Why do Aspergers people have that look?

Post Reply New Topic

This rings so true except that for my daughter I feel she is looking away to mentally find that file that corresponds with what someone is saying. Almost trying to "visualize" what they are referring to (some NT's do this to a lesser degree sometimes). She will look off to the distance, thinking, and might make eye contact with a speaker for a moment or two then back to staring "off" as though trying to access the "file". This is totally different from her passive "veged out" stare that seems to be her "stuck" on a picture or idea, and the stare then seems "blank" and not a processing type stare. Then it is the same as what a NT might feel (at least for me) when a train goes by and you become somewhat entraced by the wheels whirring by and the clackity clack of the tracks and your vision blurs from zoning out. This can happen for my daughter without the train to focus on, she can enter that state very easily and even finds it preferable. So at least for my daughter, there are two types of these "stares".

<removed>

I dunno, my mom always comments on how I have a "spacey" look in my eyes. I'm thinkin' now leave me alone.

Fatuique? I remember being told I had dark circles under my eyes as young as three.

I often have a difficult time processing statements like this. To some degree, I felt offended by this statement.

I often marvel at the peculiar things that people find to be important. The need to drive a fancy car, or buy a certain brand of clothing for instance. Spending obscene amounts of money to have painted nails or to change the color of their hair. Filling up calendars with so many activities that they run about like freshly beheaded chickens and then complain that they never have a moment to themselves. All of these things I find to be incredibly perplexing. I wouldn't insult anyone however but saying that they're unimportant. They must be to some people. They devote such time and resource to such things. I just don't share their need to partake in these rituals. I'm actually quite happy to examine a butterfly in my yard and wonder how many times removed it could possibly be from the ones we "hatched" and released in the spring.

Everything is relative. To imply that "non-typical" people are unable to filter out or recognize that which is unimportant does us a great disservice. Part of the beauty I find in being myself is that I can see so very much in that which other people view to be so little. It's a shame such emphasis is placed on forcing us to conform to some pre-conceived idea that other people have of what is valuable.

NTs identify certain things as "not important" - but how many serendipitous moments came about because some scientist or inventor didn't reject some seemingly insignificant detail as "not important"? Closer to home, I'm a writer. My mind throws off dozens of ideas a day - at least - some of them sparked by seemingly unimportant things. (A chance glimpse of the trunk lid of a car, for example, just because I happened to glance in that direction, once triggered an idea.)

Neither the NT approach nor the Asperger's approach is necessarily "right", or better. They are different. In some situations, one has value, while in others, the other has value. Human beings are diverse neurologically as well as in other ways - and I'd argue that this difference persists because each approach has its merits and its uses. But it is unfair to either group to suggest they are doing the same thing as the other.

The filtering NTs do is something they - usually - find useful. But those of us with AS find it more useful not to filter everything. In fact, as a child, years before I'd even heard of AS, one of my aspie traits may have saved many lives. NTs simply filter out unpleasant smells. I don't, and one of the smells guaranteed to provoke a reaction from me is gas. In second grade, I kept complaining of the smell of gas in the boy's "basement". When my mother called the principal, she dismissed it as unimportant, just the result of too many boys missing the urinals. When I kept complaining, and my mother called the gas company, they dismissed it, too. But my mother had at least some aspie traits - she told them if there were an explosion, she would testify against them in the lawsuit. Well, that got their attention enough to at least go take a look. When they did... the police sealed off the entire block the school was on, because it turned out the pipes, which were a hundred years old, had rotted away and looked like rust coloured lace. So you tell me, was the detail so many NTs filtered out really "not important"?

Yes, there's a tradeoff. The lack of filtering that may have averted a disaster has also sent me along many a 'rabbit trail' in pursuit of something that wasn't, ultimately, important (although I might not have lived to be distracted by those if I'd filtered like everyone else). I'm not arguing because I got that one thing right I'm "better" than NTs. I'm arguing that each approach has its uses - and each approach is fundamentally different. To compare them is to compare apples and oranges.

