Boys are diagnosed with autism 4 times more than girls by age 8. There's a certain amount of supposition that this is due in part or largely down to "boys being boys" type handwaving, though my two nephews are on the spectrum and neurodivergent behavior in them presented as distinctly different from simply being energetic (one being almost nonverbal). Though it's possible, it seems unlikely to me that there isn't actually a difference.
However, the "greater male variability hypothesis" in terms of IQ scores is not terribly well supported by studies, and the difference isn't significant enough to account for the 4:1 ratio of autism diagnoses. As such, I imagine there's more at play here.
I think boys just present symptoms that are more obvious. Girls with autism are very often much better at masking than boys are.Young girls also tend to fixate on more 'socially acceptable' topics that make that fixation less obvious
Also, 'better at masking' there isn't necessarily inherent by gender; it could well be a consequence of young girls in general being put through more social training than boys.
Are symptoms not the sole means of diagnosis? So if girls present less symptoms then aren't they therefore less autistic? Or, alternatively, if they present different symptoms then perhaps they have something else?
No. That's the whole point of masking. It's doing social behavior 'in software' instead of doing it 'in hardware' like everyone else. An alcoholic who is high functioning is still an alcoholic.
My niece has autism and it’s much more subtle than I’ve seen in boys. It was difficult to even get her diagnosed until teen years when the masking became much harder for her because of more complex social dynamics.
However, the "greater male variability hypothesis" in terms of IQ scores is not terribly well supported by studies, and the difference isn't significant enough to account for the 4:1 ratio of autism diagnoses. As such, I imagine there's more at play here.