Unmasking with other people: relationships and autistic spaces

A systematic review of eight qualitative studies found that camouflaging was a main way autistic adolescents and adults tried to make friends. For most it was exhausting, often did not work, and got in the way of feeling authentic.¹ The review found little evidence about camouflaging in romantic relationships.¹ Some people tried other routes, such as pulling back from socializing or looking for friends among autistic people or in places where camouflaging felt less needed, yet many still felt lonely or dissatisfied.¹

When autistic adults in one UK study described socializing in ways that felt true to themselves, they called it freer and more spontaneous. They said that in supportive settings it had better consequences than camouflaging, and that accepting people, autistic or not, made it easier.² In a study of autistic college students (14 interviews and 214 surveys), most had heard of unmasking and about half had tried it, but it was rare overall. Interviewees said it was hard or impossible when masking was deeply ingrained. It eased the stress of masking but brought worries about social backlash, unless friends or other people who were unmasking backed them up.³

Many autistic adults describe time with other autistic people as easier and more comfortable. A systematic review of 52 qualitative papers found that many of these experiences were positive, and participants linked them to a better quality of life in several areas; experiences varied.⁴ The review found little data on autistic people who have an intellectual disability.⁴

In interviews with 12 UK autistic adults, 10 of them women and none with intellectual disability, time with autistic friends and family felt more comfortable; they felt better understood and could be themselves.⁵ Later, separate teams found the same. In written answers from 142 autistic adults in Australia and New Zealand, people said they could unmask and be authentic with other autistic people.⁶ In joint interviews with 11 pairs of young friends (20 autistic participants, their friends autistic or not), participants described acceptance and authenticity as what let them unmask.⁷

It is not always smooth. In written answers from 142 autistic adults, people also described having to manage how much social energy they had, and some had conflicts; sharing a neurotype did not guarantee getting on.⁶ Shared interests and values mattered too.⁶

Places can work the same way. Participants at Autscape, an autistic-led conference in England, imagined it as a space where everyday masks could come off; the anthropologist who studied it calls it "a smaller mask".⁸ In a survey of 154 autistic adults aged 18 to 35, recalled conversations with non-autistic people were described as taking more effort and more masking than conversations with autistic people. Most also said crowding and noise affected their communication at least somewhat, and their answers suggested that stress and anxiety may make talking harder whoever the partner is.⁹ Autistic girls in US high schools said they camouflaged least at home and with neurodivergent friends.¹⁰

The "double empathy" idea holds that misunderstanding between autistic and non-autistic people runs both ways. A set of collaborating groups in Edinburgh, Nottingham and Dallas has run most of the experiments behind it. In their first study, a story passed along chains of eight people. Autistic chains passed it on as well as non-autistic chains; mixed chains passed on less, and people in them felt less rapport.¹¹ In pairs, non-autistic pairs rated their rapport highest, and autistic pairs rated theirs higher than mixed pairs did. Eighty observers, autistic and non-autistic alike, watched videos of some of these pairs; they rated mixed pairs lowest and autistic pairs higher than non-autistic pairs.¹² In five-minute conversations, both autistic and non-autistic partners rated autistic adults as more awkward. Non-autistic adults were more interested in meeting non-autistic partners again, while autistic adults leaned toward preferring autistic partners and told them more about themselves.¹³

Later work by the same groups is mixed. In groups of four, all-autistic and all-non-autistic groups had similar overall rapport; autistic people's rapport fell as more non-autistic people joined, while non-autistic people's rapport barely changed.¹⁴ In a pair study, autistic participants reported lower rapport whatever their partner's diagnosis, though knowing the partner's diagnosis changed this.¹⁵ A registered replication of the chain study with 311 people found no difference in how well information passed along mixed and single-neurotype chains. Non-autistic chains reported more rapport, and telling everyone in a chain the diagnoses improved rapport. The authors, several of whom ran the original chain study, suggest a more varied sample and changes in method may explain why the result differs.¹⁶

Teams outside that consortium have found mixed results. In Ohio, matched pairs gave each other drawing directions more accurately than mixed pairs, but matched autistic pairs reported the lowest rapport.¹⁷ In a study of 40 adults who were not told their partner's neurotype, everyone rated rapport fairly high, but autistic adults reported lower rapport and more masking than non-autistic adults whether their partner was autistic or not. The more they masked, the lower their partner's rapport tended to be, and partners' ratings matched each other only in same-neurotype pairs. The author suggests, as a hypothesis still to be tested, that masking may have hidden an advantage for matched pairs.¹⁸ In Ghent, among adults aged 20 to 50 with an IQ above 80, pairs of the same neurotype did not communicate more efficiently than mixed pairs.¹⁹ In Brussels, where partners were also not told each other's neurotype, pairs with an autistic member were slower on an online matching task than non-autistic pairs, and autistic people talked more only when paired with a non-autistic partner.²⁰ Two analyses that probably share one group of participants, linked to the Ohio team, found that matched autistic pairs fell into each other's sentence patterns over a whole conversation (though not within single tasks), and that this kind of matching went with stronger rapport in everyone. Matched autistic pairs also had the most turn changes without a gap, and mixed pairs left the longest gaps; both sets of authors read this as support for double empathy.^21,22 In a study of non-autistic friends, pairs more alike in self-reported autistic traits rated their friendship higher.²³ Whether people knew their partner's diagnosis differed between studies and may explain some of the disagreement, since knowing it changed rapport in the consortium's own work.^15,16

Two critiques question what these studies show. A review of 20 studies argues that they mostly do not measure empathy at all, in the sense of understanding or sharing another person's feelings.²⁴ A theoretical paper argues that the double empathy idea is poorly defined and mixed up with other concepts, which makes it hard to test, and cautions against applying the research in practice for now.²⁵ Taken together, many autistic people report finding each other easier company, though not always; whether that shows up as better communication in the lab is not settled.

