Does this count as being on the spectrum?

Post Reply New Topic

The length and depth of your apparent interest in certain topics is indicative of a person with Asperger's.

It is not diagnostic--but it just so happens that many Aspergians are "experts" in a topic which holds their interest in an immersive sort of way.

As far as I understand, "immersive sort of way" is too general to associate it with ASD whatsoever. No?

I was told this recently about the difference between the AS type of special interest and just an intense interest by someone who's not ASD (could be BAP still, or not even BAP, or whatever):

"A serious runner does not think about running all the time. It’s always on the mind like a running commentary – everything that is closely/remotely related. My autistic son (he has classic autism, not Aspergers, but the autistic obsessions are the same) thinks about his obsession, obsessively, first thing when he wakes up, talks & mutters about it in his sleep & every moment he is free mentally (while physically occupied with an activity) or free physically (not otherwise occupied) he would obsessively talks with himself about it or worse, he would naturally drive every conversation of the family gradually to that topic. It beggars belief that beginning from when he found his own tongue at age 10, he thinks & talks about nothing else literally other than his obsessions 90% of the time. Even his own sibling cannot tolerate it and would quietly leave the room. He cannot help it – it is a specific characteristic of the ASD person. Does the above explanation help you understand what an autistic obsession is? Hope that helps."

If this is the RRBI version of having an interest in something then I don't have RRBI. The point seems to be that RRBI interferes with other things.

I also read about the AS "hyperfocus", which is again something I don't have. Apparently it's a kind of focus where you can shut out the whole world for long hours, not noticing anything beyond your own thoughts or whatever thing you are focusing on. That's not me, I would hate feeling disconnected from my surroundings and from my body like that. I do have strong concentration and I pride myself on it but it's not like this. It sounds cool tho' btw, this special ability.

Ah see what you've quoted DOES fit me when I have a 'special interest' on the go. Not everyone on the spectrum has a special interest all of the time and some may not have any but perhaps present with other traits such as strong aversion to change, or insistence on routines (which I personally don't). Someone else may just have a narrow range of interests and perhaps struggle to be interested in or focus on anything outside of that range. I think sensory issues are also included under category B in the DSM-5 but I might have that wrong.

As for my other comment, I probably haven't explained it well as, to be honest, I wasn't immediately sure what my therapist was getting at, but it's not so much an interest in how the mind works but my overall thinking style and the way I talk about it? Unless I'm mistaken by what she meant.

I believe my hypothesis is poorly phrased.
Revised: Your thought process is a rigid system that acts as a buffer to novel sensory input.


I think the hypothesis is weakened by this, or you may be collecting mimic data to better handle socialization. I'm not entirely sure.


Yes, the thought process becomes detrimental to communication. You said you had a non-hyperlogical mode but it is difficult to adopt it when in the other. I think this is where I see "restrictive" in the sense that there is a difficulty to transition.


Which makes it indeterminate on a sensory processing effects, but physical changes can induce a developmental disorder to the point where it is indistinguishable.



I think I'm having trouble because of the new diagnostics in the DSM-V are being blended with the previous incarnation in my head. I think if you are curious as to your classification you should probably apply the criteria that would formerly(professionally) classify at this time. I'll post that below, but physical stimming behaviors seem to be micro-oriented and I for one rely on macro-oriented one's (e.g. routine driving paths, methodical approach to handling work related tasks, and of course restricted interests). Since RRBIs are methods to handle sensory input that would be overwhelming otherwise, I believe the mechanism behind them is that the brain needs to 'feel' in control of the environment.

So, in your fluid mode, are you hyper-aware of the moment/environment as you interact with it (e.g. like you have a narration happening as you process input but it is still automatic)?




Logic being held as a value construct that seems to pervade your worldview. Objectivism could be seen as a logic ideation philosophy.


Good question. For my wife, she obsessed over people in conjunction with mimicry. For you, it would seem that you needing to seek out empathetic people to learn is a pretty good sign.


