Social maturity

Post Reply New Topic

I've read a lot of people on here describing themselves as "socially immature" or "socially ret*d".

Given that society has been created by and for the NTs and made largely of NTs, isn't it the case the ASDers are simply "socially different"?

Now, it's one thing for NT society to label us having ASD as socially immature and ret*d from their point of view but why accept such labels and use these labels ourselves?

Note that I don't have too strong of an opinion about this and I am willing to be swayed if anyone here can list good reasons why we are social ret*ds and not simply "different"?

In my opinion, the perspective that the social deficits are 'just a difference' is too much of a niche. I'll explain below:

The definition of ret*d I consider: 'less advanced in mental, physical, or social development than is usual for one's age'.

There always has to be a standard with which we can measure everything against. I can't form an argument against autism involving a degree of social retardation as it's a developmental disability with core diagnostic criteria being severe social impairment. Autistic individuals can definitely overcome their social deficits to some extent, though natural social cognition will never exist.

If not to regard the social impairments present with autism as a deficit (immature/ret*d), how would you define 'deficit' or 'difference' in terms of other aspects of functioning? Would a schizophrenic whom experiences frequent hallucinations only be described as sensually different, rather than impaired? Would a person with bi-polar disorder or depression simply experience emotion differently?

While it's heavily semantic, there must always be a point of normalcy, hence why the term 'Neurotypical' exists in the first place.

If you're a person that takes offense at being deemed socially ret*d or immature due to stigma the words possess, don't stress about it. You're more than likely in possession of a wonderful set of abilities beyond that of the average person, including but not limited to a superior long-term memory, intense focus, enhanced sensory perception and precision. Perhaps in a way, it would make sense to perceive others as being 'ret*d' in these areas - without any negative connotation of course.

I don't see it as just a difference instead of a deficiency in skills simply because if you put me in a room full of people on the spectrum, I'd still have the same difficulties that I would with NTs. I'm sure you were looking for something more in-depth, but I'm a bit too tired for that.

I think the best analogy is that of dogs and cats.

Cats are "socially immature" or "socially ret*d", simply because cats are not made to live in groups. Cats are lone hunters. Aspies have cat-like brains.

Dogs, on the other hand, are social beings designed to live in groups. But just as cats are bad at making it in a group, dogs are bad at making it on their own.

Hence, you could call dogs (or "Neurotypicals") "ret*d in dealing with reality on their own" or "ret*d in terms of self-sufficiency" or "ret*d in terms of independece".


Neurotypicals are driven by group-belonging, and that is what they are naturally good at achieving. The "drawback" is that they have to accept being "punished" (banter for instance) by their leaders. But they can take that because they are social. Aspies cannot.

Aspies are driven by gaining independence, and that is what they are naturally good at achieving. The "drawback" is that they have to accept loneliness. But they can take that because they are loners (i.e. not social). Neurotypicals cannot.

I believe that is the reasoning behind the two different social strategies (loner vs. social).

I think the dog and cat analogy is a good one like apples and oranges.

It is ironic that among all the talk of diversity is a rather homogeneous view of how humans should develop socially. If a uniform developmental rate is determined to be ideal, then everyone can be measured against this scale and some found to be "ret*d" (slower than others).

It is not dissimilar from the declaration of an ideal height for humans and measuring all against the standard to determine who is developmentally delayed in height.

The concern of the OP about the acceptance of this assessment I think has merit. While usually meant only as a comparison to others, it does reflect the acceptance of the standard as having some validity.

Prior to WWII, children who were different were just different and usually left alone. When the industrial and collective processing mind set that was ascendant during the war was subsequently applied to education, children who deviated from the standard were identified as defective and in need of correction.

The Terminator movies were about humans trying to survive the control of the machines. In a metaphorical sense the people who decided our country needed to be run "efficiently" turned themselves into "machines" and wanted the country run as one as well. Those of us not easily processed, were targeted for correction.

Last edited by Spectacles on 05 Aug 2014, 12:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Great and convincing insights.

