Being ourselves, Aspartners, and Jack McClellan

Post Reply New Topic

This is very interesting, why do you think people want to do this?

I don't know...if I had to guess, I would guess that AS becomes kind of a scapegoat? For the person with AS, I suppose it is easier to say "my AS made me do it" than to acknowledge that you are a jerk, because if your AS made you do it, then it is "just the way you are" and you don't have to put effort into change. For the NT person blaming the AS, I suppose the underlying rationale could be something along the lines of "this part of him...his AS--which has nothing to do with me--is to blame. It is not related to something to do with me, it is him and the fact that he has this disease." It could also be that perhaps the AS person blames it on AS and the NT person follows suit.

But those are just guesses.

I think you are right, that's what I get about men. That they are how they are and can't help it, and other people are happy to say the same. It's just, since women are supposed to be the social glue, it seems to me that I'm blamed and told to try harder, which I do, but it isn't ever enough. And I'm not sure how to respond that's reasonable, yet effective to the accusations and demands for more. I do believe we all can grow. I just don't want to be a hamster on a wheel forever.

It's common for people to make excuses for their abusive partners. If they don't have AS, they will blame it on something else. It's easy to make excuses for someone because I have been there.

Cubedemon, I like to think of life as the process of trying to be one's best self. You want to maximize your strengths and interests and minimize your weaknesses and negative sides. You don't ignore or pretend the later don't exist, you just keep them in their place and don't let them define you. We make a lot of choices every day, and those choices can be positive or negative. So why not strive to make the positive ones?

The phrase, as commonly used, is not meant to be taken overly literally, no. They are just telling you that you should not pretend to be something entirely different than you are. It does not mean you can't put your best foot forward.

I see, yes. That makes a lot of sense too.

Thank you, LeagueGirl and InThisTogether.

Last edited by Waterfalls on 30 Mar 2014, 10:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Example: Your date has gone on and one about how she loves sports team X. You realize as she talks that she lights up, she is clearly enjoying sharing this. When she asks you if you like the team, you might say, "I am not really into sports, but talking about team X obviously makes you happy, and I enjoy seeing you talk about something that interests you so much." That is supportive.

Now, if you find you can't enjoy the conversation by focusing on how happy she is talking about it, you could say, "I am not really into sports, but I don't expect us to share every interest, and I respect how much you like team X. Maybe I can go with you to a game sometime so I will understand what you are talking about better." If she doesn't change the topic, let her talk a little more and then try to change the topic yourself.

If someone gives her a ticket to a game, tell her you are excited for her that she gets to go, because you know she will have a great time. No need to remind her that you aren't interested yourself; she already knows that. If you hear about a major event coming up, pay enough attention so that you can mention it, "hey, isn't the World Series this weekend? I assume you are planning to watch it? It is so exciting that X made it so far this season, isn't it!" That shows her you care about her interests.



I don't think someone would have used the phrase, "be yourself," in advising Rosa Parks in that situation. More accurately, she stood up for what she believed in; she stood up for herself and her rights as a human being. If you are going to break a law, you want to do it because you believe it is a law that needs to be broken, ie is unfair, and you have seriously considered all the ramifications and consequences. This goes way beyond the types of behavior and situations "be yourself" is designed for.

^^^This

I have mulled over this phrase for the past few days and I have come to the conclusion that it is based upon erroneous thinking. It presupposes that there is a natural and static self one can be and one should always be this static and natural self.

The problems I see with it is that this line of thinking does not allow for growth and understanding. In addition, it also disregards free will and choice. I believe that a part of being human is being able to reflect upon ourselves and how we think and change our way of thinking. I believe this is an exclusive characteristic to human beings. I don't believe animals can do this. If part of being a human being is to reflect on who we are then isn't assuming a static and absolute self is a concept that goes against who we are as human beings?

Maybe instead of being ourselves we should develop ourselves into the best we can be? How do we do this. We question our own beliefs and assumptions, we examine virtues, question them and adopt the best virtues we can come up with using the Socratic Method.

