Page 11 of 17 [ 268 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 ... 17  Next

alwaysnow
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 29 Dec 2013
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 90

15 Feb 2014, 9:33 am

Wow, reading this thread has given me a clear view of why I am never able to connect with others in a "meaningful way" and making friends.

It's because connecting with someone in what most people consider a "meaningful way" by nature is meaningless to me because I am unable to understand it. And in turn, what I consider meaningful, other people consider meaningless. For me, simply being with another person and 'exchanging information' with them is how (the only way) I know how to communicate with others, whereas for others this in itself is pointless and meaningless in terms of establishing friendships. I have always thought it was enough (although I never understood why it always failed me) just to display an interest in someone else by sharing anything with them, if I didn't want to get to know them I simply wouldn't have talked to them in the first place.



ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,155
Location: Long Island, New York

15 Feb 2014, 3:53 pm

dianthus wrote:
Bumping this old thread up because it's a great one.

Moondust wrote:
The only difference with aspies is that NTs intuitively learn, very young, that anything a person says has to be deciphered because the meaning is not literal. I discovered this in my forties.


^This is one of the things that still leaves me wondering if I am really autistic or not. I think I learned this intuitively at a young age. I've always known that people "do" things with conversation. I just can't always tell exactly what it is that they are getting at, and/or figure out how to respond to it. I am never really sure if I really understand the implicit meaning or not, unless I test it somehow.


I knew they were doing that at a young age. I just was clueless as to the details. Now that I am older understand well certain things they do in this regard, other things I am still clueless. Other things I am not sure about. I am sure there are things I think I understand but in reality only partially understand them if I understand them at all. That is the thing that scares me and makes me shy away and go mute in social situations.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


Rocket123
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2012
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,188
Location: Lost in Space

15 Feb 2014, 6:10 pm

Moondust wrote:
I remember when I used to join a conversation because I overhead a question I had the answer to and the people talking didn't. I was in my late forties when I first discovered that what they were doing was mingling and bonding, not exchanging information, so they didn't appreciate my joining in the least.


This probably explains why, during my lifetime, my two favorite places for interacting with other people have been work and school. As in both, it seems acceptable to converse with others simply to exchange information.

I find these threads simply fascinating. I have spent 50 years essentially being clueless about what it means to socialize.



Moondust
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 May 2012
Age: 62
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,558

15 Feb 2014, 6:21 pm

Rocket123 wrote:
Moondust wrote:
This probably explains why, during my lifetime, my two favorite places for interacting with other people have been work and school. As in both, it seems acceptable to converse with others simply to exchange information.


Same here.


_________________
There are two means of refuge from the miseries of life: music and cats - Albert Schweitzer


pensieve
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Nov 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,204
Location: Sydney, Australia

15 Feb 2014, 11:16 pm

Greentea wrote:

My therapist told me years ago (and I didn't get it back then ) that when you rant to someone, you're actually attacking that person, even if you're ranting about something not related to that person. Because what you're DOING when ranting is expressing anger, then it's taken as being angry at the listener.

Also, when you dismiss something a person says as unimportant, such as a movie they've seen, what you're actually DOING is dismissing the person, telling them you're not interested in more closeness with them. When you're interested in getting closer, you say things like öh yeah, wonderful movie!". You show more enthusiasm for their ideas the more closeness you want. The intention is not to exchange opinions about the movie, but to establish the quantity and quality of the relationship between the 2 people.

All the above is nauseatingly obvious to any NT and astoundingly new to me.


I feel the same way about these things. I thought I didn't like hearing a person rant because I'm oversensitive but it does feel like I'm being attacked. Even when people disagree.
My bipolar sister rants a lot to her friends when she's drunk. I wonder what could be going through their minds. They may stay and try to talk to her until it all reaches a point when they can't take no more.

And I pretty much have a few people in mind I would talk to just to get closer to them. It's not everyone I meet. Most times I show interest to be polite and practice my own social skills.

But if this is true due to politeness and oversensitive emotions I'm closer to an NT than I think. I still like to exchange specific information and get a little hurt when people show a lack of interest in those things I'm passionate about though.


_________________
My band photography blog - http://lostthroughthelens.wordpress.com/
My personal blog - http://helptheywantmetosocialise.wordpress.com/


Bodyles
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Aug 2013
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 808
Location: Southern California

16 Feb 2014, 9:53 am

What's most frustrating to me is that because NTs are constantly inserting subtext and hidden meanings into their words and actions in conversations they tend to automatically assume that whatever I say has those subtexts and hidden meanings as well, except it it almost never does.
So NTs are constantly reading into my words things that I did not say and thus missing what I actually said which is generally exactly what I meant, nothing more or less.

This is especially annoying since I often do something that I get the impression other aspies do as well: reporting.
That is to say, sometimes I just say things about the world that I observe without meaning anything other than I observed that particular thing.
I almost never actually mean anything beyond the observation, but NTs are constantly erroneously interpreting my reporting as criticisms, judgements, and/or requests, and this causes everything from simple misunderstandings to major conflicts, especially when they erroneously infer an observation to be about them and/or what they're doing or have done in terms of the situation.

