RE: spectrum people lack empathy

[Guest guest]

> I think also that if it can be said that spectrum people lack empathy

> toward NT people, it can just as easily be said that NT lack empathy

> toward spectrum people.

>

> Am I the only one who thinks this?

While most NT have been polite to me, a good number of them either lack

empathy or they literally think I have a handle in my back, the end

result is that i often experience cognitive dissonance over it but it

astound me so much that i can't answer back quickly enough.

Alain

[Guest guest]

I agree with all that Rhonda and Alain have said on this topic.

Yours for better letters,

Kate Gladstone

Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest

handwritingrepair@...

http://learn.to/handwrite, http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair

325 South Manning Boulevard

Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA

telephone 518/482-6763

AND REMEMBER ...

you can order books through my site!

(Amazon.com link -

I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold)

[Guest guest]

I thought your post was accurate and insightful, Rhonda.

The paragraph below reminded me of something I witnessed today:

>There is a big difference to me in having empathy and showing empathy.

>For example, you might be able to relate (either intellectually or by

>feeling) to a situation, but either not have the words to express it

>or be able to show through the socially expected action (for example,

>hugging).

I went to have my hair cut. There was nobody in the shop except me

and the woman (I'll call her Q) cutting my hair, and then another

employee (I'll call her R) came in. From the time R entered until her

customer arrived ten minutes or so later, Q and R were engaged in an

conversation that could be used as a case-study of NT interaction.

They seemed to be talking about nothing most of the time, but each

" reinforced " the other with verbal cues (and probably non-verbal

cues, though I couldn't perceive them). And even when they *were*

talking about something, their content-sentences were interlaced with

emotive expressions.

It's the kind of conversation that I find tiring and perplexing and

confusing (and after a few minutes, exhausting and frustrating), but

it seems to feel very friendly to the NTs who engage in it. No doubt

R and Q have been creating and maintaining their relationship through

such conversations ever since they first met. That kind of thing

really works for NTs. It is one variety of what they mean by

" empathy, " I think: the ability to engage in the kind of NT

conversation that affirms each participant in ways beyond my reach or

ability to replicate.

If either Q or R had attempted to hold that ten-minute conversation

with me, it would have taken no more than 45 seconds, tops. And Q (or

R) would have been left feeling dissatisfied, perhaps even snubbed or

disliked, though I would not have been feeling or intending to convey

that attitude at all.

Jane

[Guest guest]

>

> Hello,

> I haven't posted in quite a while, but I'm trying to get your thoughts:

>

> There is a big difference to me in having empathy and showing empathy.

> For example, you might be able to relate (either intellectually or by

> feeling) to a situation, but either not have the words to express it

> or be able to show through the socially expected action (for example,

> hugging).

>

> There is a big difference to me also between 'lacking empathy' and not

> receiving enough information (because of sensory issues or just being

> engaged in thought that causes one to not realize what is going on

> around you) to even know that something is going on that requires

> attention, and in some cases, empathy.

>

> There is also a big difference to me between 'lacking empathy' and not

> understanding/picking up on social cues, whereas maybe if a situation

> were explained, one might be able to understand and to empathize.

I agree wholeheartedly. I compare it to people speaking, in this case

thinking, different languages. Just because they understand each other in a

less than perfect fashion doesn't mean that one or the other have less of an

ability to discuss or understand what they're talking about. It's why I was

always annoyed when teachers would tell me, " Well, this is the way things

are " and then would refuse to explain why or substantiate themselves. It got

me accused of perseverating a lot, but that's just another way NTs can often

fail to understand autistics.

I think also that if it can be said that spectrum people lack empathy

> toward NT people, it can just as easily be said that NT lack empathy

> toward spectrum people.

I think that's certainly possible in many instances, although of course not

all. There are some differences, not negative ones but real ones

nonetheless, in how we think and how they think and just as we sometimes

find their social skills confusing, they often find our means of interaction

and analysis difficult to understand. It's very insightful of you to point

this out.

-Ari

[Guest guest]

Hi, Jane,

One thing I cannot stand is going to get my hair cut. They always ask

me questions that seem pointless, such as " are you married? " or " do

you have kids? " and I give short answer responses usually because I

don't really feel like elaborating on my life, and probably because I

don't come across as happy-friendly, they probably don't try to do a

decent job.

> It's the kind of conversation that I find tiring and perplexing and

> confusing (and after a few minutes, exhausting and frustrating), but

> it seems to feel very friendly to the NTs who engage in it.

Same here, and then I also have trouble finding anyone who wants to

engage in the sort of discussion I would like to have.

