Going through different theories of autism (which has been a
   subject of interest since I first saw a video in middle school
   (early 1980s) about a boy spinning plates - I don't remember the
   name of it), I found these two, coined by the same guy, Simon
   Baron-Cohen, Mindblindness in the mid 1980s, and
   Empathizing-Systemizing Theory, which he came up with more
   recently. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind-blindness
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathizing%E2%80%93systemizing_theory
   They're both very popular theories; supposedly people who are
   "mind blind" can't read the minds of other people and
   empathizing/Systemizing theory says that empathizers have more
   estrogen and are better caretakers and nurturers and systemizers
   have more testosterone and are better analyzers. Or in short,
   Super-Women=Super-caring and Super-Men=Engineers. While they're
   both very interesting concepts, and have each gotten very
   popular and used in various testing and diagnostic procedures,
   they BOTH strike me as total B.S. Too simple. Too far-reaching.
   Too wrong. So wrong. I analyze everything. I'm also very
   empathic. I also suck at interpreting some social cues yet excel
   at interpreting other social cues. Am I a hermaphrodite? Maybe.
   But I truly doubt it. I love psychology but sometimes I see bunk
   and this pair of bunk makes me mad. Yet maybe they're right. I
   don't know. But while the man is a superhero and champion of
   understanding Autism, I think he's not completely right, and a
   bad theory by a prominent person in an authoritative position
   can have far-reaching consequences for millions of people,
   including affecting how people see them and how people see
   themselves and how people treat one another.