Worse still, even after I explain this to people and ask them not to infer anything from what I say they still do, even when I point it out multiple times.
It seems like it's instinctual for them to both hide implied meanings in their words and to assume that everyone else is constantly doing the same.

It makes conversing with NTs extremely trying at times, so I strive to be as clear as possible about hat I mean so there can be no mistaken inferrences.
I often fail, but I still try since I enjoy conversing with people as most of them have a unique perspective and story to tell and I'm very interested in that.

Great thread, totally worth reading the whole thing.

Thanks dianthus for bumping it up, I really learned a lot! :D :thumleft:



Moondust
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 May 2012
Age: 62
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,558

16 Feb 2014, 2:47 pm

Bodyles, on the contrary, being as literal as possible as you attempt to do gets you in all the more trouble. What you have to do, and sorry for the bad news, is you have to learn their language. You have to learn from observation what you have to say (A) when you mean something B.

Eg:

Sue: (intent: have company to go to the beach) Lovely weather, isn't it?
Joe: Yeah, we could go to the beach.

Sue: I'm looking for company to go to the beach. Would you be interested? (literal)
Joe: Nah, weather's not good enough today. (he thinks Sue's intent is just to be nice and show interest in him as a friend, not really wanting to go to the beach)

This is, at least for me, so maddening and impossible to learn in 1 lifetime for enough situations to improve my social life, that I don't even try. I prefer to be a hermit with cats.


_________________
There are two means of refuge from the miseries of life: music and cats - Albert Schweitzer


joeyyeoj
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2014
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 41
Location: the wrong planet, presumably

16 Feb 2014, 6:45 pm

Moondust, who's who?



Moondust
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 May 2012
Age: 62
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,558

17 Feb 2014, 3:14 am

In the 1st. dialogue, it's the way NTs speak. Doing something with "Nice weather, isn't it?", namely hinting at wanting to go to the beach. In the 2nd dialogue, it's us aspies, stating literally what we want to achieve. Notice how in the 2nd dialogue, precisely for being literal and clear, we don't get what we want. :-)


_________________
There are two means of refuge from the miseries of life: music and cats - Albert Schweitzer


Davvo7
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2013
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 286
Location: UK

17 Feb 2014, 5:16 am

Very interesting thread, thank you for 'bumping' it to bring it to peoples attention again.

I think the concept of 'Habitus' and the work of Norbert Elias especially in "The Civilising Processes" has a lot to say about this subject. It explained a great deal to me about the processes that underpin the society - especially European and Western Society - and how they can be used and utilised to include or exclude people. A very common example of this can be see through youth sub-cultures and the strict adherence to dress codes and patterns of behaviour to both attract and repel people. I think Japan is another society that has a hugely complex system of etiquette due to the high population numbers crammed into such small spaces in cities.

Most societies are based on 'social norms' and ideas such as politeness or etiquette as a form of social lubricant; I have struggled with that most of my life. I lost a job because I took a manager at his word when he said, "This is my idea, what do you think? Be honest, don't hold back!" I thought it was a stupid and un-workable idea so I didn't hold back. They let me go after that as I wasn't a team player. :roll:

I have also been ostracised in the past for my clothing; if I find something I like and is comfortable and doesn't have an itchy label, then I will buy three of them. I then look like I have worn the same clothes for days and days, when I am wearing a different shirt every day. I brought my dirty washing in to one office to show them, but that was just seen as weird rather than revealing.

I walk my dogs every day and have got used passing meaningless chit chat with other dog owners, but at least we have a mutual love of canines to discuss. other times I will just say, "hello" and nod and keep going. They seem happy that their existance has been acknowledged and walk on leaving me to concentrate on my beloved Pooches!


_________________
Moomintroll sighed. He felt sad even though he had no real reason to feel that way.


Bodyles
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Aug 2013
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 808
Location: Southern California

17 Feb 2014, 10:27 am

Moondust wrote:
Bodyles, on the contrary, being as literal as possible as you attempt to do gets you in all the more trouble. What you have to do, and sorry for the bad news, is you have to learn their language. You have to learn from observation what you have to say (A) when you mean something B.

Eg:

Sue: (intent: have company to go to the beach) Lovely weather, isn't it?
Joe: Yeah, we could go to the beach.

Sue: I'm looking for company to go to the beach. Would you be interested? (literal)
Joe: Nah, weather's not good enough today. (he thinks Sue's intent is just to be nice and show interest in him as a friend, not really wanting to go to the beach)

This is, at least for me, so maddening and impossible to learn in 1 lifetime for enough situations to improve my social life, that I don't even try. I prefer to be a hermit with cats.


That would explain why I fail so badly despite attempting to be as clear as possible.
Still, since what you've just described does'nt seem like something I'm ever going to learn, clarity of communication is all I can really strive for.
Lame.



Moondust
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 May 2012
Age: 62
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,558

17 Feb 2014, 10:46 am

Sometimes, when I'm in the mood, I take it as a game. I say B because I know that's what will make NTs understand A (A is what I really mean). (In the rare instances when I know what B should be). Then I'm elated at seeing the power it gives me, how I'm able to influence and move things forward, so different from my usual experience.

