People with Asperger have opposite problem to me

Post Reply New Topic

So I watched the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fShtCCAR83w and it gave social scenarios where people with Asperger take them literally and they help explain to them what they actually mean.

The very first example was you are invited to a party. So she explains when you are asked to "come to the party" that doesn't literally mean "come to a party" and thats it. It also means you have to talk to people there. So if you sit in the corner and turn away from everyone, don't get surprised when people start to approach you. Because they are assuming that is what you came there for: to socialize. If you are not socializing, then maybe you are shy, so they are trying to help you by talking to you.

Well, I have the exact opposite concern. I know that I came to the party to socialize: that is the exact reason I came. But I sit in the corner because I am shy. Yet nobody comes and talks to me. So my problem is exact opposite to the problem of the person she describes. Because you see, the person she describes doesn't want to get approached, and they get surprised why they do. In my case I do want to get approached and I am surprised why I am not.

Now, what she tells that person is that "people assume you are shy and try to help you". In that person's case they are clearly wrong. But in my case yes I am in fact shy. So why is it nobody tries to help me?! When I ask people on wrongplanet this question, some of you (well at least Fireblossom) says "they don't know you want them to appraoch you". Well, according to that woman in the video they do. She explains to them that when they come to a party and sit in the corner then others assume they came to socialize and are just too shy. Well, if she is right, why is it they aren't assuming it in my case (I wish they did!) Or maybe they do assume it and are simply choosing to reject me?

I look shy too at parties but I don't automatically have people coming to me helping me to socialise.

Well, at least you get invited to parties on the first place and I don't.

I guess I wasn't really complaining about the parties, I was complaining about the church events or conferences or college events, where you don't have to be invited.

So you are still better off than me. You get invited but not approached while there. I don't get invited to begin with.

I don't often get invited to parties. I'm just talking about when I have done in the past. I'm sorry you don't get invited, I understand how heartbreaking it must feel. I get upset when I'm not invited to social activities my same-age colleagues all arrange together outside of work and talk about right in front of me even if I hint that I'm interested in the activity. It's hard when you've got to work with them.

That video is strange. Normally people don"t approach loners in parties in my experience.
The video seems to show an idealized world where everyone is friendly and kind.

I don't think it's appropriate to bring up other members in topics they haven't posted in or have otherwise anything to do with by name without their consent. Please stop doing so regarding me.

As for the actual topic: like I have said many times before, there are different people and different situations. Some aspies do have that kind of problem that you described, and thus, the advice is valid for them. And as has been said many times before, just because one person thinks certain way, in this case, the woman in the video, it doesn't mean everyone does. Just because she thinks people will think that a person who is alone is lonely doesn't actually mean people think so. And even if people did think so, there'd still be various possible reasons why they don't approach you.

How about, instead of complaining about things others aren't doing for you, you start thinking what you could do instead?

On the one hand, I do see why you say it: because it might sound as if I am trying to embarass you publically, as in "hey everyone, here is how stupid Fireblossom is". Let me say right away that it wasn't my intention, even though I knew it could come across that way. I guess I was hoping that it would be clear from my previous posts that its not what I wanted to do since in my other posts I am very self-centered. So I wasn't making it about Fireblossom's intelligence, I was making it about my own situation.

Now, here is the reason why I felt necessary to bring you up. Because lets say I were to just say "some people". Then the question is, who? If they haven't seen your specific replies, then they might have said "nobody here on WP told you that, so what are you talking about". I guess I could have said "my mom" (because she also said that I should approach people first, etc). But the problem is that my mom is not on WP, so you could always say "we weren't there when she told you this, you could have misinterpretted it". But if I bring up Fireblossom then yes they can go and re-read what she told me.

And this brings me to more general point. Even if I can think of someone that is neither Fireblossom nor my mom, then I still have that dichotomy: either that person is part of WP or not. If that person is part of WP, then brining up that person would be rude for the same reason as brining up Fireblossom is rude. If that person is "not" on WP, then bringing up that person is useless for the same reason as brining my mom is useless. So that is a bit of no-win situation.