No doubt

> R and Q have been creating and maintaining their relationship

through such conversations ever since they first met. That kind of

thing really works for NTs. It is one variety of what they mean by

> " empathy, " I think: the ability to engage in the kind of NT

> conversation that affirms each participant in ways beyond my reach

or ability to replicate.

Exactly. I like how you put " empathy " in quotes above. Social chatter,

for the most part, does not seem to me to be empathy at all. I think

people have become so accustomed to (and reliant on) the sort of

social rules governing their conversations and interactions, that they

aren't actually thinking about what the other person feels.

I think about that, too, when I think of stereotypes that say women

should get flowers or jewelry for gifts, or men should get sports

memorabilia, and how often it works and how meaningless it is, how it

says nothing about what one knows about a person.

> If either Q or R had attempted to hold that ten-minute conversation

> with me, it would have taken no more than 45 seconds, tops. And Q

(or R) would have been left feeling dissatisfied, perhaps even

snubbed or disliked, though I would not have been feeling or intending

to convey that attitude at all.

That happens to me, too. People who don't know me tend to think I am cold.

Rhonda

[Guest guest]

> There is a big difference to me in having empathy and showing empathy.

> For example, you might be able to relate (either intellectually or by

> feeling) to a situation, but either not have the words to express it

> or be able to show through the socially expected action (for example,

> hugging).

Your post was all very familiar. I think having empathy and showing

empathy are equated in an NTs eyes. That's why they would say we lack

empathy. I was perplexed when I first read that Aspies lack empathy,

because I'd always thought I was extrememly empathic, that I felt

things more deeply than others appeared to. But then I would have to

admit that others probably don't see it even when I'm experiencing

these feelings. Although, it has been very commom throughout my life

for people to ask me if something is wrong. I never understood why

they would ask.

Sara

--

mother anarchy http://motheranarchy.blogspot.com

[Guest guest]

> There is a big difference to me in having empathy and showing

> empathy. For example, you might be able to relate (either

> intellectually or by feeling) to a situation, but either not have

> the words to express it or be able to show through the socially

> expected action (for example, hugging).

That happens to me a lot.

Today I was at the vet's for a routine cat checkup. Someone else was

there for an emergency visit for his cat, and he was in the waiting

room crying. I know what it's like to lose a cat and I felt really

bad, but I am sure that I did not look as if I was even noticing or

interested.

It happens to me a lot that people who are looking for typical

expressions of love pronounce me heartless. (My grandmother calls

both me and my dad that, actually.) And people also view me as

emotionless. But empathy, love, and emotions in general, are not

absent from me, they are just not expressed the usual ways, so people

assume they're not there. (Often they also make bizarre wild guesses

about my emotional state that are totally wrong but that if I say

they're wrong they think that proves they're right.)

The problem is my initial responses are not ones that can be followed

through on in all situations without making things worse because of

gross misunderstanding. For instance, the man at the vet today, I

wanted to butt my head on his chin and purr, but I'm pretty sure that

would not make sense to him, and any interpretation he put on it would

likely be wrong. So of course I didn't.

Non-humans are much easier to deal with. My cat understands when I

butt her head and purr. My dog understands when I wag my butt and

pant. (Dogs are harder than cats but easier than non-autistic

humans.) Any human encountering these behaviors would probably put a

sexual spin on them or something that is not there. But the dog and

cat understand what I mean for the most part.

Come to think of it, it's rare that non-human animals seem to regard

me as heartless, although some dogs don't know what to make of me

because my interactions with dogs are more stilted than, say, cats.

But they seem to understand my expressions of empathy and emotions and

so forth. It's humans that say I'm just a heartless (pick one:

" aggressive " or " aloof and uncaring " ) bitch or something.

[Guest guest]

Hi, Sara,

I've only learned within the past few years that when I am focusing, I

look angry to others. When I am just thinking, I look sad to others.

Most of the time, since my focus is directly internally, I am not even

aware of my expressions. A thinking state, for me, is not really an

emotional state, but if I am amused by my thoughts or if something

suddenly occurs to me, then my expression might change accordingly,

which in turn confuses other people as well because it's not based on

anything they've witnessed. What's REALLY amusing to me is when I am

in my thought with whatever expression goes along with it, and someone

walks in my path and says, " Why are you looking at me like that? "

Then I say, " Well, I wasn't looking at YOU, and didn't even realize

you were standing there. " (How could you not see me when you were

looking right at me?)

