asked friend for help & he got mad cuz I didn't understand

Post Reply New Topic

I think this had at least something to do with it.

Hi Quill, I know this was a reply of yours to another poster and had nothing to do with my post, and I also shortened the quoted part a bit to highlight the part I wanted to comment on, if you don't mind my butting in.

I hadn't really heard the phrase "info dump" like that before, but your comment describes something I do. I pretty quickly seem to trust people on the internet after just a couple of back and forth messages privately, and then before I know it I'm over-sharing personal details or special interests or whatever the common thing is that we're conversing about. I think that's info dumping, right? I have to work on that one myself. Thanks for the "new to me" phrase!

Hi...I have a lot to say about the subject, because it explains a lot of my behaviours (But i'll leave that to later). However I believe I have a simple explanation to your confusion, and why the sentence about the statistic was formed in the way it was.

The best way to clarify it is that, lets say the sentence wasn't specific and instead said '1 in 10000 birth are affected'.
This sentence unintentionally implies that its talking about every birth (as if AS can be diagnosed in new born still/live babies). However by being specific the statistic can avoid misinterpetation. Because After all, the message or information the statistic was trying to communicate was clear to you, that means it did its job, its just that you found the specificity annoying, to them thats the most important thing. As a self diagnosed aspi, I actually like it when people are specific, its the vague conversations I hate. I think this is common with other aspies too.

Yes, that's exactly what I mean by info-dumping! I'm not sure if that's really the correct word for it, but it's the only word I could think of to describe it. I get so annoyed at myself because I will just blurt out all of these details, and of course the person will be put off, but sometimes it's hard for me to tell that I'm doing it until it's too late. I guess I have a hard time knowing at what point it's okay to tell someone something, and when it's too soon.

You did finally retell the conversation ( I just noticed that).

Imagine this: if one in a hundred babies were born with some condition.

And imagine that this condition killed off half of those born with it by their first birthday, but the other half had a normal lifespan. The stats would be "its present in one in a hundred live births", but "one in 200 people over one years old have it".

The reason they said "live births" instead of say..."people" is probably because (Im guessing) folks with Rhetts syndrome may not live long. Maybe the population that has it gradually dies off as it approaches maturity. So they cant say"one in ten K PEOPLE" have Rhetts syndrome because its probably far less than one in 10K of the whole population of people of all ages who are living with Rhetts Syndrome, even if it is "one in ten thousand live births".

Its only the "live births" that hospitals and governments (or whomever) keep the stats on. So thats why the author said "one in ten thousand live births" instead of just "births". And its an authoritative sounding flourish to show that he got the info right from the source.

I dont think that either of you was being argumentative. You were just stuck, and he got frustrated because you were hung up on something that seemed beside the point.

So basically the author just wanted to be clear about the fact that stillborn/miscarried babies were not included in his numbers for any reason.

But my question is, why would anyone ever think that they would be included in the numbers anyway? That's silly, because you must be born alive to be diagnosed.

This is the essence of our conversation earlier as well. Are you my friend in hiding? Just kidding.

Yeah, I get so excited to make a connection with someone that I just let down my defenses/wall/whatever it is that normally makes me sort of "aloof" and "matter of fact", and then all of my messy me-ness just oozes all over. It's hard to moderate for sure.

Based on what you wrote, he might not actually be annoyed with you at all...? He just wasn't in the mood to argue over semantics, and the "I give up" and "stop" might have been meant humorously? As in, "stop thinking about this before you drive yourself crazy?"

'Live births' seems to be an official term used in medical statistics. (Like you said, 'infants' makes more sense, because they are by definition 'born', and 'alive'!) I think you got hung up on the literal words, and he didn't understand what exactly you were confused about, and the whole conversation was going in circles, so the "I give up" really might have been a case of him laughing it off, and he's not mad at all.

And "stop" might have meant "change the subject, let's talk about something more fun". (Or maybe I'm reading this completely wrong... wouldn't be the first time!) I hope I'm right though, and that things will be okay.