Now, you might ask: "why do you want to bring up anyone at all? Why not just listen to the opinions of the people that want to respond to this specific thread?" Well, the reason I want to bring up those other people is because I want to put different opinions side by side to see what I will get. So lets say that nobody that represent a certain opinion comes to this thread. But I still want to put this opinion on a table to compare it to other things. What should I do then?

I guess one of your answers is that "people don't have hive mind". So if nobody comes to this thread that shares your opinion, there is no "contradiction" there since those people aren't you: you can have your opinion, they can have theirs. But the thing is that, even though you don't have hive mind, you are still not from the Moon. So since all who respond to me live here on Earth, their opinions do have a common denominator: namely their shared experience of how society operates. And thats why its possible that people that I interact with simultaneously think *all* of the things different people were telling me: they just think it on different levels. And thats why if there is a contradiction between those things, it means that people attribute to me a contradiction.

And this brings me closer to one of the things that is driving me. People attributing a contradiction to me is what really bothers me a lot. And even if I don't put the contradiction of the advice I get, my point about others attributing a contradiction to me still remains, because in a lot of my other posts I do talk about "Illogical" things people do, "without" quoting anyone on WP. *However* if I point out the contradiction between the advice of people on WP, that would even further highlight the point. So here are two things:

1) Without any input of anyone on WP, it feels like people's thinking is illogical

2) People on WP are telling me contradictory things

If "2" existed without "1", then I would have said the same thing you been telling me: people don't have hive mind so they don't have to agree. But since I "do" see "1", thats what makes me want to say "maybe everything WP people tell me do co-exist in a mind of the same individual elsewhere: since that individual is illogical (per 1) that means that individual can agree with those opposite statements). And that is what ultimately makes me dwell on "2", thus quoting your name.

Again, I realize that doing this is rude, regardless of the motivation. But I hope that at least you see why I do this.



As far as some aspies not wanting to be approached, that I am well aware of. But the other side of an issue is that those aspies "do" get approached. And that is what makes me wonder: why is it they get approached and I don't? You can't say "its because I don't approach people myself": they don't either! So they don't approach people, yet they get approached. Why don't I get approached too, then?



That woman in the video is a specialist who is trying to help aspies. So this means that she has some experience with the situations they get into, and that experience is what those videos are based.

I know not everyone is the same, but at least a lot of people should act the way she described, or else it won't be worth it making a video about it. Well, if "a lot of people" were to appraoch me, then I won't be complaining. My situation is nobody does.



So what are some of those reasons?

But showing idealized world was not its intention. Its intention was to show the real world in order to teach aspies how to deal with real-world situations. So that implies that those things do happen.

Well, as far as the past, I was only invited once in few years. I don't remember any time in the past where I was invited more often than that.



Thank you for empathizing with this.



I am so sorry you go through this.

Interestingly enough, I can't even tell whether my colleagues are invited anywhere or not, cause I sit at my desk and then go outside, so I only pass by them within a few seconds. But I really wish I could know. Because who knows maybe they go everywhere regularly just like you do, yet don't include me.

I do remember one guy at my Bible study. He is not Messianic -- at least wasn't. I invited him to Messianic church. Surprisingly, he liked the idea and started going. Now, I myself wasn't going there regularly (I had studies). So I didn't even know he was going there, until I actually shown up few months later, and he approached me. Well, after the service, he and a coupe of other church people, in front of me, talked about going to lunch, yet he never invited me along with them.

Now, in his specific case, he was inviting me for dinner one on one, long before I invited him to that church. But then when he arranged the dinner for all of the Bible study people, I was frustrated nobody talked to me, and I punched him. While he forgave me for this, it seems like his opinion had changed. Prior to that dinner, he actually texted one of the girls to say hello to me (she actually told me that). A month after that dinner, when I asked him about his opinion with regards to a different girl, he told me that if I am not pursuing the woman I should question my intentions on why I want a woman on the first place. I asked him what would be example of bad intentions. He said an example of bad intentions is "intentions to treat someone with anger". And he never gave me a logical reason as to how it is even possible: I have an anger as a response to a situation, I don't actually appraoch the situation intending to be angry. I don't see why anyone would .

