For those who have been following me for a while, you’ll be well aware of my critiques of autism researcher Simon Baron-Cohen and most notably, the failed Spectrum 10K study.
Many of us have been criticising his work for years, and now, out of the blue on a Sunday afternoon, the Guardian published the article ‘Pioneer of ‘extreme male brain’ theory of autism now says phrase unhelpful’
Naturally, many autistics online are responding to his backtracking on the extreme male brain theory. In the article he shared:
“Some of those terms were very easily misunderstood and so I do regret that,” he said. “It can lead to simplistic headlines like ‘autistic people lack empathy’, which is not true.“Some of that language, like male brain and female brain, I just don’t think it’s useful today.”
Many of us are not satisfied with his response. It was not just the language that impacted us, but also how it informed how the world saw all autistic people as completely lacking empathy (which is false) and excluded many autistic people from being recognised as such for decades.
Being an autistic woman, I do believe the extreme male brain theory played a role in being misdiagnosed for 20 years.
Other than the brief comments above, Simon did not address how his theories led to dehumanising us, which is something I addressed in ‘A Brief Overview Of Simon Baron-Cohen’s Autism Research’. Key points I uncovered in my research for the article included:
- Claiming his ‘theory of mind’ described “quintessential abilities that make us human”, and this is something we autistics lack (the ability to understand others’ mental states). Despite not acknowledging how frequently non-autistic people can also misread and understand autistic people, and this isn’t a one-way street (Baron-Cohen, 2001). As far as I am aware, I haven’t seen Simon acknowledge the double empathy problem, which directly challenges his theory.
- How it wasn’t just headlines that claimed ‘autistic people lack empathy’ and misinterpreted his work; this is something he claimed himself through the extreme male brain theory by saying we had a lot less empathy by default.
- Where he stated ‘The evidence presented in this article suggests that the male brain is characterised by Type S (where S > E), the female brain by Type E (where E > S), and that the autistic brain is an extreme of the male brain (S >> E)’ (Baron-Cohen, 2002).
- How his Spectrum 10K study raised major concerns about eugenics (which was dropped at a later date).
The Guardian article does reference Spectrum 10K:
“More recently, Baron-Cohen’s team faced a backlash over a plan to sequence the genomes of 10,000 autistic people, which eventually resulted in the project being dropped after a two-year consultation with the autistic community. He said there was now a far greater emphasis on consultation at an early enough stage for research priorities to be shaped, or enriched, by the input of autistic people.”
Yes, the lack of autistic involvement was a key issue, but it was only one of them. Others, which I also discussed in my post ‘The Dangers of Spectrum 10K’ are:
- Looking at genetic and environmental factors that contributed towards autism, but claiming they were not seeking a cure. A claim many autistics did not believe and/or felt uneasy with.
- Not providing enough details on consent forms – meaning people couldn’t give informed consent.
- Seeking to subgroup autism.
- The views and previous records of the researchers involved in the study, most notably around screening for autism during pregnancy.
However, the question other autistics and I are asking is why Simon has now decided to make this statement so publicly about the mistakes of his ‘extreme male brain theory’. He could have done this years ago; our critiques of his work are hardly new.
Thankfully, the Guardian shared what I believe is the answer to this question in the article.
“Speaking to the Guardian before the announcement of a £26m ($34.5m) gift to Cambridge University from the US philanthropist Lisa Yang, Baron-Cohen said the funding would be used for research guided by the priorities of the autistic community…The research centre is expected to focus on improving life expectancy and health outcomes for autistic people, earlier diagnosis and practical solutions to improve quality of life.”
One thing that is not clear is how autistic people will guide the research and if their involvement will be tokenistic or not. Details in the article were fairly brief about Simon’s next research project.
I also wonder if it was done this way intentionally after the Spectrum 10K backlash. It launched with a huge PR campaign, a prime slot appearance from Simon himself on BBC Breakfast, and celebrity endorsements.
Another thing I was curious about was who was funding his next research, especially after how controversial his research and theories have been. After asking my BlueSky followers if they knew anything about Lucy Yang, @jlimburg.bsky.social replied with Lucy’s profile on Harvard Medical School’s website.
Her profile revealed that a lot of her research was funding genetic research into autism and referred to autism as a disorder throughout the profile. Simon’s new research claims to focus on improving quality of life, and that is what autistic people have said is our priority for research over biological studies and seeking a cure (Cage et al., 2024; Roche et al., 2020).
So you can see there is a contradiction here. When it comes to research, it is important to see where the money is coming from, and if the money is coming from a person who values biological and genetic research in autism, then this is going against what a lot of us have stated our priorities are for autism research as autistic people. Which doesn’t align with the ‘priorities of the autistic community’ as Simon claims in The Guardian.
And there is also a mention of studies investigating mice to understand autism by the Harvard team, funded by Lucy. Because how exactly is studying mice going to improve autistic people’s quality of life? I am yet to come across a convincing answer!
Final Verdict?
The comment Simon made about the extreme male brain theory comes across as very surface-level, and part of me suspects he had to address the elephant in the room before announcing his next research project. I am not convinced this is about only addressing one of many wrongs he’s subjected autistic people to for decades. It appears this is more about promoting his upcoming studies, which still leaves many unanswered questions.
If you enjoyed this post and like to support my writing, I would be forever grateful if you could buy me a coffee (or tea in my case).
You can also support the blog by purchasing my book ‘Young Autistic and ADHD: Moving into adulthood when you’re multiply neurodivergent’.
References
Baron-Cohen, S. (2001). Theory of mind in normal development and autism. Prisme, 34, 174-183.
Baron-Cohen, S. (2002). The extreme male brain theory of autism. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(6), 248-254.
Boon, S. (2021). The Dangers of Spectrum 10K. Autistically Sarah. https://autisticallysarah.com/2021/08/24/the-dangers-of-spectrum-10k/
Boon, S. (2022). A Brief Overview Of Simon Baron-Cohen’s Autism Research. Autistically Sarah.https://autisticallysarah.com/2022/02/13/a-brief-overview-of-simon-baron-cohens-autism-research/
Devlin, H. (2026). Pioneer of ‘extreme male brain’ theory of autism now says phrase unhelpful. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/jul/05/autism-extreme-male-brain-simon-baron-cohen?cmp=share_androidapp_other
Harvard Medical School (2025). Lisa Yang. https://hms.harvard.edu/departments/giving/our-donors/lisa-yang
Roche, L., Adams, D., & Clark, M. (2020). Research priorities of the autism community: A systematic review of key stakeholder perspectives. Autism, 25(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361320967790
Sarah Boon 
Leave a comment