Last edited by theWanderer on 08 Nov 2010, 8:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

My son's eyes I would describe a little different, but it is the same thing I see in another AS child I know: really bright and sparkly, seemingly extra alert.

I know other AS child who has the dreamy thing, and sometimes my son is like that, but more often overly alert..

I find this comment offensive and insulting.

I also find it inaccurate. I don't know of a statistical study offhand, but I am fairly sure that the chances of a serial killer or psychopath having Asperger's are less then the chances that they are neurotypical. Which does not mean that neurotypicals are essentially killers, either. There are more of them. So a higher percentage of killers are from their ranks. Nothing to do with cause and effect.

My guess is he means to mock this thread, but it still isn't really an appropriate post. I've asked a moderator to look into it. Or, he can see these comments and choose to edit.

I think my statement was grossly misinterpreted. This is proven by science. When people (NT) look at a photo or anything of your choice, their mind will pull out the things their mind finds relevant and that is what they will process and store, ignoring the rest. It has nothing to do with beauty, scenery, etc...it has to do w/ how the brain processes information. It is similar to the theories that prove our eyes will only allow us to see what makes sense and therefore there are tons of things in the universe that exist yet we are unable to 'see' them because they don't make sense to our brain.

Agreed. Craig28, your post was inappropriate.

For some, it could be PTSD

my asd son has a distinct elfin quality to his face. i think its about a lack of emotional expression on his face, his face - particularly his brow - looks "smooth", usually unmarred by emotion. he also has what i consider a peculiar cut to his eyelid/eye socket area. i cant really explain it, but its just different than what i see on my other kids. my other kids are so expressive in their faces, its a marked difference in my asd son. he has those expressions, but much fewer occurrences and his "just sitting here" face is fairly blank (except for his tongue which sticks out when he concentrates).

a couple months ago i was cruising the web looking for autism info, and came across this article:
http://blog.autismspeaks.org/2010/05/10/ursitti-atn/
what struck me wasnt anything about the article, it was the picture of the boy. he looks a LOT like my son, the smooth appearance of the brow despite the smile, the look around the eyes, and the slightly wide slightly snubby nose.

in particular, i think the spacey look has something to do with lack of movement in the brows. my son has what we call "the look", that is when hes aggravated or angry and his brows draw together. but thats pretty much the only expression he has that uses his eyebrows, and its so noticeable because its an extreme in an otherwise mellow face. everything else is a very smooth look with very very little movement of his brows and eyes. my SO is similar, very little use of his eyes and brows.

anyone else see what im talking about here in their child?

hahha i looked at the picture and yes, it reminds me of my son too, when he fakes a smile. i imagine i look the same in those occurences ( sometimes i'm so irritated by how fake my current attempt at a smile feels, like it's "stretch your face day" , it makes me want to laugh at myself and the smile turns sincere )

Then maybe "relevant to them" and not "important" would have been a more accurate wording of the original statement? I can only interpret what you put into words. I cannot read between the lines to find people's intentions.

I don't understand why you needed to point out to me that this is "scientifically proven". I never argued that what you said was or wasn't true, I said I thought it was presumptuous to make a statement that implied that only typical people are capable of distinguishing what is important. A simple "I think what I said was unclear" would have been sufficient. It's kind of even more insulting now, and it seems like you're blaming me for not understanding your ambiguous statement.

Important to the task at hand, I guess is a better way to phrase it. The reason I point out it is scientifically proven is because it is not a subjective process. I look at my computer screen right now and don't notice the advertisement in the upper left hand corner, I see it, know it is there, but I am not processing what it is or what it says because right now my brain only says that what I am typing in this little box is all that is important to the task at hand. I will then press Submit, and although my eyes and brain knew the advertisement was there, I will not remember it because my brain said it wasn't important to process it because it doesn't relate to the task at hand. That is how NT brains work. There are studies on NT brain processing, so I can only reference those. Could it be the same for non-NT people? Sure could. I have no idea. Does that describe it better? I have no idea why it seems that you find this offensive as nothing I have written was meant to be offensive, only clarification. There were no presumptions or exclusionary terms in my statements. There was no emotion in my statement and therefore no personal attack or insult.