As far as those people at church, it was the same phenomenon: because when I asked him afterwords, he said "let me answer your question with a question: does it ever seem to you that people are uneasy around you?" Now, the part that others don't like me, is what I told him from the get-go. So it seems like before I punched him, he knew it was lack of social skills. But after I punched him, he decided it somehow reflects on my bad intentions, evne though its not the case.

In any case, I realize I am dwelling on one guy instead of talking about the bigger picture. And the bigger picture is that nobody else invites me either, even though I wans't punching ohter people. But the thing is that

--- This guy's thinking process, after I punched him, is illogical

--- Other people's thinking process is illogical too (even though I didn't punch those other people)

--- In both cases, illogical thinking process causes nobody to want to ever invite me anywhere

I guess you could still say that the one and only person whom I punched wouldn't be a good example. I agree. I guess I can't think of any other examples. Since I don't remember any other situation when I heard about some event being discussed in front of me to begin with.

How many times they talked about something and invited me? I guess twice (separated by many years).

How many times they talked about something and didn't invite me? I guess once (this guy)

Sadly, I can't think of any other examples of either: usually they just don't talk in front of me.

No, I didn't think it like that. I did understand that you wanted to have a solid answer to the possible question of "who said that." The reason I don't like it is because when I'm mentioned like this in a new thread, people who haven't seen the other ones and my messages in them could jump in to conclusions and make false assumptions about me or genuinely get the wrong idea.

Anyway, I think I got a step closer to understanding why people in your life don't seem to like you and why women ditch you after reading this message you wrote. Take a moment to think about what I might've taught before you read on.

...

Done thinking? Now, here's the thing: I expressed not liking something you did that involved me, yet instead of apologizing for making me feel uncomfortable (which you did) or making me feel attacked (which you didn't, but you seemed to think you did) or hurting my feelings (which you didn't, but someone else might've gotten their feelings hurt in the same situation), you started defending yourself without noting how I feel about the situation. In a situation where you may have offended someone somehow, even if it's by accident, it's common to apologize. If not for something you did, then for how you made them feel. One can soften it up easily with a "I'm sorry if/that my words/actions hurt you, that was not the intention." This way, you show that you have noticed the other person's feelings. I'd recommend keeping this in mind if you ever get in a fight with someone online... not that you and I were fighting, but situations like these easily escalate, especially if you're chatting real time and not on a forum since then you don't have the time to think messages over the same way.



And the apology would've been due especially since you yourself saw that it was rude, too.



You might be so messy that they think it'd be gross to approach you, or the same messiness can make them wary of you.

They might not be in the mood to approach new people (as in, specific people in specific times.)

The problem is not that you'd somehow be bad; it's that there's someone more interesting than you around that they would rather approach.

You might have gotten yourself a bad reputation among those people by doing one thing or the other. Even if you think someone's a complete stranger, they could have heard about you.

Are you saying that what you actually said wasn't as blunt as the way I summarized it? If so, can you clarify what is the difference between what you said and my summary of it?



As far as "noticing other people's feelings", I see three problems with this.

1) The fact that I don't notice other people's feelings, this seems to be a common complaint among women who break up with me (as well as professors who refuse working with me). But the question is: if I didn't notice their feelings, why am I dissecting every word they said months later? Their answer would be "I am all about details and I don't notice the big picture". Yes I do. The reason I dwell on the details is that they pinpoint the big picture that "people make offensive assumptions about me". And this directly relates to noticing their feelings. Because if they "feel uncomfortable", I take it as a personal insult (I must be unsafe person to make them feel uncomfortable) and, therefore, I dwell into it. And then I bring up the details as a further evidence that I made them feel uncomfortable. So how can they say that I didn't notice I made them feel uncomfortable if that is the exact thing I am complaining about? Sure, I care about it for a wrong reason: after all, if someone else makes htem feel uncomfortable I won't give it a second thought; I only get upset when I do it, because it reflects badly on me. But still fact remains: I noticed that I made them feel uncomfortable AND I heard everything they said (as evident by my dissecting what they said months later). So how can they possibly say I didn't notice it or didn't hear them? You could say they are not mind readers. But the point is that they DO know that I dwell on it months later. As a matter of fact, their other complaint is that I dwell on things and don't let go. So the question is: how can they say I don't hear them, and say I dwell on things too much, at the same time: I mean one of those things contradicts the other.