League_Girl, you are correct "Be Yourself" is a bunch of BS. What does everyone here consider positive and noble virtues? What do you all believe are positive habits to have and good behaviors to have and follow?

What do you all consider negative and positives? What do you all believe are negative habits to have and bad behaviors to have and follow?

How do we a Aspies live with nobility and virtue? How shall we all then live? How do we live within our respective societies and to interact and deal with others with honor and respect?

League_Girl, based upon what you have said about your ex-bf was his way of thinking and living a positive way to go? To examine this, based upon what you have told me did his way of thinking allow for growth? Did it allow him to determine what the good and noble life was? If one's thoughts are static and does not allow room for growth then how is it possible to pursue goodness, virtue and truth? If the rigidness of thinking prevents growth and the pursuance of goodness, virtue and truth and if your ex-bf was rigid in his thoughts then how was his way a positive way of living and existing? I do not see that it was a positive way of living or existing.

Therefore, if being oneself does not allow one for growth, pursuance of virtue, truth and goodness then how is being oneself a virtue?

I think elkclan married my ex.

It alienated him from his relatives because none of them wanted him around. He moaned about people feeling uncomfortable around him but yet he continued wearing his trench coat that made them uncomfortable. To me complaining about it is like me going on the bumper boats and complaining about getting wet and bumped from the other riders. Or better example, me wearing a costume out in public when it's not even Halloween and complaining about all he attention I am getting from it and continue doing it. If you don't want to do anything to fix your problem, don't complain. This bothers lot of people.

Then of course his way of behavior due to "being himself" is what jeopardize our relationship and why we are not together anymore and he said I gave up on him which makes zero sense. He had no intention of changing and working on anything so what did I give up? The crappy relationship? Being depressed and losing my functioning level? That is what I wanted and he was cool about us breaking up if it happens when I told him about it if things don't improve between us and then he was unhappy when I did it. He may have thought I was just threatening him when I told him I was thinking about breaking up and then was surprised when it happened because he saw I was actually serious. But I think what is more important, the relationship or yourself? If it's the relationship, you will try and improve things to make it better so you won't lose your partner. But hey you can't have it both ways, don't say you will not change and just accept you the way you are and then be unhappy when the break up happens. Then he called his all his faults when I told him if this is all who he is, then I don't like it and he called them faults and said everyone had them as if what he did is all normal. I just thought it was a bunch of bull and I wonder if he really truly thought that or if he was just f*****g around because he was pissed. But it sounded idiotic when he said it. That is like calling violence a human fault or child abuse a human fault or taking advantage of people or going out and scamming people.

The problem is that some people can "be themselves" and still be socially acceptable, while others cannot. Some people naturally have interests, mannerisms, styles of dress, etc. that society deem normal. So, they can walk around being themselves and still enjoy society's approval. Your ex-bf wished that he was one of those people, but he wasn't. He will have to decide between being accepted by society and being himself. It's not fair, but life's not fair.

If you have read my other posts I have written about my ex over the years, you will see he was not a pleasant guy to be with and you probably also wouldn't want him around either.

Also I told him to quit caring what people thought and why did it matter what strangers thought? But yet he kept doing what he did and hated the reactions he got from it which made no sense and it drove me crazy so I started to tell him if he isn't going to do anything about, he has no right to complain about it. I don't get these people.

Personally, I wish we could just get rid of all of these useless slogans and just get down to the meat of things.

**Addendum** Actually, there is a slogan I do like and it is by Forest Gump which is "Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're going to get." To me, to claim that life is unfair is to absolute. To me, life is a rich tapestry of ideas, beliefs, paths, and outcomes which can be any number of ways.

Think about eating a chocolate or a candy that is sweet or food that tastes good. If food tasted excellent all of the time and there was no bitter how can one truthfully enjoy the excellent taste to its' fullest. The excellent taste would become bland. What is sweet without the sour , right? If things were truthfully perfect, would the taste lose its' flavor so how would it really be perfect? How can perfection exist? What is perfection?