Cashier was apologizing for talking to me

Post Reply New Topic

The issue is not that she is an extrovert but rather that she apologized for it -- which implies that she assumes that I don't like it.

I suspect others also assume I don't like to be talked to. If so, that's what keeps me isolated. That's why it's so frustrating.

Last edited by QFT on 08 Feb 2020, 1:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Try talking to the cashier again.

Just have a conversation. Don’t question why she is forward, or why she is shy.

Just let her talk about her day or something.

Generally women apologize more than men, and when a person apologizes too much, I worry about their well being (not my behavior). Like many ASD folks, including myself, you are self absorbed in your quest to understand and respond appropriately. It seems you lack the scripting for pragmatic speech (offered to young ASD persons here). Do you have a mental (or written) list of pragmatic conversational "go tos"? I have seen them listed in ASD books and am sure some are online. When in doubt, put is aside (or let it pass) and try a "go to" question or phrase. If a person likes to talk (as she said), ask them a juicy question!! !! ! I observe what "type" a person is (athlete, parent, intellectual) and ask about a likely interest of theirs when I am in a bind and have the presence of mind to do so (I have to be relaxed). When I am stressed, I behave as you do - what did I do? Amygdala hyperdrive.

Someone should organize a club for women who prefer to take the social initiative and men who prefer that women take the social initiative.

It might backfire in some cases, though. If it's specified that women only are to make first moves in that club, it might attract very bossy women. That compined with men who have no courage to make the first move, likely having bad self esteem, could lead to an abusive relationship... though on the other hand, if there's a woman who's used to being the boss and wants to be the boss and a man who prefers it when someone else takes the charge and responsibility, telling him what to do, it might work really well. But of course, I'm just talking about the extreme ends. Most people aren't like that.

And there's also the chance that if couples meet several times at that club and the rule is that women take the lead and handle all the planning and work, it might make the men passive and make them expect that those women will handle all the thinking and arrangements in the future too without them having to do any work. That, naturally, isn't a good thing, either.

By that same logic, if it is assumed that men are to lead this is similarly unfair. Which means that gender roles should be erased -- which is what I wish were to happen.

The context of what she was saying is that we still have gender roles where men are expected to lead. Well, in this case, its only fair for an alternative to be available where women are the ones who lead.

There's an app for that.

I'm somewhere between wanting a club for that and just scrapping gender roles.

I'm not saying it's unfair, just what trouble it could cause. Of course, the same trouble can come when the genders are reserved as well. In fact, problem number one is very common among men who like to be in charge and women with bad self esteem.

In my opinion, someone who really doesn't want to make a first move simply shouldn't do it, but if they aren't willing to do it, they shouldn't complain about no one approaching them. If they aren't willing to put in the work, they just simply have no right to complain if no one else does it for them. It's hypocritical and selfish.

And before someone asks: yes, I approach the men I find interesting, for relationship purposes or otherwise. As do all the other women I know that I've talked about these kinds of topics with or been in such situations with.

Well, its not about the fact that I am "not willing to put in the work"; rather, its the fact that I want to feel liked. A sign of liking me is when the woman approaches me first. If I have to approach first then it makes me feel like she doesn't truly like me and is only talking to me because I asked -- making me guilty for trying to talk to her.

What you said in the last paragraph confirms what I am saying. So you said you approach the men that you like. So how can I make sense of the fact that no woman approaches me? I guess that no woman likes me. So how am I supposed to feel about approaching them if I feel like I am totally disliked by everybody?

Or let me even put it in numbers. If I was just like everyone else, then 50% of conversations would be started by me, and 50% of conversations would be started by others. So if, for some reason, I refuse to start any conversations, I should cut off my interaction by 50%. Yet, I seemed to have cut it by 99% not just 50%. So it seems like there is more going on than just that.