In an online survey of 106 autistic adults, relationship satisfaction was similar whether their partner was autistic, neurotypical or otherwise neurodivergent. Partners' neurotypes were self-reported and not checked, and few men took part.²⁶ In free-text answers, people with autistic partners tended to describe their autistic traits as helping the relationship; those with other partners tended to describe their traits as causing difficulty.²⁶ In Australian interviews with 13 people in couples where one partner was autistic, relationships developed much as other couples' do. Difficulties lay in communication, in reading emotions and in the autistic partner's particular habits; what helped was each partner's strengths and their care for each other.²⁷

No study found as of October 2026 asks how a partner responds when an autistic person, often after a late diagnosis, starts camouflaging less.

In the survey of 214 college students, those who unmasked with family had lower anxiety and depression, and those who found unmasking hard had more anxiety.³ The survey measured both at once, so it cannot show which came first. Among 136 autistic children in the UK aged 8 to 14, most felt positive about being autistic at home; far fewer did around peers or teachers.²⁸

Studies of late diagnosis show how families react to the news itself. Most of 21 Spanish autistic women said relatives disbelieved them, reacted with hostility, or dismissed the diagnosis, and that relationships worsened over time; friends, partners and autistic groups supported them.²⁹ In a UK study of six adults diagnosed after 35 and six loved ones of autistic adults, families were supportive, though adjusting was hard, and stigma made people wary of telling others.³⁰ Women diagnosed after 40 described others' first reactions and stereotyped assumptions.³¹ None of these studies follows what happens in families when someone then masks less.

Most social programs ask autistic people to change. A few studies have tried changing non-autistic people instead. Non-autistic men were randomly given a brief autism acceptance training or none, then talked for five minutes with an autistic man. After the training, both partners in these 39 pairs were more interested in meeting again, though other ratings mostly did not change. Across all pairs, the two partners' views of the conversation were largely unrelated. The authors conclude that more far-reaching changes are probably needed.³² In a separate study by the same group, a short acceptance training video improved non-autistic people's knowledge and stated attitudes toward autism but not their implicit bias.³³ Autistic adults have suggested ways non-autistic people can communicate to reduce misunderstanding.² In the chain replication described above, telling everyone the diagnoses improved rapport.¹⁶

Several autistic writers argue that masking stands in the way of closeness. Devon Price writes: "Masking is designed to keep other people at a distance." Unmasking, Price says, risks showing "our least attractive habits" and "our messiest emotions", most of all in intimate relationships, but the alternative is "a growing distance and resentment".^c1

Writers describe partners and family adjusting. Megan Griffith writes that when Griffith began unmasking at home, a partner "felt like I'd been lying to him for years about who I really was"; they talked it through as a survival mechanism, not a deliberate lie.^c2 The research above found no study of how partners respond. Price, in Unmasking for Life, writes that "the data is clear" that couples do better when autistic people express themselves openly or date other autistic people; the research above has not tested whether unmasking changes how relationships go.^c1 On family, Price writes that unmasking may mean having to "sacrifice elements of our relationships with them", and that greater acceptance from relatives is "never guaranteed".^c4 In an earlier book Price puts it more generally: "Unmasking isn't a universally positive experience; sometimes when we put ourselves first, we will frustrate and disappoint others, maybe even leave them feeling triggered or upset."^c3

Pete Wharmby writes that many late-diagnosed autistic people report their relationships with family, friends and especially colleagues starting to "break down a little" straight after diagnosis, because dropping the mask reminds them why they wore it. Wharmby asks the people around them to let them drop the mask gradually: "However, this comes with a huge proviso: you need to be able to handle whoever lies behind it."^c8 One autistic adult quoted by Luke Beardon, a practitioner who writes for autistic adults, began unmasking after years of marriage and describes a husband's consternation: "If he accepted that unmasking is something that I need, rather than something I am doing to annoy him, I'm guessing that our marriage would be a much happier time for both of us."^c9 Beardon counts remarks such as "you didn't used to be like this" and "that's not who you really are" as a form of gaslighting, because they deny that the unmasked self is real.^c10

Many writers describe autistic company as a place where masks come off. Price describes "small, mask-free subcultures that are created and maintained by Autistic people" as a glimpse of a society that accepts neurodiversity.^c3 Megan Anna Neff writes that through relationships in autistic culture "many of us finally experience a sense of belonging, connectedness, and authentic engagement".^c5 Sol Smith urges meeting other autistic people, in person or online: "It will ease your nervous system in ways you can hardly imagine."^c6 Jim Sinclair, writing about Autism Network International, recalls first meeting another autistic person as like meeting "someone who came from the same planet": "Here, with people who shared my language, meaning flowed freely and easily."^c11 Carly Jones, who first knowingly met another autistic woman in her thirties, compares time with autistic women to changing from high heels into slippers; there, info dumping or preferring to text is "met without judgement or misunderstanding".^c12 Daniel Burford writes that what most often makes unmasking possible is "seeing someone else do it first".^c13 Steve Silberman's history of autism describes Autreat, a retreat run by the autistic-led group Autism Network International and first held in 1996, whose rule was "opportunity but not pressure", and which Silberman calls a template for later events, including Autscape.^c7 The research above finds such company easier for many autistic people, though not for all and not always.