This was an exceptionally helpful post for me, thank you VERY much for helping to explain this. These words are making sense in a way that works for me. I'm not a "memorize the facts and accept them blindly" kind of girl - I am a "help me understand it so I can manipulate it freely in my mind from every angle and still get it right" kind of girl. This feeds my brain in a way that it's content with on those other levels, where I feel like I can now manipulate the information - and maybe future things I read - and make better sense of them.

Very nice. It's a relief, really. Thanks again!

PS - I do that, yep - fixate on a detail and fail to see the big picture because of that. I guess that's an aspie thing through and through though from what I've heard so I don't feel so bad.

Hey Ashariel,
Well, I agree that he's not going to stay mad, but I do know him well enough to know that when he says "I give up" it means "this will annoy me soon and I don't want to get annoyed with you so I better drop it", and when he says "stop" he means "impending shutdown/gonna get truly annoyed by you at this point if you don't"... he's pretty good about saying what he means without anger but also without a lot of room for pushing him further. I think he was basically doing what I do sometimes with my husband - say "we need to stop now or I'm going to get frustrated and take it out on you and I don't want to do that because I love you so let's avoid a potential argument" except in fewer words. I just wasn't hearing his distress signals. I have to remember he's more like me than I give him credit for.

Ah... I'm not great at reading people's 'tone' (which explains a lot about my own social blunders!) But I'm glad it's likely to blow over - he seems like a good friend, and kindred spirit!

I give up!! !

...lol i'm just kidding. I don't think its the author at fault here...whomever the author got the statistic from, they had a particular reason to frame it in a way they did, cause as you said, they could have just said '1 in 10000 children'. So maybe the answer to all of this confusion lies in the context in which the survey was conducted, and not necessarily in the article. However your furstration is valid, and I think i'm on your side of the argument.

I also like to say whoever came up with the phrase 'info dumping' deserves a medal. I really thought that was just me. I get so excited, so worked up and so in the moment, that I just dump everything as if thats my only and last conversation with the person. It's almost like an out of body experience, I kinda of catch myself doing it or even about to do it, and its just so hard to stop.

^ I totally agree. I info dump on people all the time.

And I've learned the hard way that when you info dump at doctors, you seem like a hypochondriac who spends too much time consulting with Dr. Google. They hate that. But doctors appointments take a long time to get, cost a lot, and it's important to me to give them ALL the info, for sake of completeness. I would be unable to see a doctor and not info dump, just not possible. But hey at least psychiatrists would be able to stay endlessly busy with me, if I could find one that takes my insurance. Which doesn't seem possible. No wonder so many tragedies happen with involvement focused around people with mental illnesses who aren't being properly treated- I have medicaid and my diagnosing psych was out of network so I had ot pay him cash first of all, and now nobody he's recommended me to see for actual ongoing care will take my insurance, so I've got no meds, no supports, no therapy, no nothing. Until psychiatrists take medicaid I don't see this problem being solved, but I'm not into politics so I will stop there. I have no answers unfortunately.

I know, doctors don't like 'doctor google' over here either. I always do my research before I go to a doctor, if only to be able to explain my condition accurately. But I try not to make it obvious.

By the way I don't know if this is an aspi thing, but i generally prefer not to go to a doctor, especially to a general practitioner, they are always quick to dismiss or play down your symptoms, its really rare to find a doctor who is willing to listen and not jump to his/her own conclusion.

Yeah, I don't like doctor appointments either, Mirage. Sometimes it seems like the world is too rigid and science-based, but maybe I'm bias.

LivinginParentheses, your post describing how you asked and how you responded when you got the answer reminded me greatly of conversation between my daughter and I. (Both Aspie.) She'll ask what to do about something, I'll give her my best advice, and she'll say "but......" I have already given her my polite attention and tried to provide a useful answer. If she doesn't like my answer, I'm done.

Not done with her forever ... just done answering or helping with that particular topic. I shouldn't have to defend the answer I give the way you defend a doctoral dissertation!