Does this change with variability of circumstances (e.g. more people involved, unpredictable people, etc.)?



Have you looked into PDA behavior profile? My wife and son both acted like teachers to their peers in elementary school which is one of the indicators.

Your case doesn't sound like it. If you are curious, look into it. It is also called Autistic Regression.



Acting NT can cause a burnout. Basically, more autistic traits will surface while established coping mechanisms will not work. It also kind of acts like depression.


Hmm... your interpretation seems narrow in the sense of simple types of social contact as being indicators. There are atmospheric aspects to social communication and generally surrounds figuring out intent or emotion in the other person... just because you are in a novel situation doesn't mean you suddenly forget how to perform automatic cues like eye contact and such if you have developed that.

On a side note, you seem to have narrow interpretations when you apply your analysis, and you said before on debates that you do not like it when the conversation breaks down into relativism. Is this keeping you from finding an accurate classification for yourself, because the listed criteria that leave open interpretations of types that fall within? I'm just musing here, though.


So, you are consciously aware of automatic responses? I don't think people who instinctively react are aware of the reaction. Also, if you are presented with someone with unknown intent and motivations, it sounds like you are saying that you will avoid trying to grasp another person unless they show you that is what they want. Is dismissing an avoidant trait to prevent novel interaction?

I will cover the rest later...

Your immersion in this issue, frankly, bespeaks Aspergers.

Even if your "special interest" doesn't permeate your existence, your fascination with the precise nature of your "special interest" seems, to me, to be of at least a rather immersive nature.

It's not necessarily a "bad" thing. If you could become as immersed in something like "finding a way to drain the quagmire which is the state of our world today," as you are in this topic, excellent solutions would, inevitably, be promulgated by you.

Ah so you really are that completely obsessed with your interests? You have a hard time not talking about it to people?

Yes, sensory issues are included in that category in DSM-V, you remembered that right. I don't have those either.

What's "the way you talk about it" in terms of your analyzing your own cognition?




So, you would then diagnose every thorough and analytical person in this world as AS? Is this what you are saying? Or, if you mean there is another factor beyond that, do let me know about it.

I don't see thoroughness as a bad thing, no.

As for topics like "finding a way to drain the quagmire which is the state of our world today", those are not concrete enough, unfortunately. In the sense that I cannot connect that sort of stuff to concrete implementation so there would be no goal with it so I wouldn't spend much time thinking about it.

I'd of course be happy to contribute to making this world better in some realistic way

I definitely have a hard time not talking about my interests. I don't constantly have a 'special interest' on the go but when I do it is all I want to do, think, or talk about and moderating this is very hard even with the self-awareness I required as a result of my diagnosis.

Sensory issues can be mild and you may not be aware your experience of sensory stimuli is atypical- I'm not saying that's the case for you but it's a possibility.

As for your other question, I'm not 100% sure but I imagine she was referring to my detailed description of and analytical approach to myself which can get obsessive. Personally, I'm also egocentric but not in a narcissistic way.

I also agree with Kraftie though that's not to say you are definitely on the spectrum, just that you are presenting in a way that is reminiscent of someone who could be.

As I've said before, it's the number and presentation of traits that count towards a diagnoses as most people in the general population will have some 'autistic traits'.

It's all a very interesting subject though; 'what makes someone autistic'...

Ah thanks, that's easier to understand. That's interesting. But no, I can't relate to this, I don't mind "novel sensory input", no need to strongly buffer against it. Maybe that's why I don't have sensory issues like many AS people do?

But, you could say I developed some - indeed strong - buffer against the "touchy-feely" emotional side of things/people/life. That's not sensory stuff at all, though.

If you are saying ASD is more about the former, well, that's not me and I dunno exactly what the latter one means.




"Collecting mimic data", like? I don't know what you mean, got some typical examples of that?

