Why don't neurotypicals care about using true definitions?

Post Reply New Topic

You would get this in certain situations such as in dating, job interviews and being told at the end we'll let you know in the latter case. That really means we don't want you. Another thing is how are you being just a conversation piece and the person saying that would not care a monkeys whether you are alive or dead Euphemisms remind me of beating round the bush, never geting to the point. When a neurotypical is telling the truth he or she is hurting feelings and they hate human diversity. They will never admit that just make excuses for it. If a neurotypical may talk politely he or she is using various simian gestures posures eye contact and expect you to know the rules but without telling what they are just getting pissed off when these unwritten rules are bent. Their euphemisms remind me of bearfaced lies and not really admitting the truth in certain issues. I find that neurotypicals do talk a load of dross compared to the aspie who talk with a lot of sense a neurotypical communicates with 93% non verbally and 7% verbally. on the other hand an Asperger syndrome person is the other way round.

You would get this in certain situations such as in dating, job interviews and being told at the end we'll let you know in the latter case. That really means we don't want you. Another thing is how are you being just a conversation piece and the person saying that would not care a monkeys whether you are alive or dead. Euphemisms remind me of beating round the bush, never geting to the point. When a neurotypical is telling the truth he or she is hurting feelings and they hate human diversity. They will never admit that just make excuses for it. If a neurotypical may talk politely he or she is using various simian gestures posures eye contact and expect you to know the rules but without telling what they are just getting pissed off when these unwritten rules are bent. Their euphemisms remind me of bearfaced lies and not really admitting the truth in certain issues. I find that neurotypicals do talk a load of dross compared to the aspie who talk with a lot of sense a neurotypical communicates with 93% non verbally and 7% verbally. On the other hand an Asperger syndrome person is the other way round.

I think people are assigning malice where there is often none. A lot of people don't admit they hate other people because they are trying to be polite.

It's also about considering the feelings of the person you are talking to. If you talk about how you hate someone to someone who knows you both and who doesn't have the same feelings, it can make the other person in the conversation feel very uncomfortable because they feel they are being asked to take sides in a conflict. They don't want to tell you where to get off but at the same time they don't want to join in because they don't agree with what you are saying. Also they don't want to hurt your feelings. Also they may be afraid that someone will overhear the conversation and have people falsely assume that they share your feelings. Amongst the nicer people in the group (because the nastier people won't feel bad but will see this as an opportunity to gossip) you will get the reputation of someone to avoid.

Of course there are times when refusing to admit you hate someone does have a malicious reason behind it, but often it doesn't.

I know they are trying to be polite or PC at times but why is it that they let their actions or words contradict the statement "I don't hate so and so" if they truly want to conceal it? I know we are only human and we all slip up at times. I guess it may be to avoid conflict in those cases (if the slip ups occur every once in a while) but if their words constantly contradict themselves, why do they expect no one to take notice, especially the hated person?




I feel this is an example as to you should be sure that the person you go to is both sympathetic to your situation and outside of possibility of conflict with the other person. An example of a person to tell would be a spouse, partner, or a friend who has ideally been in a similar situation and has no existing relationship with the person you dislike. This will give you the sympathy you need. In addition, the other person would feel less pressured to take your side because he or she is already favors your take on the issue. It may not offer you constructive criticism, but it does offer both support and a chance to vent instead of suppressing your emotions. In addition, it would be much less likely that the conversation would result in negative consequences.

I'm just curious. What kinds of feelings does conflict, aruging og riling up people stir up in you? Does it make you feel good to see people's frustrated and angry faces when they do not understand why you are being so aggressive toward them? If I met somebody I clearly perceived was out to quarrel with me or to point out what they believe are logical fallacies, I would withdraw from their company at once.

You aren't the onl;y combative person out there. Lots of people are combative. But lots of other people aren't. When you get infuriated at people for using language that avoids conflict, you are essentially getting infuriated with people for avoiding conflict, for avoiding something you enjoy, for not being just like you. Embrace neurodiversity. There is nothing wrong with other people not being just like you and not wanting conflict.

Well, these people would have to do or say something that pissed me off in order to create such a response. They would have to be unreasonable and unable to talk it out. It would be a situation in which I don't foresee any long-term consequences for doing so. Hard hitting questions or statements would never be done on a friend. As for how it makes me feel, it's the thrill in seeing a person I dislike reacting in an irrational and erratic manner. The biggest thrill of all is to see them admit to (in words) what I knew about them all along. My ultimate goal is to prove myself right.

I think what happens is that the NT trait of being able to read between the lines (sometimes poorly at that) is something they fall back on the most, so they allow for the laziness of misusing words. Aspies are very dependent on words, so that's why you tend to see more Aspies at least trying to use words more accurately. The upside is that when you correct people's words, sometimes they think you are psychic. Like when you realize they are using the word love in place of lust, pointing out that correction gives them so much insight on their lives that nobody ever really figured out before So that world in between the lines is often not so obvious to them I guess.

My favorite, by the way, is that I realize hate is a form of love, so when someone says they hate their ex, I tell them that they are still in love but it's now a bitter love rather than the sweet love. Oh, I get so much "Wow you are so right" on that one. Just call me Miss Cleo...LOL.

Yes. They hate it if you phrase things in a different fashion because it's a "cold" way of saying things-even if that's basically what it is-power plays and balancing of controls and all. For example, my mother claimed "there's no f*****g balance of power" in the local baptist church she works up/her mother set up as a family thing in the 1980s....and I pointed out that other people will do things, other people will take the position that the dead person fulfilled-and therefore there is a new power structure. She yabbered about "it not sounding emotional" or some garbage. I then pointed this is what is basically is-and that she doesn't like it because it's not socially 'proper' or she doesn't like thinking of it like that-when it is that.

And see you are sounding pretty psychic. Just word it like Miss Cleo does and people will be more accepting of it.