Autism and love shyness; sexual disorders?

It may seem to be a weird idea to talk about relation of  sexual matters and disorders like autism ( or love shyness). But here I believe if we look at it deeply we can find strong signs that supports this idea.

Maybe Freud is the first one who mentioned about the relation of sexual instincts and some disorders. This Freudian belief is overlooked after his dead and now it may be considered as an old, out dated psychoanalytical belief. But when it comes to Freud, we shall take all of his words serious.

 

but how sexuality could be related to a disorder like autism? the answer is : not directly, but indirectly.

Love shyness as a disorder which is never recognized as a disorder in DSM, has many similarities with mild types of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). In a brief word, both come with social impairments. “love shyness” is a name which Gilmartin gave to males with severe shyness which their shyness is mostly about interacting with  opposite sex. This acute nomination (love + shyness) reveals important things about this disorder. It is about love (and thus it is a sexual matter) and is a kind of shyness (which shows it is about social difficulties). Gilmartin has provided us a good cue.

Actually both love shyness and autism affect dramatically more upon males than females. In classic autism the gender ratio is 4 males to 1 female. love shyness also is all about males. But the important point is that studies show that male sexual drive is more stronger that female sexual drive or at least there is significant differences in many aspects of their sexual drive.

I agree that these reasons are not enough to prove that I am right about relation of sexuality and mentioned disorders, but I will explain more in future posts.

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Autism and love shyness; sexual disorders?

  1. Okay: Freud – I think he broke through the dam of the superego so that people can talk about male/female interaction. Society controls reproduction (of course) so it makes the rules. When humans were “wild” there were few opportunities for sex; many myths have brother / sister ancestor gods. I think this was a real situation. As human population grew the opportunities for sex/reproduction increased (close living in villages) and sexual selection for ‘tame’ females took place. In ancient cultures (and many today) women were confined in the home, not out of persecution, but because the village streets and countryside were dangerous – rape and kidnapping were the common way for men to “get” females. Even though the “dam” of social control has been “opened” in Western countries, the healthy way to deal with human instinct has not been found; the incredible concentration of humans in cities requires great sacrifice of individual expression, causes enormous stress and increasing physical restraint in prisons, made possible by more and more laws, military-style police forces, etc. In other words, the steep increase in human population since the industrial revolution has placed the human animal in impossible environments; evolution doesn’t occur that fast – humans have adapted culturally (not very well) and self-domesticated, but even this is not enough to compensate for overpopulation and depletion of resources. In fact, tech adaptation has made the situation worse – we encourage overpopulation by our policies.

    I guess my criticism of Freud would be that he got stuck on sex itself, but the function of sex is reproduction and you can’t separate the two.

    • Thanks for your comment:
      I should reply you in multiple parts:
      First: Unfortunately I don’t have any knowledge about aborigines and their life. Study of their life could be a great help for psychoanalysis. But Freud get some of his ideas from life of aborigines. Two of his books I remember now is “Totem and Tabu” and “Civilization and its discontent”. (These two books after “interpretation of dreams” had huge impact on me.)

      Second : Freud once said that a researcher should be like an animal, without any pre- judgement or feelings towards an attitude. I think he was loyal to his quote. About sex also he reflected what he found regardless of other strong, dominated thoughts. In speaking about sex he is not in the role of a judge. He said what he observed.
      You are right that Freud thoughts refined the function of super ego, but it was an indirect advantage of his theories. In his book “Civilization and its discontent” he argues that civilization brought restriction and sorrow to the life of human being. But he never provided a solution for the problem.
      + Also about the relation between disorders and sexuality, I have not faced in Freud’s work with an idea that sexual freedom could solve the problem.

  2. Pingback: Again about ‘sexuality’ | love+shyness

Leave your opinion

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s