Specific neurons that secrete oxytocin in the brain are disrupted in a mouse model of autism, neuroscientists have found. Stimulating these neurons restored social behaviors in these mice. These findings could help to develop new ways to treat autism.

[u/mvea]

https://www.riken.jp/en/news_pubs/research_news/rr/20250207_1/index.html

[u/sagerobot]

Yeah we can tell by the rest of your comments and how you are ending up being very arrogant because you strongly believe you are more informed than everyone else in this thread.

You very well may be, but you are doing yourself a disservice in getting your point across. You are unfortunately in a world with other people and other people are going to be more receptive to you when you figure out how to drop the arrogance.

Some of the worlds smartest people are also some of the most kind and professional. Arrogance has no place in academic discussion.

[u/kelcamer → u/sagerobot]

I hear that you perceive my tone as arrogant, and I appreciate you sharing your perspective. That said, I believe it’s important to focus on the content of the discussion rather than assumptions about my demeanor.

When I discuss these topics, my intention isn’t to appear superior but to advocate for accuracy and inclusivity, especially in conversations about autism. Sometimes, my passion for this topic might come across as strong, but it’s because these discussions have real-world implications for autistic individuals, including myself.

If something specific in my argument felt dismissive or unclear, I’m open to constructive feedback.

It's frustrating to me, to be autistic, and to be constantly be bombarded by society with messages of inferiority and deficiency, when that is not ultimately what autism actually is.

I’d like this conversation to remain about the issues at hand, and I hope we can move forward with mutual respect and curiosity.

If tone or phrasing matters more than the validity of an argument, then that suggests emotional comfort is being prioritized over truth.

It also occurred to me from your comment that you may be interpreting information differently than I do. For me, as someone with correctness OCD, I tend to process things in a way that feels emotionally neutral. I wonder if this difference might reflect a double empathy gap between us.

I would like to clearly state that my understanding is that education and correction is a neutral process, but your comment has led me to a new understanding that most people see it more like a power struggle which gave me a new perspective to consider! (Thanks for that realization)

I understand that people are emotional, but does that mean accuracy should take a backseat to how a message makes someone feel? If so, that raises the question—should ideas be dismissed simply because they challenge someone’s comfort, even if they’re correct?

[u/sagerobot → u/kelcamer]

I hear that you perceive my tone as arrogant, and I appreciate you sharing your perspective. That said, I believe it’s important to focus on the content of the discussion rather than assumptions about my demeanor.

This is exactly what Im talking about. This statement right here is going to turn 99% of readers off, immediately.

Like Its enraging. You absolutely suck at communication and are harming your stated cause.

You are better off silently linking studies that back your claims, you are not the person to communicate them. You are actively hurting your stated goals.

If tone or phrasing matters more than the validity of an argument, then that suggests emotional comfort is being prioritized over truth.

It probably shouldn't matter in a world of pure logic. But unfortunately this is not the world we live in.

Like it or not, effective communication is done by meeting people where they are at, not barking down at them. No matter how correct you are, the way you say things absolutely matters.

This is a public space, not a court of law.

For me, as someone with correctness OCD, I tend to process things in a way that feels emotionally neutral. I wonder if this difference might reflect a double empathy gap between us.

It certainly seems that you came from an emotionally charged place, you even stated as much in your first statements.

Sometimes, my passion for this topic might come across as strong, but it’s because these discussions have real-world implications for autistic individuals, including myself.

Were you being strongly passionate or emotionally neutral?

It seems you might not even be aware of how emotional this subject made you. And like you said, its a very personal subject so I think its pretty normal for you to get a bit more invested in discussing it, as you feel you have more stake that the average person. And to be clear you do.

I understand that people are emotional, but does that mean accuracy should take a backseat to how a message makes someone feel? If so, that raises the question—should ideas be dismissed simply because they challenge someone’s comfort, even if they’re correct?

Unfortunately the answer to this question, on reddit and in most public spaces dedicated to open discussion is yes. Accuracy should take a back seat. But, make no mistake, it should still be "in the car".

You arent in a court of law, and this isnt an actual debate with rules.

The reality is that if you want other people to agree with you, you have to find ways to slowly walk them from their current understanding, to yours.

If you want to be purely factual, you have to basically just post links to studies and maybe give a small synopsis.

Dont try to argue from your personal perspective, because that opens the conversation to the other people personal perspectives. And no one can be "wrong" about their personal perspective. At the very least they dont want to be told their perspective is wrong at the get-go. You have to add to their perspective, not try and replace it. I hope that makes sense. Sorry if this was a bit of a ramble, im not trying to say you are wrong, just that you should reconsider how you approach these things and honestly if its worth your own personal time or not.

It might be more effective for you to get your point across in different ways.

And look, communication is a problem everyone has but its an extra challenge for people with autistic traits and ultimately what ive said here is just my own take on things. I hope what ive said comes off as tips and tricks not me suggesting you are deficient or inferior in any way.

[u/kelcamer → u/sagerobot]

I’d like to continue this conversation, but I found your earlier statement about my communication ability dismissive, especially since I already mentioned that I’m autistic and that information-sharing is neutral for me.

I don’t think this discussion is going to be productive for either of us at this point, given our differing communication styles.

I prefer to chat with people who see value in accurate communication, without adding their own projections on top of that, as that allows for more productive discussions. I would've expected in a sub called r/science, that accuracy of information would be highly valued over emotional contents.

I also spend a lot of energy adapting at work, and I prefer not to mask on Sundays, so I’m going to step away from this conversation.

Autism is a subject I'm deeply passionate about, and I wish for a world that would be capable of reflecting on its biases rather than trying to force a neurodivergent individuals to conform to neurotypical norms.

It is my strong hope that one day people will be able to see that autism itself can be disabling, and also recognize that autism doesn't make a person deficient, to fully understand that disability isn't or shouldn't be a 'status drop' as so many act like it is.

For anyone who wishes to continue this conversation in good faith, I am always willing to share all resources and research on this topic with you, and I invite you to DM me if you'd like to explore this topic without cognitive bias in an open minded way.

I hope you’re able to find ways to engage with different communication styles in a way that feels constructive for you in the future.

I find it ironic that you’re asking me to be more emotionally sensitive while using a tone that feels dismissive and harsh. This seems counterproductive to fostering the kind of communication you’re advocating for.