And finally, let me ask you rhetorical question. How come in this thread viewtopic.php?t=379696&start=255 in the reply dated 10 Feb 2020, 5:36 am you said that the people in that group chose not to talk to me and its their choice. Well, the rhetoric question is this: how do you know they chose not to talk to me? I thought you are of the opinion that if I don't start any conversation then its me who chose not to talk to them? Well, the reason this question is rhetoric is that I know the answer: in particular the answer is that people aren't rude so they won't come yelling at me "we don't want to talk to you please leave us alone"; rather, they will simply start conversation with someone other than me. Now -- if you agree with what I just said -- then by the same token the girls elsewhere who don't approach me they, too, just don't want to talk to me. But, if so, then why are you expecting me to talk to them then?

In other words, you are saying two things:

a) In case of that class, if they don't start conversation with me, it means that they don't want to talk
b) In all the other situations it doesn't mean that

Well, how is "a" any different from "b"?

I guess I am suspecting that maybe in case of "a" I gave enough details for you to see people don't like me, but in case of "b" I didn't. Well, the fact that I didn't give those details doesn't make them go away. So maybe in case of "b" people don't like me all the same, you just don't have enough info to tell. If thats true, then thats your answer as to why I don't start my conversation with them.

If someone doesn't deem you interesting enough so that they'd come talk to you, you can try and make yourself more interesting by talking to them. They might think that hey, this guy is actually interesting. I mean, the guys I approach didn't approach me, so that means they didn't like me enough to do that, but since they don't shoo me away, that means they're giving me a chance. If, after I've first approached them, they come to me later on their own, that means I've changed their idea about me from not interesting to interesting.

Eer no, most people don't have their conversations started 50/50. Pretty sure really social people start most of their conversations, while less social people are the opposite.

They chose not to talk to you and you chose not to talk to them. It goes both ways. Yes, the girls choose not to talk to you, but that doesn't automatically mean they hate you, just that they have some other plans they think is better than your company (and no, that's not unfair. They just have lives to live.) By talking to them you have a chance to make them think otherwise.

Or it could mean they just talk to you out of pity since they seen how desperate you were from the fact that you came to talk to them.

I know that people's minds don't change so easily from online dating. You see, when I am talking about not wanting to approach anybody first I am talking about face to face. Online I do approach people first. In fact that was the main reason I went online so I could do it. Now, online, most girls don't respond to my messages. And if I look at the ones that do, then in a lot of cases there will be some misunderstanding that will make them dislike me and when I would persistently try to correct their misunderstanding they wouldn't change their mind.

Now in person it's different. In person they have to be polite. But their underlying belief system is the same they just hide it better. That's why if online they don't change their mind so easily then in person they don't do it either. Therefore, if they talk to me because I talked to them it seems less likely that their mind changed and more likely that they just do it out of pity.

Now don't get me wrong. I strongly believe people *should* give each other second chances and change their mind. But the word "should" doesn't mean they actually do that -- which is what I feel so bitter about.

Now you could say that people are more willing to give second chances face to face than some stranger on a dating site. Fine, why don't they prove it to me -- by approaching me first?



That confirms my point even further. Why are other less social people "do" end up in the receiving end of conversation attempts and I don't?



The point is that they talk to each other spontaneously without any effort. So why would talking to me -- in equally spontaneous manner -- be such a burden to their plans? If they spontaneously talked to 10 different people within five minutes, why would talking to 11-th person within that 5 minute tome period be so difficult?

Yes, it can be about pity in some cases, but most people wouldn't bother, especially several times, so I'd dare say that it's safe to assume it's not about pity if someone talks to you. If a person doesn't like someone, they're much more likely to do what they can to avoid them, not chat with them out of pity. And even if it is a pity chat, one can practice their social skills in that situation too, so something will be gained anyway.