Example of doing things with conversation:

Scenario 1 - Sue explaining her real intent, i.e. not doing anything with conversation but pass on information:

Joe: You yelled at Charlie and that's unacceptable. We'll have to take strict measures with you.
Sue: If he does again what he did, I will report him to the police.

Scenario 2 - Sue performing an act (doing something) with conversation:

Joe: You yelled at Charlie and that's unacceptable. We'll have to take strict measures with you.
Sue: What he did is illegal.

In sc. 1, although Sue's intent is the same as in sc. 2 (to warn of imminent police involvement), the NT (who is programmed to search for hidden meaning rather than take the literal meaning), interprets that Sue's intent is to continue the aggressivity and even extend it against Joe too (rather than literally explaining what she plans to do). In sc. 2, by not being literal, she actually achieves perfect understanding in Joe, because the NT interprets that she's planning to go to the Police.

As opposed to aspies, NTs rely heavily on what they interpret and distrust what they literally hear.


_________________
There are two means of refuge from the miseries of life: music and cats - Albert Schweitzer


Bateman
Butterfly
Butterfly

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 15
Location: England

17 Feb 2014, 11:47 am

Greentea wrote:
My therapist told me years ago (and I didn't get it back then ) that when you rant to someone, you're actually attacking that person, even if you're ranting about something not related to that person. Because what you're DOING when ranting is expressing anger, then it's taken as being angry at the listener.


I don't agree with them.
If you're ranting to a person about something related to them, then yes, they'll be uncomfortable... but for absolutely anything else, as long as you're sensible (as in, you can back up your points, and you're not appearing dangerous), rants bring people together.
There's sometimes the sense that the two of you can unite towards a common goal, which is nice, but even if they can't find themselves emotionally invested in what you're talking about, there's at least the sense that you can confide in each other. People think "Ah, they're willing to share their feelings with me, they're interested in me understanding their point of view. We're growing closer".
Just don't go on for too long.



Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 May 2009
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,450
Location: x

17 Feb 2014, 12:08 pm

Bateman wrote:
Greentea wrote:
My therapist told me years ago (and I didn't get it back then ) that when you rant to someone, you're actually attacking that person, even if you're ranting about something not related to that person. Because what you're DOING when ranting is expressing anger, then it's taken as being angry at the listener.


I don't agree with them.
If you're ranting to a person about something related to them, then yes, they'll be uncomfortable... but for absolutely anything else, as long as you're sensible (as in, you can back up your points, and you're not appearing dangerous), rants bring people together.
There's sometimes the sense that the two of you can unite towards a common goal, which is nice, but even if they can't find themselves emotionally invested in what you're talking about, there's at least the sense that you can confide in each other. People think "Ah, they're willing to share their feelings with me, they're interested in me understanding their point of view. We're growing closer".
Just don't go on for too long.


You're both right.

It's completely situational. It depends on the two people involved; their prior interactions and current mood, the content of the rant, and the manner in which the rant is presented (presence/absence of swear words, general coherence- a rant full of swears and lacking coherence will seem more threatening).

The exact same rant can bring two people together or drive them farther apart depending on these factors.



Moondust
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 May 2012
Age: 62
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,558

17 Feb 2014, 12:38 pm

There's a reason why it's customary to give a rant alert. It's unpleasant to people.


_________________
There are two means of refuge from the miseries of life: music and cats - Albert Schweitzer


dianthus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,138

17 Feb 2014, 4:43 pm

Moondust wrote:
...the NT (who is programmed to search for hidden meaning rather than take the literal meaning)...[/b]


^This is THE single most crazy making, infuriating and maddening thing in the world.

Just today I noticed an example of this: Person A explained something to me and Person B in detail, in a very straightforward way, and I took it at face value as being just exactly what he said. However when we walked away, Person B told me that he suspected something else was going on with Person A but he couldn't put his finger on what it was. I started to say, "I think it was just exactly what he said" but I stopped myself because I felt like it would be no use.

I tend to take what people say at face value, unless it seems ambiguous or contradictory in a way I can't make sense of, but of course a lot of what NTs say doesn't make sense to me, so I'm just left wondering what do they actually mean? NTs tend to use language in highly ambiguous ways, so even taking things at face value, there might be multiple ways to interpret a comment. I have a very literary mind, so I automatically look for metaphors, symbolism, and double meanings. And I definitely notice how tonal inflections can change the meaning of words. But those meanings are all tied to the actual language a person is using, so it is not lost on me at all.

I also know that some people tend to say things they don't mean, for instance people who are highly labile or emotional tend to say things they don't mean (but then, how are you supposed to know exactly when that is the case or when it is not?) and I also figure out that some people tend to lie about things a lot so you can't take anything they say at face value.

But what is most confusing is when a person says one thing, but they mean something entirely and completely different that is not stated in the words at all, and you are mysteriously just supposed to "know" somehow that they mean something different. And it's usually some sort of cultural thing you really do have to just "know".