Freaked out by article; what do you think?

Post Reply New Topic

I came across these articles yesterday when I did a Google search for news on "Asperger". (I found the second one first and read it, but went back to the first one to get the context.

http://firefox.org/news/articles/1298/1 ... Page1.html

http://firefox.org/news/articles/1432/1 ... Page1.html

The first one was directed to members of "fandom", and was basically saying respect others' boundaries and don't try to get to close too fast or if it's not wanted. It freaked me out right away, because it reminded me of a recent situation with a co-worker who got laid off last Friday. Even though we worked in the same office area, we hadn't got to be really friends yet; however when she was packing her stuff I asked for her phone # & email address & gave her mine. Another co-worker was doing the same thing at the same time, but she had got a little closer to the departing co-worker than I had. (Both co-workers are NT as far as I can see. The one who was laid off is introverted and the other is extroverted.)

Anyway, after reading the first article about not respecting boundaries I went and deleted the former co-worker's cell phone and email addresses. (I hadn't called her and to be honest, probably wouldn't have. I usually don't call people because I think they won't want me to. I did email her once but it was more just to let her know that she could use me as a co-worker reference when she looks for another job.) I just felt so bad that I had disrespected her boundaries by asking for her cell phone # in front of the other co-worker--she probably thought she couldn't refuse.

Then I read the second article. It seemed the first article was written from the point of view of an Aspie who was also introverted and had had some people, whether NT or Aspie, try to get too close too fast or mistaking an interest in the same thing for friendship, or thinking that someone interested in the same thing would naturally want to be friends. It wasn't saying that Aspies would naturally disrespect boundaries at all--in fact some of the disrespectors might have been NT.

Does anyone have any comments on this? Has anyone had this happen to them, either way? I have had people disrespect my boundaries before, but thought it was just me, not them. I have a landlady, for instance, who is very nosy and gives unwanted advice and is very disrespectful of any decisions I happen to impart to her that have anything to do with my choice of jobs, or my past choices to leave certain jobs, so I can understand the point of view of the first article. I hate to think I did the same thing with the former co-worker.

At least I no longer have to feel guilty that I didn't get in touch with the former co-worker due to my social anxiety. I have to remind myself constantly--my social anxiety is there for a reason! People don't want me to call them! I have to realize that.

Through experience, I almost thoroughly disagree with the policy of distancing oneself from others. The closest thing to that policy that I have applied successfully is a lenient professionalism, and when I reach uncertainties it has been found that intimacy, even if sudden, is far more effective than even trying to read the other person's more subtle messages.

As long as the aggressive pursuit explicitly displayed some confidence and a slight reluctance to move into the ad hominem, my attempts to establish social utilities have not failed. I suppose that either I get constant special treatment or that article does not describe a very hectic corporate culture, or a high-stakes academically inclined environment. [I disclaim in that social environments differ vastly]. Many of my NT colleagues are capable of "smelling" both confidence and fear; as long as one's actions and propositions are so equipped and sensitively rational, the problems associated with Asperger socialization can be superimposed and overwhelmed by the non-social strengths.

Have you ever had any problems with people not wanting to be friends--how would you handle that? You would probably know right away though, and I'm not sure if I would. I remember in 5th grade I kept inviting this one classmate to my house. She kept saying her brother was painting her picture and she had to sit for him, so she couldn't come over, and I kept believing her excuse and asking her until finally I mentioned this to my parents and they said it sounds like she's making excuses and not to ask her again. I know I wouldn't be that persistent now, but still I think I might not know if people don't want to hang out with me. This is why I usually assume they don't want to and don't ask.

I usually tend to be over-enthusiastic, and sometimes the other person displays what I perceive to be frustration [" [my name], you're annoying" or expletives] or a more subtle thing that I have sometimes failed to understand ["I would appreciate it if you don't call this number again"]. However, these tend to be very temporal. I was raised to maintain a reputation of flawless and forgiving ethics; I now use it as a shield against the vile of others. Legal, pragmatic and psychological shrewdity, of course, is important here, but it is also important to try to be "nice." I have been in great trouble trying to be "nice" but it just hasn't backfired completely.



I have indeed re-engineered some social skills. Yet, it is a useless pain to practice them constantly and I can blissfully ignore some stuff that I know how to interpret if the opportunity cost is harsh. Their formation required incessant failure. That means that when I have to deal with a refusal, I cannot afford to quit my attempts. I do not know about many subcultures, but this is what works for me with the mainstream. That I am shy is not immediately apparent because high performance demands regular liaisons. Through performance-related regular liaisons, my social replications have been practiced on people who would be extremely hesitant to rebuff me. The pressure to make the most out of these people would also keep me on edge to please and perform. It is interesting that "awkward" questions as seen by some are easily interpreted to be "intimidating" or "daring" by others. Similarly what has been labelled "naive" office behaviour [running down a street during lunch to get a birthday present for someone whom I hardly knew] has also been considered "sweet." That particular example seeded a relationship and cemented an ongoing tradition of special treatment, including a reciprocation. I suppose all of this would imply that I construct my safety networks before I enter them, but consider that this is very specific to my own environments. In particular, the idea that I construct safety networks before I enter them is in some way correct but incomplete and misleading. I simply ensure that I try, and that my trying is carefully conspicuous. Forgive the necessary and urgent truncation of this discussion.



I think I understand this, but I cannot accept it for myself. I have no motivation to "hang out" [I do not engage in that kind of active socialization unless there is a clear opportunity for some gain] and I have no time for it. However, assuming I wanted to, the assumption of rejection can help induce the actual rejection. This mentality is not productive. I am not criticizing you, but the practice of not trying will not bring gain. I am just explaining why I have never, to my currently conscious knowledge, engaged in self-defeat.

Remark: I thought the socially motivated aspies were the socially skilled aspies. If you are socially motivated, maybe you should give a persistent try. Re-reading your post, I am guessing that your emotional affect has been affected to the effect of effecting a latent refusal to act.
Disclaimer to the Remark: I, of course, probably know next-to-nothing about actually wanting to "hang out" in and of itself.

I skim-read the first article. Made about as much sense as Finnegans Wake. And contained more blatant contradiction: "Don't do this, don't do that, don't talk about your interests" on one hand. The punchline: "Be yourself". Eh? So how can anybody "be themselves" if they can't mention what interests their self?

He: "Let's talk about your interests"
She: "No, let's talk about your interests"
He: "No, let's talk about your interests"
She: "No, Let's talk about your interests"
He: "No, No, No, I don't want to appear self centred, we really MUST talk about your interests"
She: "No...." etc etc etc