I don't think people should give second chances all too easily; everyone's life is limited, so it's not a bad idea to be careful of who one uses their time on. And I wasn't talking about second chances, I was talking about first chances. If someone sees your pic/message on a dating site and doesn't send you a message, that means you have been noticed, but haven't been given a chance. I highly doubt you send a message to every woman you spot on dating site, right? Therefore you have seen those women, but not given them a chance. Likewise, if someone sees you in a classroom but doesn't talk to you, that means you haven't been rejected 'cause you haven't had a chance in the first place yet. You can wait for the chance to come by waiting for her to talk to you or you can create the chance by approaching her first. If you wait for her to do the first move, the odds are against you compared to you making the first move because
a) If she wants a new friend, there are also others to pick from
b) She might not be interested in making new friends in the first place
c) She might not want to make new friends in class because she wants to focus on studying
d) She might be from some religious group that says no unneccesary contact with the opposite gender
e) Your body language might scare her off
f) Your loud voice might scare her off
g) There are lots of reasons, really
The point is that if someone doesn't approach you and you don't even try to approach them yourself, you can never be sure why they show no interest in you.

I think this is pretty simple, actually. You've mentioned before that your hygiene is poor and appearance messy, right? That kind of stuff usually leaves a very bad impression on people. If you top that with bad social skills, it's pretty easy to see why people aren't attracted to you, both romantically and not. It's true that having aspergers make it harder to learn these basic things, but they can be learned. So my advice would be to study. There are books about social skills and basic manners, so you should start with those. Lack of social skills will, at least in my experience, be overlooked easier if you are polite.

^ That is also what I think is the reason to your last question. If they do want to pick 11th person, it's very likely not going to be you if you're the only one not taking care of your hygiene etc.

Well, when did I say that people kept trying to talk to me several times? I guess it can be construed as several times if I lower the bar to include simple "hi" and also pull together different isolated incidents separated by several days. But that would be lowering bar too low, given that they talk to each other on a daily basis for far more than that.



What would constitute "doing whatever they can to avoid them". I mean, it would be too rude to blatantly say "I don't want to talk to you" or "go away". So what else would it be? I guess not starting a conversaton with that person. But what would they do if that person starts a conversation themselves? Once again, they wouldn't be so rude as to say "I don't want to talk to you". They would just give a short answer and not build on it. But then you can always say "well, if they don't build on it, build on it yourself". So what this means is that, when I have to do everything myself, its a pretty good chance they don't want to talk to me. And thats the exact reason why I don't want to do it myself and want them to do it, so that I know they actually want to talk.



And where would I use the skills I just practiced if nobody talks to me? Note that these are the skills of how to carry on a conversation once it started. But my first concern is to get it started to begin with.



It could be that I "think" of it as the first chance but, in reality, its the second chance because they seen me a certain way with someone else.

Let me give you an example. So a couple of years ago I been participating on Mental Health delphy forums (note that it is Mental Health at large, rather than Asperger specifically -- so it was just me and apparently one other guy who had Asperger there, nobody else). In any case, normally most people don't reply to my messages. If it is a large board like wrongplanet then, out of hundrids of participants, a few will respond. But if it is something small, like delphi forums, that has very few members to begin with, then its pretty normal for my posts not to get any responses, or so I thought. But then I learned later that, actually, the reason I didn't get any responses was because there was one woman there who had brain injury and her grammar was horrible. So I guess I just assumed that if I make fun of her I wouldn't be hurting her since there is nobody there to be hurt, or so it felt. Well, I turned out to be wrong. It turned out that I "did" hurt her. Besides, again despite the appearance of poor grammar, she turned out to be one of the popular ones there -- and thats why when people saw my posts towards her they decided to avoid talking to me. But the point is that I didn't know that was the case until someone mentioned it to me much later; I was thinking that its just a small board and thats how people are

Now, I am not saying what I did is right; I know I made a mistake and I won't make those mistakes in the future. But thats besides the point. The point is that I was led to believe that nobody -- besides that woman -- ever gave me the first chance. But they thought they did. So the question is: could it be that in the face to face interaction something similar might happen. Even though a given person didn't, personally, talk to me, their friends did, or their friends of friends did?



