still confused lol
Presentation.
That makes sense. Thank you!
Thank you for writing about this experience. I find it valuable to me as I have my diagnostic clarification testing coming early April. I have been looking and collecting information as to what I could expect before I have my getting to know introductions. It's been surprisingly difficult to find information from someone who has actually had the testing done.
Also, I appreciate your answers on Quora as well, which is where I found the link to your writings.
I'm glad you found it useful, and good luck on the clarification
Very well written, and interesting
Thank you
Exasperated.