The girls that I started talking to more, they help in several ways: 1) they just involve me more in fun social stuff, they put me in different moods than my default neutral one 2) they tell me about some people related stuff, e.g. what may bother other people that people don't want to directly mention (about my logic/bluntness). And it's pretty easy to absorb, what they say, compared to trying to analyze in that unnatural fashion with the crappy theory stuff.

Tbh, spending time with them, that really reminds me how it doesn't help that I really did miss out on a lot of socializing in high school.




I get you and I agree on that one. I definitely lose the ability to connect to others in that mode. Though this mode is online only, the online stuff is an important aspect of my life (it connects to my IRL life a lot in ways). So I do see it as an actual issue, not brushing it aside as "online stuff is not real".




I never had sensory processing problems. Just those subtle "touchy-feely" aspects of socializing... along with losing contact with people as described.

I don't think there were physical changes from the loss of hearing that would directly cause any disorder but indirectly it could have affected my socializing, yes.




As I said I have the DSM-V copy but thanks anyway

Btw, there is this bit about severity levels of the symptoms, the least severe version of category A:

"Without supports in place, deficits in social communication cause noticeable impairments.
Difficulty initiating social interactions, and clear examples of atypical or unsuccessful responses to social overtures of others. May appear to have decreased interest in social interactions. For example, a person who is able to speak in full sentences and engages in communication but whose to-and-fro conversation with others fails, and whose attempts to make friends are odd and typically unsuccessful."

If you leave out "clear examples of atypical or unsuccessful responses to social overtures", "to-and-fro conversation with others fails" and "odd" attempts at making friends, the rest would fit me. I did have unsuccessful attempts in high school, due to not trying enough or just bad luck, idk. (I did still hang out with a couple of girls but that wasn't all that great.) And yeah, I looked very aloof and I still often do.

So essentially a lot of keeping my distance, too successfully, is what I relate to in this. The extra oddness nope.

Dunno what supports are meant there, either, but looking back, I sure would have been better off if someone tried to involve me better in stuff with people, giving support that way. I remember when I was 18 and got on an online forum for the first time in my life, someone told me they really want to "take my hand" and take me to socialize and have fun with people IRL and he said he could see me getting used to it really quick and he especially could see how much good it would do to me. I had no idea what he was talking about back then lol. Too bad we didn't try that.




I have no stimming and never had any, micro or macro either. I don't find sensory input overwhelming, I'm pretty normal there. But this is interesting like your reworded hypothesis is, I didn't know all RRBIs were to handle overwhelming sensory input. I can't relate to that, nope.

I usually take the same route for some things because I don't often stop to think and change it up, no logical need for it and no impulse comes up either to change it. Familiarity in this sense is a natural background for me without focusing on it consciously. If that make sense.

I said "usually", though. Sometimes the impulse does come and then I change up things a bit, because why not.

I do have a methodical approach to work, sure, that seems normal to me. And control is important to me like it is important to quite a few people (not to everyone though, I know that).




What narration? No, no hyper-awareness, I'm just directly aware of the environment as usual. Why would I need extra thinking for that? That's why it's fluid, I guess.




Yeah I value objectivity. I said in my OP that I'm like, 90% rational. The other 10% is when I do have some emotions or feel some connection with people.




OK, I never thought about mimicry or other details like that, let alone obsess over it.

Those empathetic people, I explained above why it's good to spend time with them.




No. It's very rare that I get to go to parties with more people there but I enjoy those just fine if the people are fun enough. Also, it usually means less talking is needed.




PDA as in "Pathological demand avoidance"? That was what google found for me. I don't relate to that, no. Never a problem with responding to demands. No labile mood either.

I wasn't deliberately trying to act like a teacher btw, it just happened because of my natural drive to correct/educate people that I apparently already had in kindergarten


You didn't comment on the following but I'd like to emphasize it. Just curiosity (not expecting a deep answer that will answer all my problems lol). Would it be different from the mechanisms behind ASD? "Hmm, I developed that "hyperrational mode" a few years ago, or so, I think, as a result of dealing with topics needing the analysis (as I said above) and at the same time having had no opportunity for a long time to socialize with people. There could be a connection between these two things, yes"




Looked it up, yeah no, don't relate. (According to this link https://musingsofanaspie.com/2013/12/19 ... adaptation)




OK let me clarify... I don't plan to act different from what I am. Whatever I can understand from the emotional aspects or absorb through experience without it feeling forced, that's what I care about.