Well, what if it is either e or f. How would my talking to her first make those two things any better? Thats why I was saying that she would be talking to me out of pity. The parts e and f would be there just as much, but she would figure that since I was the one who started talking, that conversation won't mean much in my favor, so she might as well talk. Well, thats the exact reason why I would want "her" to be the one to start talking.

Lets put it differently. If, by talking to her, I could somehow make her reasons for not talking go away, then yes I would talk to her. But the problem is that talking to her first won't make reasons e and f go away. Thats why I want "her" to talk to me first in order to prove to me that she isn't concerned about e and f.



See, you just confirmed my reasons for not approaching people first. I don't see how me approaching people first would "fix" the stuff you just quoted. So logic says that either they have to prove to me they aren't turned off by that stuff (by approaching me first) or else they are just talking to me out of pity.

By the way, as far as hygine, I fixed it: I take showers. However I didn't fix my messy looks: my hair is naturally messy and I don't know what to do about it. If I use the gel it would feel like a glue and I don't like it.

I never said you said that people talk to you several times, just that if they do, then it's extremely unlikely that it's out of pity.

Actually, some people do say it directly. It's not common, but when they do, it's better to leave them alone 'cause in order for someone to do something like that that is considered very rude, they must really not want you around. If this has never happened to you or happens very rarely, then you might not be off as bad as you might think.
Other than saying it directly, there's ignoring the person even if they talk to you, giving very short answers and not trying to keep up the conversation. Or coming up with a reason to leave the place (of course, sometimes they can actually be in a hurry.)
There's a difference between starting something and trying to desperately build something when the other person clearly doesn't want it. Starting means that you take the first step and go to talk to them a few times, or even just once is enough if you get their interest the first time. If they seem completely disinterested after a few times, then continuing would be like trying to build things for nothing.

If your social skills improve, people who talk to you because they have to (like people you work with) are more likelier to want to talk to you outside of the times they have to do so. Also, if your skills get better, you can go and include yourself in to a conversation in a more natural way. Or start a conversation and seem less awkward doing so. Learning social skills takes time, patience and effort. And since your problem is to get a conversation started, it's really simple: go and start one. Practice is what makes you better.

You know, if you saw someone, a total stranger, making fun of your friend, would you be as eager to give that person a chance to be your friend as you would to another stranger who hasn't made fun of your friend? I highly doubt it, I know I wouldn't. That's probably what happened on that forum: you gave an extremely bad impression of yourself and they treated you accordingly.

You're missing the entire point. The point is that if you never try, you'll never know what the reason is. It could be something that you can't affect at all, like she has no interest in making friends, or it could be that she's just too shy to talk to anyone. By checking it out you're likelier to know. And by the way, E and F can also be trained. One can learn to talk in a quieter voice and one can learn proper body language. Maybe you can't reach normal levels, but getting a little better can help, too... it's just that, again, effort. Also, if the problem is one of those and you go and talk to the person yourself, the person might come to the conclusion that you are okay after all despite having a trait that made them wary of you.

I never said it would fix them. You asked why one of those random people others decide to approach isn't you, and I answered what the reason could be. It's true that even if you approach people yourself, some of them will still avoid you if your appearance is messy, but there can be some who will look past that after you've made an effort to get to know them. They might think that they're willing to deal with how messy you are because you have an interesting personality, something that they won't find out if you don't approach them. Of course, they could check by approaching you themselves, but like I've said, if someone wants a new friend and there's a group of clean people and a dirty person, why approach the dirty first or even among the first when you know nothing about any of them?

Showering is a good start. Do you use any soaps and such? Just water can't usually get rid of the smell on an adult. Then there's also the hair thing, though that can usually be overlooked if the hair isn't too long and the appearance otherwice isn't messy. Are your clothes clean? Do they have holes? Are they wrinkled? Have the colors completely faded? What about facial hair, do you keep it clean or messy?