this post was submitted on 10 May 2024
119 points (75.8% liked)

Autism

6876 readers
3 users here now

A community for respectful discussion and memes related to autism acceptance. All neurotypes are welcome.

We have created our own instance! Visit Autism Place the following community for more info.

Community:

Values

  • Acceptance
  • Openness
  • Understanding
  • Equality
  • Reciprocity
  • Mutuality
  • Love

Rules

  1. No abusive, derogatory, or offensive post/comments e.g: racism, sexism, religious hatred, homophobia, gatekeeping, trolling.
  2. Posts must be related to autism, off-topic discussions happen in the matrix chat.
  3. Your posts must include a text body. It doesn't have to be long, it just needs to be descriptive.
  4. Do not request donations.
  5. Be respectful in discussions.
  6. Do not post misinformation.
  7. Mark NSFW content accordingly.
  8. Do not promote Autism Speaks.
  9. General Lemmy World rules.

Encouraged

  1. Open acceptance of all autism levels as a respectable neurotype.
  2. Funny memes.
  3. Respectful venting.
  4. Describe posts of pictures/memes using text in the body for our visually impaired users.
  5. Welcoming and accepting attitudes.
  6. Questions regarding autism.
  7. Questions on confusing situations.
  8. Seeking and sharing support.
  9. Engagement in our community's values.
  10. Expressing a difference of opinion without directly insulting another user.
  11. Please report questionable posts and let the mods deal with it. Chat Room
  • We have a chat room! Want to engage in dialogue? Come join us at the community's Matrix Chat.

.

Helpful Resources

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Edit: A few people have interpreted the title as serious, so I wanna clarify that it was meant as a sarcastic joke about how little sense the neurotypical world makes to me, but it is still legitimately me asking for help understanding said neurotypical world.

Was having a conversation with a friend today about why I seem unapproachable to people online. Apparently it's for 2 reasons.

One is that I say "K." all the time, as a short way of saying okay. She pointed out that most people find this rude and offensive. This kinda baffled me, because like why? She explained that like, if somebody were to give a long emotional speech and I just responded "K." that would be offensive. That confounds me. So it's rude in one context, and neurotypicals have decided to be offended by it in all contexts? But the reason it's rude is what confuses me more. Apparently it's considered lazy because you could have just typed out the word, but like, that applies to all text speech and nobody's mad about people shortening those words.

But it got more confusing when she explained the second reason, which is that I end all of my sentences with proper punctuation, which she said "makes people feel like I'm done with the conversation and not interested." But just a second ago improper grammar was rude, and now proper grammar is rude instead.

It baffles me. You can't just use proper or improper grammar. Use too much improper grammar and you're lazy and rude. Use too little and you're also rude. But you can't just use any improper grammar, you have to use the very specific subset of improper grammar that's been deemed acceptable and not lazy (even though it's exactly as lazy as what they do consider lazy.)

To be clear, I'm not bitter, and I'm definitely gonna adjust my behavior to hopefully seem a little less rude to people. I think that's just a nice thing to do. I just find the neurotypical mind utterly fascinating. I don't think they even realize how many contradictions exist in the social rules they all so easily accept.

(page 2) 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] oracleunity@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Did you do teenager k, work k, or spouse k?

[–] Sombyr@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 months ago

I'm not sure, but I've asked people and I'm told by my friends that before they knew me better, they thought I was either being passive aggressive, or maybe I was going through something and was being rude by accident (the friend I mentioned said a lot of people were asking her if I was okay, because apparently I came across like I was upset about something.)
I'm guessing that'd be the "spouse k" then since I think that's the one that often implies "okay, but not really okay."

[–] moitoi@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 months ago

I hope I won't be too long on the topic. This is an historical question.

Why it's like this, why are NTs deciding for us? It began in the Renaissance period with René Descartes. He was a philosophe and saw the human body as a machine. He wrote about this vision of the human. Each organ, muscle, bones are a piece of the machine. He did a direct comparison between the human and the material.

