marigolds-sorry asked: You do realize that suggesting that autistics are actually descendants of Neanderthals based on minimal, questionable evidence is REALLY FUCKING OFFENSIVE, right? Do you understand that racism plays a role in who gets dismissed as incurably oppositional rather than receiving a proper diagnosis of autism (hint: it's not the white people)? You're being an incredibly ignorant person. Please, please fucking STOP.

I hope you’ll excuse me for answering your understandable criticisms publicly, but I’ve been waiting for an opportunity to openly address my hypothesis’ unavoidable surface-offensiveness. First, to clear up a few errors:

autistics are actually descendants of Neanderthals

I am in no way saying that this is the case. You should always make an effort to understand things before you attack them.

I’m proposing that some of the genes linked to autism, a cognitive variation characterized by social dysfunction in an NT environment, may have originated in one or more niche hominids and entered our evolutionary line via introgressive hybridization. This has already been explicitly suggested in multiple published papers, at least one of which is peer reviewed:

Autism…is referenced in studies of fossil hominin brain structure and function, either as an analogy for developmental differences between closely related species or as a potentially atavistic indication of actual primitive phenotypes. For example, an autistic child lacking language created naturalistic artwork much like that from the Upper Paleolithic, on the basis of which it was suggested that fAMHS could have also lacked fully modern cognition.

Also, neanderthals are almost certainly not the whole picture. Humans have probably admixed (adaptively) with “archaic” hominids for most of our evolutionary history.

Do you understand that racism plays a role in who gets dismissed as incurably oppositional rather than receiving a proper diagnosis of autism

I do understand that racism is an entirely unnecessary evil that can and does significantly affect the diagnosis of many psychiatric diseases (and cognitive variations), including autism. However, completely ignoring human variation between and within groups of extant humans will not help solve this inequality. If you base your arguments for equal opportunity on the assumption that people are biologically identical, racists will use any evidence of innate difference as an excuse to discriminate.

For example, the Hutu people of Rwanda are, for the most part, lactose intolerant (they cannot digest milk). The Tutsi minority (victims of the 1994 genocide) are mostly lactose tolerant [1,2,3]. It is very hard to make a living raising cattle when you can’t drink milk [1]. I don’t mean to imply that the history of inequality between these two peoples is entirely, or even mostly due to this innate genetic difference (the Belgians can still take the majority of the blame). But actively ignoring it doesn’t do anyone any good.



I’m genuinely sorry that I offended you, and I hope this response helps clear up any confusion.

To conclude:

Although they are frequently characterized in an unflattering manner, research showing Neanderthals were as intelligent as contemporaneous Homo sapiens, with early stone tool technologies of comparable efficiency, is debunking long-held beliefs.

—Wikipedia: Neanderthals in popular culture

If you’re interested in learning more about my hypothesis I suggest you read the ‘about’ page.