It's offical... I now join your ranks

Post Reply New Topic

What exactly is an "un-aspie attitude," gwynfryn?

I'm sorry if it's not the place to ask, but I am still rather unsure of myself, and have not yet gone for a diagnosis (for various reasons). I'd like your honest opinion, since you seem to have assessed Scoots, what is your opinion of me? (Would you say that I have Asperger's, or would you be more inclined to believe I am one of these people with an "un-aspie attitude" who just clings to the label?)

Thanks for the clarification, I wasn't sure what you meant by it, I kinda thought you were making a veiled accusation of doctor shopping.



He definately was not taking it at face value, it was a very interactive session, with alot of back and forth between me and the doctor.

Dr gwynfryn responds:

Seriously, I don't make a habit of analysing everyone, but had noticed some of Scoots posts and noted a similarity of thinking, and, while there's no general agreement on this (and I don't know if it's even been researched) I've often noted that certain people on these various sites are "like-minded", and that this also correlates well in the Chandler & Macleod tests.

It's a selfish approach insofar as I'm thinking of "Aspies" as "people like me", but I'm not the only person who thinks that AS has become a catch-all, for what should really be seen as distinct sub-categories (e.g., the highly social types currently labelled "Aspie" have quite different needs to the socialy inept like myself).

As a general description of my own perception of "my kind", I see us as driven by curiosity, but not so much "obsessive" in the clinical sense; I'll work at something I find interesting up to the point I have a good understanding of it, but then I move on. Similarly, I like debates to reach a conclusion, but if not, I'm not inclined to force my own view-point on others, and do not concern myself with trivial differences; this latter does not describe some diagnosed Aspies.

I see us as unusually rational, and disinclined to let emotions cloud our judgement (we don't care a hoot for "majorities", for instance, and are content to plough our own furrow, at least until evidence shows we've got it wrong); this is supposed to be "classic" Aspie, but it's quite clear that some "Aspies" diverge from this (those who opt for a certain political bias, say, and who then blind themselves to the reality of their chosen party's actual performance).

I see as as pedantic insofar as we like things to be "correct" but we don't obsess about it; we are in fact, quite flexible in our thinking and able to give serious consideration to others ideas (even if we ultimately reject them). I've known "Aspies" who are out and out pedants, who, having mastered a subject (i.e., by studying someone else's thoughts) will not tolerate any disention; this just doesn't ring true to my mind! Real Aspies, it seems to me, are very ready to consider alternatives and learn new things.

We often cause offence with our bluntness, but it's rarely intentional (and real Aspies may well take offence at such times, but will readily forgive and forget; not all here are as forgiving).

We are given to point out faults in others, but not to the point of nagging. A minority on these boards are definitely given to keep bringing up the same criticism over and over again, which seems alien to me.

Those who seem to fit the above (and similar observations) closest also seem to get both A and N in the C&M on-line test (which is why I think it would be a good basis for providing a dedicated analysis for the various categories currently labeled AS) but if you study the descriptions, the E and D characteristics, in particular, have facets that would, according to current criteria, lead to one being labaled AS, even in the absence of the A (autistic) component. As AS is considered part of the autistic spectrum, then one would think that the A factor (which is seemingly testable) would be an absolute requirement for diagnosis as AS? I doubt we'll ever get clear breakdowns, but it should be possible to improve on the current situations. This is relevant as currently the assistance and treatment available is a "one size fits all" proposition, which is clearly absurd!

Unfortunately, the current emphasis is on measureable observations (which is all very well for the clinicians) but no one seems to be looking at the personality/practicality side of things. From my own observations, this is at least as relevant; it's fairly straightforward to persuade companies to provide ramps for wheel chairs, for instance, but no provision has even been attempted for discouraging managers from imposing status games, and the like, on people like myself (who find them unfathomable, but are otherwise perfectly capable of both producing good work, and getting along with other techies).

So Civet, does that make things any clearer? I've had a quick look at your posts (but can't do a thorough job as I'm both short of time, and an untrained "amateur") and you seem quite Aspie in most respects, and the few minor differences I've noted are in line with the D factor in your C&M result. Please don't read anything into this; I'm by no means an authority. I'm just proposing a guide which you should pursue on you own behalf (as you know yourself better than I ever could). There are links to explanations for all available aspects of the C&M test, but if you have difficulty accessing any let me (or Torley) know.