This may interest you, I did notice the process with me trying to (re)integrate with people goes like this: 1) I notice a repeating problematic situation, that I'm experiencing yet again 2) I try to analyze it on my own - for this, I used to try with those crappy theories, I no longer do that, now I just use my default logic. It's still a process that can take a while. 3) I somehow end up realizing some previously unconscious emotional aspects to the situation (taking place in myself or in other people) or other people point me to it (those empathetic girls for example). 4) At this point I suddenly have a concrete conclusion on the problem, it feels good and not forced, and I can move forward. Slowly, though.

Tbh I do a similar process with analyzing myself too for some psychological issues. (Nothing crazy deep tho'.)




I would say there are basic and there are more advanced sides of social dynamics, yeah. (Including basic aspects and advanced aspects of the atmospheric stuff and of seeing intent and emotion in others.) I still think I have the basics for most of it by instinct. I never had to learn / develop those. Otoh, I don't think I can get to some very advanced level and I don't want to try and force that, either.




Well I interpreted and summed up the DSM-V ASD criteria as something I don't have... so in terms of that - the simple question of having ASD or not as per the official criteria - I had no real problem classifying myself, but I'm fine with discussing some aspects more closely, especially about the social issues I've had, of course. It's fine to hear more input from people here and I'm definitely still curious about that "unnamed issue" as to what kind of social problems I have if it can even be labeled neatly. Beyond just calling it low EQ or something.




No, I'm not consciously aware of automatic stuff, I didn't mean to imply such a thing. Did you skim that too fast or did I word it really bad/unclear?

I just tried to describe what it is that I see about people - all the visible stuff, using my two eyes - and where I said "just somehow adjust along that. Kind of being in sync" is the part I think is instinctual reactions. Notice how I said I can't analyze it out and I'm not even interested in doing so. Precisely because it comes from instinct.




OK No rush btw

Gotcha, yeah that's not me.




OMG you people all want to dive into all these remote possibilities here.

Don't get me wrong, it's not a problem, I just see no need to question every little thing.

No, my sensory experience is not atypical. I never had problems like AS people describe their lives. I did this test before about AS that had a lot of questions about sensory issues and I did not relate to them. Etc.




Are you so intensely into analyzing yourself because you want to fix issues in your life? That's why I'm doing it so much.




Presenting in what way? Being analytical and thorough? Anything else?




You mean the underlying psychological mechanisms? Yeah that would be interesting to know.

The official criteria itself is clear tho', severe enough social issues and the restricted repetitive stuff. I have no idea why the two would go together, tho'. That's what's not really intuitive to me at all.

Note: I will be a bit too busy for a few days but then I'll be back. Thanks.

After deliberating and considering the criteria, I would say you have S(P)CD or something like that with a comorbid alexithymia or subdued emotional capacity (I'm not sure what it is specifically). The latter making it more ASD like on the surface but when you delve deeper obvious differences exist.

I still think you may have learned social behaviors that are instinctually based for NTs, but since you don't have anything straining your sensory controls like with ASD there isn't an overload to diminish your trained behavior. In other words, in your developmental years you Pavloved yourself to handle most social communication but subtle and complex forms lead to complications that just confuse you as to what went awry.

I think this was simple, when you withdrew to work on stuff you just became out of practice and when you returned you just had to get back on the bike, so to speak.

I think your ability toward hyper-rationalism is just a byproduct of intelligence and reduced emotional capacity. In the case of someone with ASD exhibiting it, it is a control mechanism to filter, buffer, or otherwise alter the sensory environment.