I thought it might be helpful to also look at what kinds of deficits, if any, usually come with an ASD-wired brain. I really like the cat/dog analogy, though unfortunately, it's very difficult for cats to live completely independently from the rest of society (or at least, not many people want to go through all the work to make that possible). There's even some cats who enjoy being around and seek out other cats or/and dogs. Though many dogs also have issues with living amongst each other, they also have a set of implicit rules and guidelines that help the communication process run more clearly. Us cats have some trouble with this, resulting in miscommunication and misunderstanding that are of a different kind than when dogs face similar communication problems. Without these implicit guidelines, we're left in the dark when s**t hits the fan, not always understanding what's going on. To make things doubly worse, we might not even be aware that we are lacking in the guidelines' department, and thus are blind to a intersubjective social reality shared by most dogs, one that is based on a difference in the brain/mind (unlike schizophrenic hallucinations, where you see things that aren't there, cats don't see things that are there...or at least there in the minds of dogs).

When you play the same game with a different sets of rules, without knowing that you have a different sets of rules from the other players, you are bound to run into some trouble (especially if your set of rules are in the minority). I do not know anyone on the spectrum in real life, so I can't say whether the shared differences associated with ASD (or more precisely, in its subcategories) are similar enough in different people for communication to be significantly clearer (ie, that people on the spectrum have their own intersubjective social reality apart from NTs), or whether people with differently wired brains will run into the same problems with each other. Browsing through the forum a bit, the former has definitely been suggested by many, though I've also found plenty of disagreements that remain unresolved (usually ending with attacks on the other person's rationale in a formal manner).

However, I can only speak with certainty about my own experience. I know that I sometimes get fixated on certain topics, then I start to relate everything I experience to said interests in such a way that allows new insight to flourish, but causes plenty of confusion to those who do not share my hermeneutics, at which point, all clear/productive communication is eventually severed. That I don't always know which thoughts are worth sharing (relevant) and which are not also hinders clear communication. As for being socially immature, I sometimes react to others in sh***y ways because I suck at knowing what is fair, expected, or even how our interactions look like from an outsider's point of view. I sometimes act like a little kid with those closest to me when I feel strong emotions. It's incredibly frustrating, and something I need to continually work on. I do not like this part of me, but instead of applying demeaning character labels to myself (which I think is at the root of so much frustration about living in an NT world. Yes, I know I am what I do, but sometimes I really don't understand what I do, so is it really me? To all outward observations, yes it is), it's important to recognize these sh***y aspects of having a different kind of brain (sh***y parts being emotionally and socially harming and distancing others as well as yourself) and learning to work with it. There's also more than enough perks with having a different kind of brain that makes it worth it, IMO.

I'd hypothesize that a country of only cats would be very chaotic, though we might feel more at home ('normal'. More categories of people would inevitably arise) there then in the NT world. Then again, such a country might eventually inspire theoreticians to solve the communication deficit problems (a fun paradox, similar to what's going on in poststructrualism actually), then take over the world (mwahahaha!).

I'd be curious to hear from others who have a friend/several friends/meet up groups for cats to see how you guys get along and how well communication goes. as compared to when you are with NTs. I'd also be interested to hear whether others have similar sentiments about their social deficits, or am I just reading my personal experience into ASD?

I accept the label because I am years behind my peers in social understanding and development. I am 30 but I feel like maybe 14 or 15 at the most when it comes to social maturity.

The "Asperger-mind/cat-mind" does need social interaction, but far less than the "Neurotypical/dog-mind".

The "Asperger-mind/cat-mind" is aware that it needs other people/cats to procreate. It is just not dependent on others for survival the way the "Neurotypical/dog-mind".

This has got to do with greater Emotional Intelligence (EI) of the "Neurotypical/dog-mind". It is my observation that EI naturally gives you greater fear about the dangers in life, which the "Neurotypical/dog-mind" solves by establishing groups. When the "Neurotypical/dog-mind" is in a group it feels safe because the fear of these dangers disappear.

The "Asperger-mind/cat-mind" often has relatively high Intelligence Quotient (IQ). The "Asperger-mind/cat-mind" need this because it has to survive on its own so it has to figure things out for itself (i.e. be its own leader). The high IQ gives great analytical and solving abilities. The "Asperger-mind/cat-mind" is smart. But the "Asperger-mind/cat-mind" has low EI. This makes the "Asperger-mind/cat-mind" socailly immature/ret*d, but it also makes the "Asperger-mind/cat-mind" fearless. This fearlessness is needed for an individual that has to deal with all the dangers in life himself.