Later in the first half of the 19th century, an astronomer, and statistician had the idea to use statistics for human. Prior, statistic were in majority an instrument used for astronomy. Adolphe Quételet studied Scottish soldiers to make statistics of the human. He went further and did not only statistics on the body. He did statistics about injuries, body, and a lot more. With all of this, Quételet invented the average person. Without statistics, you can't have an average person. This idea is important for the following. It's also the key idea at the beginning of eugenic.

Someone was very interested in this topic. At the point, he coined the word “eugenic” itself. Francis Galton was the half-cousin of Charles Darwin. He came from a wealthy family and really like the work of his half-cousin on evolution. But, Galton wanted to apply it to society. He was also inspired by the concept of the average person of Quételet. Galton diverges of both of his predecessors. For Galton, the average person was not the person in the middle. No, it was the person at the bottom. There is a shift down compared to Quételet.

The poorer, the people without education, disabled, slaves, race shouldn't be considered with Galton. There were just this average for the one able to work and earn what they need to survive. The others were not even at the bottom of the social ladder.

People with education, wealthy people, were of course at the top of this ladder. Galton also believed in birth control based on the assumption of the categorization of the human. Wealthy should reproduce as their genetic was better.

On this base, Galton developed a lot of theories that we still use nowadays, and in particular in psychology and psychiatry. But, his ideas in pathology survived.

More general, some of his ideas and theories are still around. Eugenic was very popular at the beginning of the 20th century – Galton began his work at the second half of the 19th century. People founded during this time eugenic society, university cursus, etc.

With WWII, eugenic fall in disgrace. People working in the field made a shift in their career. They went to psychology, psychiatry, philosophy, sociology, anthropology…

In the 50s and later in the 60s and 70s, a new movement emerged with anti-psychiatry. In this ideology, you will find many points of view. They had and have in common that we should not intern people that aren't the average person, in other words the norm. Yes, the average person of Galton became a norm. If people are disabled, they don't produce anything and aren't included in the norm. They interned these unproductive people. Some went against it.

But, in one side of anti-psychiatry, you had people who think that people with psyachiatric issues were faking it. The idea is that people are lazy and invented their illness, condition, difference to do nothing. These people in anti-psychiatry wanted to close the asylums, so people will have to work. Spoiler alert: It didn't work, and people ended on the street or in jail.

But, all these people thinking people were lazy were in the normal at least. This scheme continued to today, and we end with NTs in charge of deciding...

I can only recommend the read of the book “Empire of Normality; Neurodiversity and Capitalism”, by Robert Chapman.

[–] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Use too much improper grammar and you're lazy and rude. Use too little and you're also rude.

Genuinely not sure what you mean by this.

It's rude to use "too little" improper grammar?

Where are you getting that from?

But to your main point:

Why are neurotypicals in charge of making up the social rules?

Why are you under the assumption that the social rules are something they all got together and agreed upon?

Social rules form over time in cultures, based on the interactions of individuals. It's part of the social zeitgeist. Neurotypical people make up the majority, they do the most social interaction, so the overall "rules" are formed by them.

[–] Sombyr@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 months ago

As far as the first thing goes, I used to avoid using any text speech at all, only used proper punctuation, always made sure my grammar was right. People started to get really annoyed with me because of it, telling me I was being overly formal.
As far as the second thing goes, that was a sarcastic joke about how the "rules" I'm told to follow are always full of contradictions, making them hard to follow. The joke being if autistics made the rules they'd be actual rules, and efficient ones. I'm well aware of why it's not actually that way.

[–] IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

You should ignore every single one of those people bitching about punctuation.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

They are not in charge. It's just that autistic people sometimes take non-critically not even what they are told, but the situation and the emotion as something normal, because that other person is more social and knows how it is.

The rules are different for every tone, discourse, context, etc. Adjusting for one of them won't do much good even.

You won't ever lift the weight of adjusting yourself for such expectations well enough. Putting more trust in your own perception of what's rude and what isn't is the only way to deal with it.