I think you are describing a self administered communication treatment/training program. That is interesting.

Anyway, I think we thoroughly vetted the ASD criteria and determined no concrete RRBIs, which is required before one can suggest Social (Pragmatic) Communication Disorder.

Your thoughts?

What is it that's making you, itsme82, not connect with people. Is it impatience for people who aren't as thorough with everything as you are?

Have you heard about a person named Tony Attwood? He is considered one of the most foremost authorities on Aspergers. Perhaps give him a read? He speaks of the paradox of people who want, and concurrently don't want, to connect with other people.

This ambivalence, I find, frequently occurs with people on the Spectrum, and with BAP folks as well.

I sense, overall, that you are on the "Broadened Spectrum," since you don't exhibit many traits frequently associated with being on the Autism Spectrum per se. But you seem to exhibit at least some.

What might be more revealing is how you actually relate to people who don't share your thoroughness. Do you openly show your disdain? Or do you just refuse their social invitations?

One solution might be to join an organization which caters to whatever special interest you possess. Joining WP could also provide you with a way to connect with people.

Maybe you've started on the proper path already to attain your goal of connecting with like-minded people.

I would like to second this.

OK thanks for the input. That makes sense for the most part, yep, with some communication problems along with the "comorbid alexithymia or subdued emotional capacity" and how this differs from ASD.

What makes you think so much though that I "Pavloved" myself as a kid about social communication? What did I say that sounded like that? I really have to strongly emphasize here that I did no such thing. Whatever I learnt - including most aspects of nonverbal cues - was learnt automatically, without me paying attention to it. Whatever was not learned was not learned, either automatically or consciously. About as simple as that.

Yes now I do try to improve a bit more by consciously analyzing and doing that "training program" lol. Of course the best still would just be simply have people in general socially include me a lot while at the same time being open and helpful about some bits of people related stuff so I can have more experiences and pick up some of it that way but I think I missed that train in my the teenage years. (Those girls I mentioned do help though.) So I either catch up this way or not catch up at all. My choice.

As for subtlety in expression - that sort of thing makes me unsure if it's a negative thing that's being expressed. Even when not. That's definitely a kind of confusion. I don't think I'll learn that kind of "more advanced aspect" but I can make myself assume that it's probably neutral stuff, not negative, and I can sometimes make myself take into account the social aspect of the situation to see it's neutral actually. This is new for me.

Or another area that I see as more "advanced": making a small mistake when relating to others - say, I allow myself to be too blunt when sometimes I just can't hold back an opinion because I see the necessity for saying it, even if I know it's blunt, and then someone does show how they didn't like it - it would be seen as small, and not taken out of context, not seen so black and white. I can sometimes take into account aspects of the situation to see that better. Again this is new for me. Before I'd just not think about it and that's ok for small matters but for other ones nope, would lead to bad places with people eventually.

Can you please give me an example of a "complex form", too, to see what you were thinking of?




Makes sense. That "reduced emotional capacity", it probably is in part inborn and yes, in part made worse by those disconnected out of practice years. And missing a lot in my teenage years too, I think. (When I didn't get anywhere socially in high school.)




Criteria for S(P)CD: https://psychcentral.com/disorders/soci ... -disorder/

"1. Persistent difficulties in the social use of verbal and nonverbal communication as manifested by all of the following:

Deficits in using communication for social purposes, such as greeting and sharing information, in a manner that is appropriate for the social context."

Greetings - seems a basic thing, no problem.

Sharing information - I'm a bit too private but I can do "basic" small talk and can share some information there as part of how those small talk things just seem to go. I don't mind that.

However beyond such small talk here and there, when I'm around people in general, I'm too aloof to initiate sharing of stuff unless others do it and then they still have to really engage me before I become a bit more connected "human" and start sharing a bit in a spontaneous manner like other people do it. Some people did have a problem with that before, other people didn't see it as an issue (or just they were able to engage me naturally).

That's the more complex side of social dynamics...