2) The part that is true in regards to my lack of awarenness is that I couldn't predict their feelings. Yes, I noticed them after the fact, but I didn't predict them before-hand. And this brings me to the other question. Why is it that someone who is oblivious gets more punishment than someone who is aware? Because you said that the point of apology is to show that I noticed something: in other words it is to show that I am not oblivious. The result of an apology is that people have better attitude towards me. Thus, they have better attitude towards someone who is not oblivious, than towards someone that is. But it is unfair: if someone is oblivious, then its not their fault they did something. If, on the other hand, they are not oblivious, then yes it is their fault. So punishing olbivious people more than non-oblivious ones is unfair. Now, since being oblivious is one of the symptoms of Asperger, that directly relates to aspies being punished more. So, as an aspie, don't you find it unfair?

3) At times I genuinely don't know what it is that bothers the other person. For example, back when I dated Ginger, she was bothered by the fact that skype connection was going on and off. I had no idea why. Later she said she suspected I talked to another girl on skype, which is totally not true. And also my mom's ladlord's sons visitted, and his son David took his daughter Brook. Ginger suspected I wanted to cheat on her with Brook, even though it was not hte first time they visit (they visitted long before Ginger came along) and it happened once in every few years, and it was not about me and Brook, it was about landlord and his sons. Plus this particular time I didn't want to see Brook anyway: I wanted to go to my new school a week before Brook came. My mom was the one who wanted me to stay a week longer so I could see Brook, which I didn't do. Now, do you think I should have apologized to Ginger EITHER for Brook OR for technology? I mean, none of those things are factual. I can't be apologizing for something that factually not true. So in case of Brook I was yelling at her "Brook is just a piece of furniture, why do you think I would cheat on you with a furniture", and in case of Skype I yelled at her "this is just a technology, who cares about technology". In both of those cases it only caused escalation. But how exactly was I supposed to apologize, especially since, in the technology example, she didn't actually tell me that the technology was the thing that bothered her. And, last but not least, what about Renee who dated me last summer and broke up with me because I told her I punched Andres a year ago. Should I have apologized to Renee for punching Andres? Isn't it a bit weird to apologize to Renee for that, given that she doesn't even know Andres? Did I apologize to Andres a year ago? Yes and no. On the one hand I did apologize, but on the other hand, I worded it in such a way that made it clear that I was concerned about my reputation and not about the way I made him feel (in fact I kept asking him for an hour "what should I do to improve my reputation in front of those people who saw me punching you"). But he said he took it as apology (although I am not sure how he could have taken it). However, this is irrelevant. Because the one who broke up with me is Renee. So the question remains: should I have apologized to Renee? If so, how can I apologize to Renee for a person whom Renee doesn't even know?



I am sorry for making you feel uncomfortable by mentioning you in the thread you were not a part of. I didn't mean to make you uncomfortable, I am sorry that I did.



If thats the reason, why were you suggesting that me approaching them myself would be a solution? If a homeless person approaches me, it doesn't make me dislike them any less. As a matter of fact I would dislike them even more. If a homeless person doesn't approach me, yes the sight of them is unpleasant, but I can minimize the discomfort by walking fast. But if they approach me it makes me outright angry at them. So by the same token, if I approach people who perceive me in a similar way, it would make them dislike me even more, too.



That is probably true in some situations. But the question is: why didn't I get into any of those small groups back when they were forming? Thats because I am dislikable overall. Which means that there are other situations when I am being actively avoided which, in turn, contributed to my difficulty of getting into those groups.



