InThisTogether wrote:
This is a misperception that many people on the spectrum seem to have. To some NT's, the group has significant importance. But at least in Amercian society, for most people, the individual outweighs the group. There are other cultures in which the group outweighs the individual. But this is a cultural thing. Not an NT/ASD thing.
American society may be more individualistic than some other cultures, but the individual does not
outweigh the group. Can you give some examples of how you find this to be true? Many people overestimate the value and rights of the individual in the US.
Quote:
Just because people are aware of things like social nuances and the subtleties surrounding status within the group, it doesn't mean that they value the group over the individual. It just means it is probably easier for them to manipulate their own behavior to get the outcome they want because they can understand the nuances and better predict how others will respond to any set of behaviors.
I would suggest that such people DO value the group over the individual, precisely because it is the larger context of the group that enables them to get the outcome that they want. Valuing the group doesn't necessarily mean placing the overall well-being of the group above their own wants and needs. It means that the person values using the social order of a group as a means to achieve an outcome. A person can value social order in a way that is cooperative and potentially helpful to others. Or at the other end of the scale, a person can value social order in a way that is self-serving and potentially harmful to others. But either way, the person primarily values social order.
A person who primarily values themselves as an individual, does not want to use social nuances to achieve an outcome. Even if one is ABLE to do such things, it is abhorrent. It feels like a betrayal of self.
Quote:
People on the spectrum often lack that ability, and I think that is what leads to a lot of the "social underdog" things that I've seen happen. The nuances and subtleties are missed, and along with that, opportunities to "come out on top" are missed, too.
Indeed, many people on the spectrum may miss these signals, but not all do, and those who don't may not use the same context as NTs for interpreting them. The person you see as a "social underdog" may not see themselves that way, and may not see any need to "come out on top." These over/under concepts are inherent to social order and hierarchy. Those who value social order are communicating nuances and subtleties designed to preserve it.
The person who wants to "come out on top" must be able to decode these nuances as cues telling how to do so. To be able to decode such cues, or to even notice them, one has to first believe in the necessity to do so. The person who simply wants to be appreciated on their own merits as an individual may not even see the necessity of noticing such cues in the first place...or may be appalled and flabbergasted by the very concept of needing to do so.
What I am getting at here, is that these missed opportunities you speak of may not be "missed" at all. Opportunities to "come out on top" are created expressly BY and FOR people who believe there is a top to come out on. As such they are designed to exclude people who value individuality and equality.
Quote:
But I would say most NT's value themselves over the group. Otherwise you would not see things like crime, manipulation, taking advantage of others, and other forms of victimization. Clearly these things are prevalent in society as a whole. And it's often because people put their own desires/wellbeing over the group's.
How do you account for organized crime?
Again, valuing the group does not necessarily mean valuing the
well being of other people in one's own group, or in other groups. It means that the person values the functionality of a group.
Quote:
Go with the flow. The behavior is socially acceptable, even if it seems outrageous, uncomfortable, unfair, or weird to you.
I think it may be damaging to your son to tell him to deny his own feelings and perceptions in favor of what is socially acceptable (to you).
13 Feb 2014, 2:02 pm
. In my opinion, something like that is always a personal attack, regardless of whether it's accepted by the family group. I also see people try to obscure a personal attack by pretending it is a joke, or just friendly teasing. In my experience, if there's any ambiguity about the joke, 95% of the time it turns out to be a personal attack and the person just thinks they're being clever by adding a smile. I usually won't comment on it, because that only furthers their agenda by revealing that they scored a hit, but I will also flag that person in my head as someone I can't trust and should watch more closely.