"Impairment of the ability to change communication to match context or the needs of the listener, such as speaking differently in a classroom than on a playground, talking differently to a child than to an adult, and avoiding use of overly formal language."

I apparently assumed the wrong context when doing the "hyperrational mode" in some online places. Even though it seemed like it was OK places for it. Apparently most people just remain people (=social beings) in those contexts too tho', lol.

Also if, say, someone starts cracking jokes in general, then if I'm not already engaged enough (that is, not put in the mood enough) I will not think of it as something to respond to with other jokes etc. I will still enjoy them though (assuming it's the kind of jokes that I can follow). Maybe too subtly, some people don't realize I actually enjoyed them.

Otherwise no problems here, if engaged, I'm okay even if not the best. And in general, recognizing such explicitly definable contexts - like someone is a child or an adult, or it's a classroom or a playground etc - is perfectly fine.


"Difficulties following rules for conversation and storytelling, such as taking turns in conversation, rephrasing when misunderstood, and knowing how to use verbal and nonverbal signals to regulate interaction."

No problem here. At least these examples seem basic things, including the nonverbal signals.


"Difficulty understanding what is not explicitly stated (e.g., making inferences) and nonliteral or ambiguous meaning of language (e.g., idioms, humor, metaphors, multiple meanings that depend on the context for interpretation)."

Yeah, some jokes etc are quite the problem. Especially if I'm not put in that social mood. Apparently thinking does depend on what mood you are in (there's actually very interesting psychology research on this). I can definitely see the effects of that. Anyway, some jokes I'll just never understand. Idioms in general are ok, but I remember that as a kid I didn't understand them. I didn't try to learn them though, as I got older, these things just started to make sense without my trying to learn about them at all. With metaphors, eh, some I understand, some not. Ambiguity I don't like when it gets in the way.


"2. The deficits result in functional limitations in effective communication, social participation, social relationships, academic achievement, or occupational performance, individually or in combination."

Makes me less compatible with some people. And, my misinterpreting subtleties as negative did result in that social anxiety thing, etc. So it did limit me.


So, all in all, that's not too far off but, on another site (https://www.autismspeaks.org/blog/2015/ ... it-treated) they list these things, and I see most of it as "basic" skills that I see as obvious and no problem with them:


* responding to others
[i]Gesturing is an important form of nonverbal social communication.* using gestures (like waving or pointing) - fine, basic.

* taking turns when talking or playing - fine, basic.

* talking about emotions and feelings - NO this is difficult lol. I get oblivious about these things as well, so someone really has to engage me before I get in the right state/mood/whatever that's needed beyond willingness to open up a bit.

* staying on topic - fine, basic.

* adjusting speech to fit different people or situations – for instance, talking differently to a young child versus an adult or lowering one’s voice in a library. - fine, basic.

* asking relevant questions or responding with related ideas during conversation - fine, basic.

* using words for a variety of purposes such as greeting people, making comments, asking questions, making promises, etc. - fine, basic.

* making and keeping friends - as a kid I had friends just fine. Haven't lost that ability of making friends but I did notice I had to catch up on some things - that I must've missed when a teenager - when trying to maintain the relationship with friends in the last couple of years. That seems more okay now. The result is that I have some closer friendships now that I didn't before. It was kind of painful to get as far as this though... And yes, before that I had the socially oblivious period with no friends keeping in touch.


Oh and I think I forgot to reply to this bit earlier:



The dismissive avoidant attachment style? No, that's not to prevent "novel interaction". That's just my difficulty with intimacy in romantic relationhips. (Another problem beyond the social stuff, eh lol.)

I'm actually surprisingly very open to any "novel interaction" if someone walks up to me and initiates a bit of small talk or whatever. I feel easily connected in that context. (But of course if the talk or the person ends up boring, I will politely excuse myself after a few minutes.)