Since different people have different tastes, if I was "average" then 10% of the people would think I am bad, 10% would think I am perfect, and everyone else in-between. Since I don't have the 10% thinking I am perfect, yet I do have some people thinking I am bad (based on some concrete examples from the past), this means that the overall way people perceive me is below average. And if that percists year after year, then it means it is REALLY below average. Because the other thing you would expect is fluctuation. If I was just slighty below average then at least one out of three years I would be above average. But if I am below average every single year then I am grossly below average.



Exactly. And that is what I am complaining about. Which brings me to making the following points:

4) If I got myself bad reputation, why would approaching people myself help me at all? They would be upset that someone with bad reputation approaches them

5) You said people don't have hive mind. Well, to some extend they do: you just said yourself that someone who haven't personally met me, might dislike me due to the bad reputation that I created.

6) I think bad reputation is unfair. I can't "do" anything about the fact that people already made up their mind about me. ANd that is the main reason why most of my posts are asking "why is it fair" instead of asking "what can I do". Because you see, if I have trouble with completting a homework assignment, I won't be saying "the education structure is unfair" instead I would be asking "what can I do to complete it". That is because I know there is a way to complete it I just don't know which. But in case of bad reputation, when people already made up their mind about me, I don't see such a way. And thats why I complain. It would be similar to a teacher who decides to give a student bad grades in the subsequent assignments just because they got bad grades in the previous assignments, that would be unfair too. Incidentally, that Russian woman whose videos I saw, talked about a certain autistic girl who kept telling that the teachers are incompetent and should be fired and then were surprised that she got bad grades. My reaction was "I am surprised too: I know that grades have nothing to do with behavior". I guess in America they don't, but apparently in Russia they do (I don't know how it is in Finland -- maybe you can tell me). So maybe if the grades were done the way that woman describes, I would have given up trying, too. But, fortunately, as I live in America, they grade me objectively. THats why I don't complain about grades and only ask "what should I do". I wish I were given similar chance to improve my social performance. But I don't: they have their mind made up. In fact, in America they seem to have even more made up mind than in Russia, at least as far as "not approaching me" is concerned.

I'm saying you misunderstood. From what I understood, you thought that I thought you were trying to embarrass me, but in reality, I just didn't like it because of the reasons above.



I see... it sounds like you do notice their feelings, but that you ignore them and just focus on how their feelings make you feel. And honestly, that's worse than not noticing their feelings, at least in my opinion. You know their feelings are there, yet you only focus on your own. That's selfish. Try to take both in to account from now on, and preferably start with the other person's feelings.



If you and I go for a walk and I step on your toes but don't notice, is it my fault? Yes it is. If you and I have a talk and you say something rude and hurtful but don't realize it yourself, is it your fault? Again, yes it is. Being obvious to doing something bad doesn't take away the responsibility. Of course, when one doesn't notice they've done something wrong, it's natural that they don't apologize, but once their wrong doing is pointed out, then they should.
The problem here is this: when people do something wrong, they often fake obvious to avoid apologizing, so others can't always tell if the person is really obvious or not. And if the thing is something that most people the other person knows wouldn't mess up with, like basic social interaction, the chances that they think you're faking obviousness about your social blunder will be high.

For point three, too many names, and apparently several cases. Couldn't follow. Think you can give a shorter, simpler version of the main point? Assuming it's important.



Apology accepted.



Because it might not be the reason for everyone, and even for those that it is, they might be able to overlook it if they can tell from your behavior when you actually speak to them that you aren't high, drunk or anything of the like that they assumed.
Also, if people who look homeless approaching you makes you mad, then shouldn't it be easy for you to accept that people don't like approaching you? As in, if you get to make assumptions about others based on their looks, isn't it just as okay for others to make assumptions based on how you look?



I think there's some kind of ritual or something when it comes to little grouping that is hard for us on the spectrum to point out and that's why we often miss out on it, so it's probably part of the reason. Another, or perhaps tied to the former, would be if you did anything in order to get to those groups? Or were you just there and expected others to do things for you? The others who got in to groups probably did at least some kind of body language thing to get in to them. Not that I know how that really works, but I know it exists. Of course, there being something that makes you generally dis likable compared to others is a possibility too, but I highly doubt it's the only reason in all cases. I mean, outcasts like that would usually attract other outcasts on some level... or maybe that doesn't apply in Universities?