Anyone else want analysis of this kind? Tough! This was my first and last; the Doctor is definitely out!

Forgive me for going a little back in the topic.

I was thinking how I would answer that question. It is a difficult one for me. First, I really don't know what a friend is. From what I have read it appears that I never had a close friend. I wasn't distressed by this situation - it is as though I didn't know that I was supposed to have friends. Being a loner, I nevertheless managed to have one buddy most of the time (but not always). These acquaintances just happened, I don't recall actively seeking them. In my twenties I noticed that people usually had many friends, and encouraged by this observation, I tried to befriend more buddies. These efforts have largely failed, despite showing some initial promise. In the end I can say that I am perfectly content alone, but I don't mind having friends or acquaintances, even though my "friendships" usually fail. I wonder if this classifies as AS or schizoid personality?

Sound's like you found one of the better diagnosticians Scoots (and some, of course, must be competent) but as magic kindly illustrated, not only are diagnoses uncertain, even the questions themselves have to be carefuly analysed!



Magic, as I understand it, those with schitzoid personality have no desire for friendship, whereas you clearly do (albeit in an "inhibited" way) but how many psychologists, I wonder, would even consider the subtlety of the various options?

Yes, Gwynfryn, maybe you are right. In the last 7 years I made 8 attempts to befriend people. Four of these did not progress to any relationship, two showed promise and I put much effort into them, but in the end they failed, and two succeeded, but did not go beyond a "buddy" status. How close these buddies are? I see one of them once per month, and the other - twice per year. I find being alone easier than socializing with people, but I look forward to these infrequent interactions that I have. (These statistics do not include my family.)

None of the friendships I've tried to start have ever gotten off the ground floor. Of all the people I've ever known that I could call friends, only one was intentional, all the other ones were "accidental" friendships. During my junior high and high school days I would often spent time hovering around groups of people at lunch, either I would get shooed away, or I would be ignored completely. It was the only way I could think of at the time to try and meet people. But their conversations were often of little value to me, usually gossip with witty and humoreous comments, something I was bad at, and I could never think of a thing to say.

It's ironic though how all my friendships formed in grade school. In early 1989, I don't remember when exactly, but one of the "cool" kids in class decided I was cool too, and we became friends, friendship was much easier back then for me since everything was object based. He even called me up one night in february 1989 to talk with me over the phone. My parents were so excited that someone had actually called me up on the phone. But after that, all the other boys in my class, who followed in this kids footsteps suddenly decided that I was cool too. A year before, the same people who would drag me thru the mud at recess and pelt me with snowballs now wanted to sit next to me at lunch and do stuff with me. It was strange indeed, but I accepted it as is since I was having a good year acedemic wise, and with the sudden assest of having a few friends, for a while I thought that I might have been "normalizing".

Hey, gwynfryn...

Since you're fairly good at analyzing who's aspie like and who seems unaspie, could you browse through my posts and see if I really act like an aspie or not.
Even though, I've actually been diagnosed with HFA at age 2, I don't know if it's just a huge misdiagnosis or not. There have been a few things I've read about aspies that don't say all that much about who I am.
I still feel that I'm definately not NT though, I can't relate to those people at all and have little in common with them

I just need you to see if I really belong here or not because I'm really confused to what my true diagnosis should be.
Could it be another disorder other than AS or autism? I'm just curious to know.

Sorry, if this post seems out of place. I'll just start a new topic on it then...

PS: BE HONEST AND DON'T LIE TO ME AT ALL!! !!

Thanks for your help
PS:

NO!! ! (see above).

Enigma, I just had a quick scoot around and don't see any posts from you on the on-line tests, such as the EQ, SQ, and AQ tests to be found on the following link (which I've included for the usefull discussions in each thread; it's worth taking the time to read through them):

http://www.musicmademe.com/asp/viewforum.php?f=1

nor on the C&M test on Torley's "...little ole personality quiz..." thread on this site (which has the same links and more...).

While none of these tests are at all conclusive (and the AQ test is fairly experimental, and the C&M test was designed for something else completely; it's looking like a good starting point for developing a dedicated diagnostic tool though!) in their own right, they can tell you a great deal when you look at the totality!

Read the various posts first, and avoid the pitfall of being too pedantic (especially with the C&M) and you could well be in a position to answer your own questions! At the very least, if you publish your own scores, others will be able to help in your analysis; and the more we contribute to the understanding of these tests, the more useful they'll eventually become!