And yeah. You wouldn't know that kind of openness is there in me if you looked at how aloof I appear by default. (I did actually notice tho' that I can make myself look more open by changing some internal attitude but this is something I don't entirely understand. But... I was probably decently open before the social anxiety developed and I just remained "closed" even after I got past most of the social anxiety.)


OK that's all I can think of. Really appreciate your having analyzed all those detailed descriptions before, it did help. It's OK if you don't have too much in-depth input for this now, of course.

Last edited by itsme82 on 11 Apr 2017, 2:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I'm back now for a bit. Should I assume you saw nothing else, or you haven't yet put it into words?




Er, no, I don't place expectations like that on people. I mean, when it's about a work environment then yes, there are such expectations for getting the job done well. Beyond that, outside a work context, no.

Oh yes I can be impatient but it's not about that. It mainly happens when things get in the way for some objective or goal. Or when I look like that know-it-all correcting BS but it's all with good intentions. Or just simply correcting things that are not BS, just simply need to be corrected for whatever other reason. (Though I can be incredibly patient with explaining things but that can't be seen when I just correct something quickly.)

(Did I come off like this here?)


So what is it about not connecting with people, hm, well it's the following 1) too aloof and uninvolved mood-wise by default 2) the hyperrational mode in the wrong context 3) outside the hyperrational mode still a too blunt know-it-all for some people.

For 1), I want to make that a bit better. For 2), I'm able to just drop it if recognizing it leads nowhere. For 3), I can't and won't fundamentally change, I will never be a soft empath, but I can try and develop a little more foresight for certain situations, so again, want to improve a little but not by changing myself per se.




I didn't say I don't want to connect with other people. I don't relate to any real paradox here. But if you have a link on this topic (I haven't found any with google so far), do let me know.




Yeah, as I said I borderline qualify for BAP. Otoh, I still wonder how BAP is different from OCPD.




That seems like on the wrong track, sorry. I don't have disdain like that, and no, I don't refuse social invitations but I don't get such a thing often. And so I want to learn to be less um, aloof looking, so I get more easily connected.

Otoh, did I say or do something on this forum that makes me look like I disdain less thorough people? Because I have no idea where this guess of yours came from. But it might help me understand some of the difficulties in general.




Maybe you didn't read every post (which is understandable with me going into so much detail describing things).

But it was discussed that I don't qualify for having a special interest. Since it's not the same kind of intensity or hyperfocus than what's described for special interests. Etc.

I remember now, I actually asked you what makes it look immersive in the AS way, other than being analytical and thorough, is there any other factor you noted? I'm curious.




Heh I tried to look for a good place before but idk what "like-minded people" would mean in practice.

Other than that... I'll just improve on the things I listed above and move forward somehow.

Hi Itsme82,

I wasn't saying that you have the "paradox" I described, nor did I say you have disdain for people. I was merely speculating, and asking questions. And you answered them:

1. You don't feel you have the "paradox" I described. That you concurrently want, and don't want, to connect with people.

2. You don't have express overt disdain for people.

No, you don't come off as somebody who arrogantly corrects people. Rather, you come off as thorough---and therefore, people might get the wrong impression. You stated that yourself.

No, I don't believe you should "change." Rather, I believe you should adjust a little, and consider that people aren't as thorough as you. At the same time, I believe you should seek out people who believe in your philosophy of life--in your thoroughness. Those sorts of people exist. And some of them even have a good sense of humor

In essence, I believe it would be easier for you to connect to people if you show that you enjoy people. People who are logical/analytical tend not to give the impression that they enjoy people.

Please do remember that I'm asking questions, and I am NOT assuming you are a certain way. It's impossible for me to determine if you are a "certain way", because I don't see you and I've never met you. It would be presumptuous of me to make such an assumption about a person.

In truth, I believe you have a pressing desire to relate to others. And are making a fine attempt at it. The reason why I am responding to you is because I feel you have a sincerity about you.

And I admire your proficiency in English, since it is not your first language. I am curious as to where you reside; but, obviously, you don't want to reveal that information.