Autism Masking, and Female Experiences in Autism
- Feb 17
- 5 min read
By Baylor Barnard
Masking as it relates to autism, like Autism Spectrum Disorder itself, is complicated and intensely individual. Also called camouflaging in some contexts, masking is “the difference between how people seem in social contexts and what’s happening to them on the inside” [1]. To some degree, this isn’t just an exercise or social nicety performed only by autistic individuals or by neurodivergent people. For some, though not all, modifications to behavior are second if not first nature. In some cases it’s referred to as a way of managing or hiding “everything your parents said was wrong with you” [3]. Masking itself is described as mentally, emotionally, and physically draining. Even so, these replacement behaviors can be so intense and reinforced that unmasking is also difficult for autistic individuals to achieve. The study and understanding of masking is still young, younger naturally than the study of autism. However, there is already a great deal known about how strenuous and harmful its effects are. Despite that, communities of neurodivergent and autistic individuals are hard at work in making themselves and others more comfortable in the spaces they exist within every day.
The social expectations for autistic males and females differ. Especially when it comes to boys and girls in their early periods of socialization. The reactions that parents, teachers, and medical professionals have to autistic boys as compared to autistic girls are related to what is socially expected of them. The way that autism, and indeed masking or camouflaging autism, is studied in girls and women is markedly different from how it was once studied primarily in young boys. Francine Russo writing for The Transmitter makes note of a study conducted in 2017 which compared the scores of over 200 boys and girls on the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule [1]. This is a tool used by medical providers to help in the diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in both adults and children. It is flexible in terms of assessment method and is modified for age and ability of the person being assessed. While it is not needed in order for a diagnosis of ASD, it is there as might be needed [2]. It measures activities which are easily observed by parents or medical professionals and are critical to daily life. In Russo’s article, she relays that even when girls score at a similar range to boys, those girls were “more severely impaired” [1]. This implies that boys who are less severely impaired, to borrow the language of the article, are seen or understood with a different perspective than their female counterparts. Parents of girls seemed to be more aware or critical of their child’s social skills, their single mindedness around interests, or how often they repeated behaviors.
These comparisons don’t end there. A trend across much of the information the author came across for this article indicates that autistic girls are more likely to desire social acceptance from their peers. To the extent that they actively alter their behaviors and interests in order to fit into peer groups of their choosing. For example, in Corscadden and Casserly’s article in Journal of Inclusive Education in Ireland, the authors recount the story of one autistic girl who listened carefully to what other girls in her desired social group wanted for Christmas, and whenever discussing what they received as gifts, lied and said they got what everyone else wanted [5]. Meanwhile, autistic boys tend to play by themselves and that isolation is used by teachers and professionals to spot students that might have ASD [1]. It’s been previously believed that boys are more likely to be autistic and to show autistic traits or behaviors. However, in more recent studies this is believed to be the result of a combination of a few factors. Two of those are: a lack of understanding of all the manifestations of autism in females, and varied socialization and social expectations of boys and girls [5].
In the past fifteen or so years, more attention has been given to understanding female manifestations and experiences in autism and the same is true for understanding how masking autistic traits affects autistic individuals. Whether the article covered the female or the general autistic experience, many of these articles end their discussion of masking with the question of whether it is truly possible for autistic people to truly, and comfortably drop their proverbial masks. For some, as in Russo’s article for The Transmitter, there is some relief to be found in reading that at least one interviewed woman says she is able to drop her “mask” when with friends and family. In Belek’s article for Springer’s Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry in response to the question of whether individuals might be able to drop their masks, drops instead its titular line, ‘“Well… Maybe,’ was his reply, ‘I can just wear a smaller mask.’’’ [3]. The reason for this is more complex than some might imagine, as Belek writes earlier in the article, for many autistic individuals the line between themselves while masked or not is, if not invisible, very fuzzy. One woman who relayed her experience to Belek stated that there was no real or true self waiting to be discovered but instead one that needed to be designed with conscious effort [3].
Reaching beyond just the effects of masking, there is the ever evolving problem of language and its relationship to autism and disability in general. In Wenn B Lawson’s article for the Journal of Intellectual Disability the author argues against the usage of both camouflage and masking as accurate terms for autistic individuals when trying to adhere to social norms. These terms, although unintentionally, imply that when an autistic person is masking their true selves they are deceiving those around them. Lawson further posits that it could imply that this deception is entirely deliberate rather than a learned behavior [4]. Masking should instead be understood as a set of behaviors which allow individuals on the autism spectrum to fulfill what Lawson calls, “an overwhelming need to feel, and be safe” [4]. Lawson instead suggests the term “Adaptive Morphing.” This isn’t just an attempt to change the words that are used in daily life, but a call to alter how autism and masking is discussed in academic circles, including how individuals are surveyed about their experiences and the way that academics discuss these same topics.
Ultimately the complexity of social demands placed upon all people, not just autistic and neurodivergent people, can be strenuous and damaging. The expectations placed on members of society as a result of their assigned gender at birth, gender expression, behaviors, etc are a constant revolving door of demand, stimulus and response. What is undeniable though, is the strain that masking of unwanted or unexpected behaviors puts onto autistic individuals when going about their lives. What is most important in these conversations is and always will be to include the voices of those with personal experience, which many of the articles the author reviewed for this piece included. Many of the voices recorded in these articles demonstrate the burden that masking their behavior causes. In particular, one stands out: "masking for me, is liberating and debilitating in equal measure. I don’t know how to take my masks off. I don’t know how to live without my masks. And they provide me with the opportunities to be what I need to be for the people I love." [4]
References
