Re: Difficulty understanding your posts @

[Guest guest]

>It's not the word itself but the context in which it is said or

>written that lets listeners and readers determine whether they are

>picking up resentment. Of course, the words preceding and following

>the word 'eh' will also offer hints as to the context in which the

>word 'eh' is being used.

You see that is more of an explanation of how to do it.

And it shows " eh " does not always equal resentment.

>>: " You see stating that Aspies can HAVE A CONVERSATION and

>>then warning someone who can have a conversation is odd behaviour

to me. "

>Conversation is a two-way avenue. If the person you are attempting

>to engage in the conversation does not wish to converse, then it is

>not odd behaviour for them to refuse to reply. It is also not odd

>for the moderator to point out that someone does not have to speak

>with you -- privately or on the forum -- if they do not wish to do

so.

Taking your advice about context above, why don't you re-read the

context of my comment in that post. As your reply seems to

completely miss the point.

>Aspies, like NTs, *CAN* have conversations but it takes at least

>two willing participants. Please do not diss anyone here who

>chooses not to respond to your posts.

Can you indicate which words you are calling a " diss " ?

.

[Guest guest]

>It might also be that the person being spoken to is becoming either

>annoyed or a little angry about the posts so they stop posting

>trying to defuse the situation.

Exactly, . The mechanism is called projection.

Ken replied:

>That' very perceptive, , I was starting to get angry, and I

>really don't enjoy feeling that way. It feels turbulent, like a boat

>being tossed about on high seas, like you're no longer in full

>control of what think or say or do.

I try to do nothing or take a deep breath rather accuse someone else

of having an emotion I myself am experiencing.

>I am pretty much cooled down now. Normally, I don't anger easily,

but I do have certain buttons (that term again), and when they're

pushed, I'm likely to go off to some extent.

And it feels like the other person has pushed those button. Reminds

me of the humorous comment of a loser in a fight: " I hit his fist

with my head " .

>I do my meditation and other spiritual practices largely in an

>effort to become more detached, in the sense of not reacting from an

>emotional place when my buttons are pushed.

Practice makes perfect!

>Maybe it's the curse of too much testosterone. Baron-Cohen thinks

>autism is extreme masculinity. But that hardly explains the level-

>headed, compassionate AS women here and elsewhere. I'm beginning to

>suspect that AS is really distinct from autism and perhaps not part

>of the spectrum.

Baron-Cohen's theory refers to pre-natal testosterone, not the

testosterone prone outbursts of sports, or pub closing time.

We AS have become 'acclimatised' to high levels of the hormone.

[Guest guest]

Doesn't being attacked make one angry, especially when it is words and not a physical threat?

[Guest guest]

Raven:

>It's not the word itself but the context in which it is said or

>written that lets listeners and readers determine whether they are

>picking up resentment. Of course, the words preceding and following

>the word 'eh' will also offer hints as to the context in which the

>word 'eh' is being used.

:

> You see that is more of an explanation of how to do it.

And it shows " eh " does not always equal resentment.

I have never said " eh " always equals resentment. It usually does in the way

you originally used it. It all depends on the context, just as Raven

explains.

>> : " You see stating that Aspies can HAVE A CONVERSATION and then

>> warning someone who can have a conversation is odd behaviour to me. "

>Conversation is a two-way avenue. If the person you are attempting

>to engage in the conversation does not wish to converse, then it is

>not odd behaviour for them to refuse to reply. It is also not odd

>for the moderator to point out that someone does not have to speak

>with you -- privately or on the forum -- if they do not wish to do

so.

> Taking your advice about context above, why don't you re-read the

context of my comment in that post. As your reply seems to

completely miss the point.

Why don't you explain what you meant then?

>Aspies, like NTs, *CAN* have conversations but it takes at least

>two willing participants. Please do not diss anyone here who

>chooses not to respond to your posts.

Can you indicate which words you are calling a " diss " ?

Not sure which Raven means but I'd say these (among others):

" I hope Ken is taking note, and any other Aspies who struggle in the ability

to continue to communicate beyond monologue (communicating at others instead

of with) or as 'little professors'. "

Inger

[Guest guest]

wrote:

>> It might also be that the person being spoken to is becoming either

>> annoyed or a little angry about the posts so they stop posting trying to

>> defuse the situation.