To recap:


"Neurotypical/dog-mind"
- IQ: Low/Medium
- EI: High/Very high
- Analytical/solving abilities: Relatively low
- Social maturity: Relatively high
- Fear: Relatively fearfull
- Deal with having leaders/bullies: Relatively well


"Asperger-mind/cat-mind"
- IQ: High/Very high
- EI: Low/Medium
- Analytical/solving abilities: Relatively high
- Social maturity: Relatively low
- Fear: Relatively fearless
- Deal with having leaders/bullies: Relatively badly

I don't see NT social skills as being superior. Let me explain...

They gossip, argue, b***h, cause trouble, fake things, lie, misunderstand everything and generally lack logic.

How is that having superior social skills exactly?

They are also incapable of rational discussion of any kind. Its the majority but it should not be the norm socially. Just because something is the majority that does not mean it is superior, better, more correct or even right. It just means it's the majority. NT are terrible at social interaction, as I said, their world is full of pointless and rather stupid arguments, lies, deciet, fakery, delusional beliefs and constant misunderstandings, most of which is all in the name of the shallow pursuit of superiority (ego masturbation).

I really hate this belief that just because something is the majority its better, more efficient, more accurate suprior when something being the majority means nothing of the kind. All it means is that the majority of people do it and the majority can just as easily be wrong!! !! !

And if anything it is NT people who lack understanding of social interaction...

1 They cant tell the difference between someone who is shy, someone who is quiet and someone who is being asocial or unfriendly. I can. I can spot a shy person a mile away...they will seem kind of awkward and reticent but will be friendly if approached (even if nervous), someone who is quiet will have more confident body language but won't speak much and someone who is being unfriendly will give you the cold shoulder (ie turn away, not look at you at all, ignore what you are saying). Sometimes shy can appear asocial if the person sits alone but if approached they will respond with friendly body language even if nervously whereas someone who is being asocial will be cold in their mannerisms.

Most NTs don't know the difference. They are terrible at reading things socially, terrible at it becuase they are obsesed with over generalised social rules that dont' always apply as there is often variation. Telling if someone is shy or asocial requires intuition not rules rules and more rules. It's a sensing thing.

There are other examples but I am feeling dopey on the painkillers i am taking for my bad back and can't be arsed to type them in.

I'm glad you posted this, it's making me think very differently about loneliness and making friends.

I tend to agree with it being more socially different than socially immature, slow or ret*d.

I would buy the notion of being developmentally impaired (ret*d) socially if it weren't for the other areas AS folks are gifted in. And AS seems to be a reoccurring variation within our population throughout history, not the result of case-by-case random abnormalities in the development of the fetus (like the palsy family of conditions).

To me, that suggests AS is in fact, a variation of human mental function, one that played it's part in the formation of our society. There is a reason humans took over the planet, we have an arrangement of people with different skill sets, we are not simply 'homogeneous, with the occasional duds'.

To the person who wanted to know about cat-cat interaction...

Interaction with the one Aspie acquaintance I had was at first awkward until I realized he was an Aspie. Then I realized I could stop trying to interpret him as an NT and act like an NT myself and just relax. We both meant what we said and said what we meant. He was soooo smart and hilarious. He made such intelligent jokes, I couldn't believe I was actually having such a wonderful conversation. Seems like even smart NTs dumb themselves down when they have casual conversation, but this guy didn't. Not with me anyway. It was great.

Some great points posted by folks in this thread...

Let me further elucidate my POV as espoused in the OP :-

Let's look at the needs/wants of aspies and NTs from social interaction.

What do aspies and NTs both want from social interaction? Love, compassion, affection, basic emotional support, exchanging information and sharing interests.
What do aspies want from social interaction that is different to NTs? Almost nothing.
What do NTs want from social interaction that is different to aspies? A heck of a lot.

That's what it boils down to.

NTs need and want a lot more from social interaction than we aspies do.

Our aspie brains are quite capable of handling the amount of social interaction that we need and want which is not much at all when compared to NTs. Only when our brains are called upon to handle much more social interaction than should be ideal for us that everything goes haywire.

Accepting a label such as "socially ret*d" seems to me like accepting that the NT form and level of social interaction is the ideal form and level for every human disregarding their individual wants and needs.

It is playing into the NT frame of reference and just because it is the majority does not mean it is right.