I mean, probably a therapist would say that. Still ask your therapist and not Lemmy.

[–] Sombyr@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I mean, probably a therapist would say that. Still ask your therapist and not Lemmy.

The funny part is I asked here specifically because I was directed to by a psychiatrist. They thought the best people to ask would be other people with autism who've already learned better how to interact because they'll understand what I need to hear better.
She also told me to consult the friend mentioned in my post, which is how that conversation started.
The reason I'm trying so hard to understand is because I keep having mental health crises over my inability to communicate and the fact that I have a habit of making people really mad and not knowing why or what I did to cause it. Being not only an outcast but having everyone hate me and not just imagining that is very stressful.
Trusting myself to know what's rude doesn't work. I piss people off extremely easily and don't even notice I did until they're refusing to speak to me.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I have the same problem.

When a conflict arises, just tell them what you think about it and that they are assholes both for deciding to be offended without asking you and for thinking that their idea of being nice is the only right one. Be more aggressive and open about what you think both when behaving like you do and when evaluating their response and opinions on that. And don't ask, beg or otherwise put yourself in a dependent\lower position.

Some of those people will get pissed off even more, because they were consciously abusing this, to be honest. Like with bullying at school, liking it that you're "wrong" and they are "normal". And if you feel yourself cut off, that succeeded and they are fine with it, and if you don't, they really won't like it. Expect mischief and cowardly shit behind your back from such.

But some will understand you better and won't make that mistake further. Well, after a few such aggressive actions, because it's not easy to understand immediately. These are much more numerous than you'd think.

Never try to track your own reactions, "mistakes" and correct for those. You'll get overloaded with depressive thoughts and indecisiveness.

Those people are smart enough to understand what is what. Some of them will if given better context, which I called aggressive. And some of them are consciously attacking you because they can.

[–] Sombyr@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

As far as I understand, people generally assume I'm being rude and dismissive, but they don't tell me that, they just kinda stop talking. Then they go and ask my friend why I'm like that, where she explains to them that I'm not being rude, I just have difficulty communicating, at which point they usually accept that, but still don't talk to me much because I'm just too difficult to get close to. Or at least they think I am, because they don't realize I'm enjoying their company because I don't express it, because I just assume they'd know because I'm paying attention to them.
That's what I'm working on. Showing people that I'm genuinely enjoying their company, that when they ask me questions I'm happy to answer, and so on. So it's not so much a problem of people not being willing to adapt to me, but the fact that they as much as me don't know how to adapt, so I need to meet them in the middle.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

but the fact that they as much as me don’t know how to adapt, so I need to meet them in the middle.

That may be true, but many times you'll find out that the other side considers only meeting at their side the polite behavior. Because they're "normal".

Because it's not that hard to meet in the middle, just remembering that people are different does that.

[–] Sombyr@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 months ago

I'm aware, and thanks for the advice. I've experienced a little of this already since I've been applying the advice I've gotten here. Luckily, so far, most have been willing to put some effort in now that I've shown I'm willing to as well. It's easy enough to just not talk to the people who won't, because they're already not trying.

[–] Emmie@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

There are no official rules, we NT just kinda feel it, like a sixth sense and so because we are the majority and we share this ability no one is even aware of it consciously. How can you describe a sight to a blind person? It’s difficult at best and impossible at worst. It’s like an instinct. We can describe it logically but it will always be imperfect and not feasible at times

[–] r3df0x@7.62x54r.ru 1 points 6 months ago

No one is specifically in charge of social rules. There are reasons why things are the way they are, and it seems common that geeks and people who have often operated outside of this system think that they can intentionally defy the social rules without consequence if they understand the reason for it and think they can compensate.

This sort of "social hacking" doesn't work because geeks don't fully comprehend all the reasons why things are the way they are and it ultimately blows up in their face.

[–] BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one 0 points 6 months ago (5 children)

Your friend sounds impressively tedious.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›