Trying to get an idea of how NTs see us. I know that when I see autistic people, I see someone that’s like me. Obviously, that’s not how NTs perceive us, so what do we look like to yall??
Trying to get an idea of how NTs see us. I know that when I see autistic people, I see someone that’s like me. Obviously, that’s not how NTs perceive us, so what do we look like to yall??
I track everybody with the same method, their logic trees. Everybody’s logic is true to themselves, and if you can figure out said logic (which is not easy), it’s incredibly easy to figure out a lot of things about a person.
-So, having known 2.5 people with officially diagnosed autism (one autism, one asperger’s, one somebody’s kid), and combined with the lurking in this community (both pre and post lemmy), I’ve noticed an odd thing about autistic logic trees.
-Each individual branch on their logic tree is almost always something that a normal person might have. The difference is what a normal person would have that an autistic individual almost certainly either does not have, or has a toddler/child version of. The vast majority of these missing/underdeveloped branches tend to be what are considered right-brained behaviors. It’s like autistic people are colorblind, but in regards to right-brained function.
-Meaning roughly, anytime a normal person would use such things as emotion, it appears to me that an autistic person replaces said response with blunt logic. As in, they evaluate things on a flat scale of good/bad, with disregard to whether emotion was originally involved. One of the behaviors that I notice from autistic people is that they almost always choose a method that is guaranteed over a method that isn’t, regardless of whether or not it actually matters. This causes odd responses whenever a normal person “likes” something that is just flatly bad in an autistic individual’s mind (or hates something that is flatly good), and also when the guaranteed methods aren’t supposed to be used often/repeatedly.
-A portion of autistic people have figured this out, to mean that many individual preferences have approximately jack shit to do with intelligence or anything else. I might not be able to discern the difference between these people and a “neurotypical”. They’d just be people who do things slightly oddly to me (which is basically everybody).
-A portion of autistic people appear to have learned that liking “bad” things means that you are stupid. That’s what it sounds like to me when they call all NTs stupid and start making assumptions about NT behavior and reasoning. It sounds like they’re projecting.
If yall want some tips about interacting with people here are some
-The average person really is very stupid. But also very easy going. Tell them in advance that you’re not judging them even if it looks that way.
-Tell people in advance that you suck at people skills. This is a totally normal thing to suck at and people won’t be surprised.
-Allow people to be wrong. Mistakes is how people learn and how evolution works. Also, when you get to the top of human knowledge, you will realize that you’re still missing something and the only two tools you will have for such an occasion is doing random shit and exploding shit to see what happens.
-Separate assholes from “neurotypical”. Those are not the same. The average person doesn’t know how to deal with things they haven’t encountered (that’s you, and your job to teach them). Assholes require exactly zero personal responsibility and for everything to be exactly their way and no other way.
On another note or possibly rant,
there’s somebody I know who I swear has autism, and nevermind the rest of the symptoms that match, just his logic tree is totally wack.
-such as Gurren Lagann is politically offensive because of the flamboyant gay guy, Cowboy Bebop was a product of its time (this is a common saying for racist things for those who don’t know), “text to speech ass bitch” (accounting software learning video for work), “I’m locked out of pokemon games” (he didn’t own a switch) (also he’s bought one since), split the speakers from his computer with exactly three 3.5mm splitters… There was a time when he thought that seeing an AnimeNewsNetwork episode review for an anime specifically meant that the anime was garbage…(they do episode reviews for everything)
-Even his personal preferences are super wacky, he thinks the X-Files plot episodes were the best part, 2nd season of Jujutsu Kaisen is boring, etc…
-I really don’t know what to do with this guy, not because all of his logic/preferences, but because he deadpan refuses to recognize that he isn’t perfectly right.
I have to go back and read your description of how we come across again, but I’m going to comment on the advice a bit:
I think if I said exactly that – “I’m not judging you, even if it looks that way” – and it was interpreted as genuine, that message given verbatim is friendly. But I don’t predict it would be interpreted as genuine.
What’s a good way to phrase this so a person knows I’m not being snarky?
They don’t believe me. It goes like this:
“I have autism”
“Oh, well I had no idea!”
“I know, but I’m not so good with understanding people. What you’re seeing here is scripts I’ve practiced to get through the world”
“You seem perfectly fine to me”
“I know, I’ve practiced the scripts a lot. But I can’t practice for all possible scenarios like I practice for the commonly-used scripts.”
“Well you’re handling this conversation pretty good”
“That’s because I’ve had it hundreds of times”
But isn’t someone informing them also how people learn? I know that pain can be necessary to knock a person into a new paradigm, but just getting basic info seems like it could be as painless as “actually magnesium won’t constipate you. That’s wrong. It’ll give you the runs”
I do understand that something like “If you keep drinking and being late for work, you’ll regret it” doesn’t really come across to somebody and they probably need to feel the pain of those choices to learn new choices.
On the other hand, human knowledge is far deeper and wider than any human can absorb. It’s worth making a study of. So many people have been through so many things and written about it.
Sure, makes sense
That’s a good point. If you think about it, an average autistic encounters the autistic-neurotypical interface far more often than an average neurotypical does.
For a neurotypical, they might have 1 out of 10 interactions in their day being with autistic people, and other nine being with other neurotypicals.
For an autistic, the ratio could be reversed. 9 out of 10 interactions or relationships they have is with a neurotypical.
That difference, if not recognized by us, could lead us to over-estimate your awareness of how to successfully navigate this.
So yes, I’ll make more of an effort to educate, and try to keep in mind the other person does this far less often than I do. I guess I have been unconsciously assuming they had the same expertise as me (and getting offended when they didn’t enact that expertise to accommodate me, as I enact it to accommodate them). Thank you.
uh…don’t open with this…
-The perception of autism has been ruined by being popular. Since very few of the nonphysical autism symptoms are unique to autism, you can maybe try showing the bits that are normal first and explain at some point when they notice differences? I myself did not know there were physical symptoms until I read the Wikipedia entry.
-A large portion of comedy is just timing. As such inappropriate timing will bomb really hard. It’s also quite common for a person’s personality to not match their physical appearance or language use. If you mention things early and often, and not after issues arise, it should be okay. Also, mention if you have trouble with tones and inflections. (This made me think of the Johnny Carson tomahawk bit, where he kept his mouth shut for a solid half minute before saying his line)
-There are multiple ways to learn, and that’s actually one of the less common ones, especially if it’s just a flat “don’t” without an actual answer. The most common method being things exploding in your face.
-It’s rather easy to learn from prior knowledge, but all of human knowledge had to be discovered at some point, which means somebody had to fuck it up repeatedly to get there, because they sure as hell didn’t get perfect completion on the first try.