I don't think it's possible to give such clear numbers in these matters, but aside from that I get your point.
Maybe it's a combination problem? As in, maybe majority of people who rebel others with their looks have the social skills to somewhat make up for it, and maybe the others who're socially bad at things don't look threatening or otherwise unpleasant, so their average appearance makes them seem average enough to approach, but since you have the bad end of both sticks... yeah, I'd really recommend looking presentable from now on since that's an easier fix than social skills and body language.

BTW, just a thought, but how commonly known is it that you're Russian? I don't know how it's in USA these days, but the attitudes towards Russians have gotten worse in some countries due to the war... though it's not like this would explain anything that happened years ago, unless things got significantly worse in, say, 2014 when things started going down in Ukraine.



Possible, but it's also possible that their image of you is worse than what it would be if they talked to you. Even if they don't approach you, they're unlikely to just walk away unless your reputation is really bad, which of course is perfectly possible too considering your temper tantrums and violence. Can't really blame people for wanting to avoid those who're potentially dangerous, right?



That ain't hive mind, that's rumors and gossip. But of course, people will listen to their friends rather than a stranger, especially a stranger that doesn't make effort to change things in the first place.



It's only unfair if people tell lies about you. If they tell things that are true, there's nothing unfair about it. Doing bad things has consequences (most of the time anyway, if you get caught), and that if anything is fair. What you can do about them is to show that there are good things about you, too, but you need to put in the effort.



In Finland, bad behavior can affect one's grades. They can't give someone who would get 10 (the highest grade) from the course based on their work a 4 (the lowest and failing) just because they behave badly in class, but they can drop it to 9 or even 8 if it's really bad. And in elementary school, we got a separate grade for behavior, too. (Mine was usually "good", which was second only to "excellent." Most students got "good.")
I got 8 from P.E. in the spring half of ninth grade instead of the usual 7 just because I volunteered for the graduation dance show (or at least, I assumed that was the reason. Can't think of any other reason why it would've suddenly jumped a grade.)

...I wonder if I forgot something? My mom came over in the middle of writing this and stayed for a few hours so I got distracted.

Sounds to me like a cultural (or subcultural) difference.

In SOME social circles, it may be customary to make a point of approaching and welcoming shy newcomers at social gatherings. In other social circles, probably most, this is not customary.

I think most people, in today's world at least, tend to be cliquish -- unless they happen to motivated, for whatever reason, to make a specific point of NOT being cliquish.

I think most people are cliquish because they are just more comfortable talking to people whom they already know.

You say she's a specialist. Quite often in the autism world "specialists" have no idea what they are talking about and have a really weird version of how humans actually behave.

Just because someone important says something, it doesn't make it true.

You've used your reasoning skills to figure out there is a disconnect between what she said and what you experience. Other people have stated that they've had similar experiences to you. People often aren't that friendly in real life and stick to their own group.

Which reality do you now think is true? The so-called expert offering "advice" on a made up scenario or real people?

What your real gripe here is a gripe I've always had. Why is it always me that has to make the effort? It would be nice if someone could extend a friendly gesture towards me for a change. I feel like I'm always doing the work. It would be lovely if everyone was outgoing and friendly and included outsiders, but they don't.

Work with the reality, not an ideal. If you're not getting invited, you do the inviting. Eventually you'll meet someone you get along with. Remember to take an interest in them and not talk AT them.

Because you always want something from them more than they want from you? If they'd be as eager to get to know you as you are to know them, then they would approach you, unless they're the types of people who never approach anyone due to shyness or the like. I tend to have the same problem, but I try to not think of it too hard since I'm aware that I don't approach every person near me, either, and pick the ones that I do. And if I allow myself to do that, I need to allow others to do so as well, even if I'm outside of the group they want to approach.



Yup, this.