>Exactly, . The mechanism is called projection.

Not necessarily. Sometimes people react because they are feeling attacked.

Ken:

>> I do my meditation and other spiritual practices largely in an

effort to become more detached, in the sense of not reacting from an

emotional place when my buttons are pushed.

> Practice makes perfect!

, that's actually an insulting comment to Ken sharing something

personal about himself. Perhaps you are not aware of this? (Many Aspies have

trouble realizing how they come across to others and figuring out how to

interact smoothly. It's part of the syndrome, though it can often be

improved with extensive practice and/or tutoring.)

>>Maybe it's the curse of too much testosterone. Baron-Cohen thinks

>autism is extreme masculinity. But that hardly explains the level-

>headed, compassionate AS women here and elsewhere. I'm beginning to

>suspect that AS is really distinct from autism and perhaps not part

>of the spectrum.

> Baron-Cohen's theory refers to pre-natal testosterone, not the

testosterone prone outbursts of sports, or pub closing time.

We AS have become 'acclimatised' to high levels of the hormone.

That is correct (according to the theory). Thanks for this clarification.

Inger

[Guest guest]

Raven:

>>It's not the word itself but the context in which it is said or

>>written that lets listeners and readers determine whether they are

picking up resentment. Of course, the words preceding and following

the word 'eh' will also offer hints as to the context in which the

word 'eh' is being used.

:

>>>You see that is more of an explanation of how to do it. And it

>>>shows " eh " does not always equal resentment.

>I have never said " eh " always equals resentment. It usually does in

>the way you originally used it. It all depends on the context, just

>as Raven explains.

Usually does! According to whom - FAM, Raven and Inger?

Raven:

>>>Conversation is a two-way avenue. If the person you are attempting

>>>to engage in the conversation does not wish to converse, then it is

>not odd behaviour for them to refuse to reply. It is also not odd

>for the moderator to point out that someone does not have to speak

>with you -- privately or on the forum -- if they do not wish to do

so.

:

>>Taking your advice about context above, why don't you re-read the

context of my comment in that post. As your reply seems to completely

miss the point.

Inger:

>Why don't you explain what you meant then?

I have already and why didn't she read it well in the first place.

>>Can you indicate which words you are calling a " diss " ?

>Not sure which Raven means but I'd say these (among others):

> " I hope Ken is taking note, and any other Aspies who struggle in the

ability to continue to communicate beyond monologue (communicating at

others instead of with) or as 'little professors'. "

Jeeesss! That is an observation. Is it true or not?

[Guest guest]

>>It might also be that the person being spoken to is becoming either

annoyed or a little angry about the posts so they stop posting trying

to defuse the situation.

>>Exactly, . The mechanism is called projection.

>Not necessarily. Sometimes people react because they are feeling

attacked.

What do you mean " not necessarily " ? Again, that is no answer. It is

still called projection.

And notice how you omit the part where Ken ADMITS he was himslef

feeling angry.

Ken:

>>> I do my meditation and other spiritual practices largely in an

>>>effort to become more detached, in the sense of not reacting from

an emotional place when my buttons are pushed.

>> Practice makes perfect!

>, that's actually an insulting comment to Ken sharing

>something personal about himself. Perhaps you are not aware of this?

>(Many Aspies have trouble realizing how they come across to others

>and figuring out how to interact smoothly. It's part of the

>syndrome, though it can often be improved with extensive practice

>and/or tutoring.)

You took over 50 words to say the same thing I said in 3!!

>>Maybe it's the curse of too much testosterone. Baron-Cohen thinks

>>autism is extreme masculinity. But that hardly explains the level-

headed, compassionate AS women here and elsewhere. I'm beginning to

suspect that AS is really distinct from autism and perhaps not part

of the spectrum.

>Baron-Cohen's theory refers to pre-natal testosterone, not the

>testosterone prone outbursts of sports, or pub closing time. We AS

>have become 'acclimatised' to high levels of the hormone.

>That is correct (according to the theory). Thanks for this

>clarification.

No problemo, but, er, how do know its is correct. . . did I clarify

for you or everyone else?

.