Rhonda

> Your post was all very familiar. I think having empathy and showing

> empathy are equated in an NTs eyes. That's why they would say we lack

> empathy. I was perplexed when I first read that Aspies lack empathy,

> because I'd always thought I was extrememly empathic, that I felt

> things more deeply than others appeared to. But then I would have to

> admit that others probably don't see it even when I'm experiencing

> these feelings. Although, it has been very commom throughout my life

> for people to ask me if something is wrong. I never understood why

> they would ask.

>

> Sara

> --

> mother anarchy http://motheranarchy.blogspot.com

>

[Guest guest]

> It's why I was

> always annoyed when teachers would tell me, " Well, this is the way

> things are " and then would refuse to explain why or substantiate

> themselves. It got me accused of perseverating a lot, but that's

> just another way NTs can often fail to understand autistics.

It's the same with when I ask questions.

Some people take it as an aggressive threat. They don't tend to get

along with me very well.

Other people take it as me trying to gather information. They tend to

get along with me better.

I went to a meeting recently with a woman who I think is in the second

category. She was still a little taken aback at the following exchange:

Her: So if your staff are dishonest, you will need to be able to fire

them.

Me: Uh... dishonest how? Because it seems to me that people are

dishonest all the time, but they call it politeness, and I suspect

that you don't want me to fire them over it. So I'd want to know what

things it's wrong for them to be dishonest about, and what things it's

okay.

I was talking to about it later, and she pointed out that one

problem for non-autistic people in making information accessible to

autistic people, is that we often step over taboos, both major and

minor ones, when we ask for the answers we require in order to

understand something. She said that for instance it's not normally

regarded as good to point out that some " politeness " is inherently

dishonest, and that even my request for information might be taken as

very impolite because it crosses that taboo where you don't *mention*

that some politeness entails dishonesty.

But I was not asking the question to be belligerent, of course. I

really need to know where the line is between acceptable and

unacceptable kinds of dishonesty. I was eventually told that it meant

staff being dishonest on their time sheets or with my money or

something. I would never have guessed that without being told.

And my case manager at another agency would never have told me an

answer, he'd have just pronounced me overly aggressive and refused to

speak to me. Which he did a number of times when I asked questions

that crossed into other taboo areas.

The problem is that quite often they think I already know something,

or else that I don't *need* to know something, when in fact if I don't

know that thing, I won't be able to understand something else. Even

if it doesn't make sense to them. Even if the thing I need to know is

something they've been conditioned since birth never to talk about.

Even if the thing I need to know reveals a major flaw that nobody

*wants* to talk about.

At any rate, I prefer people who are able to handle this sort of

question without seeing me as hte problem for asking it. Calling it

just " perseverating " is a way, in that case, of demeaning the question

and not answering it. (I've been called perseverative, obsessive,

inappropriate, etc, before, too, when I've asked things I needed to know.)

[Guest guest]

> Most of the time, since my focus is directly internally, I am not even

> aware of my expressions. A thinking state, for me, is not really an

> emotional state, but if I am amused by my thoughts or if something

> suddenly occurs to me, then my expression might change accordingly,

> which in turn confuses other people as well because it's not based on

> anything they've witnessed.

That's an interesting point. I've often noticed that people look at me

weirdly if my expression changes based on some thought I've had. Does

this sort of thing not happen to most people? Or is it just that it

doesn't happen to them often enough for them to realise it?

> Then I say, " Well, I wasn't looking at YOU, and didn't even realize

> you were standing there. " (How could you not see me when you were

> looking right at me?)

Again. Same sort of question. Do other people not get so inwardly

focused that they stop paying attention to external input? Or just not

often enough to not have noticed that they do?

You *do* hear about this one every once in a while, though. " I was

lost in thought " , " I was daydreaming " , etc.

Are our internal mindscapes more detailed and absorbing than NTs? I'd

certainly like to think so.

-Simon

[Guest guest]

> That's an interesting point. I've often noticed that people look at

> me weirdly if my expression changes based on some thought I've had.

> Does this sort of thing not happen to most people? Or is it just

> that it doesn't happen to them often enough for them to realise it?

I think it happens to them, but less often. I remember exactly one

non-autistic person who told me everyone thought she was " a real

bitch " (in her words) before getting to know her, because when she was

concentrating on a book or something she got a " mean " facial expression.

We're more consistently misinterpreted by non-autistic people, though,

than they are by each other. (Although they do get their share of

misinterpretation among themselves, it's on a different level.)

What I notice the most often, is that people expect my movements and

expressions, or lack thereof, *in general* to be about *them*. Even

when whatever I'm doing has nothing to do with them. It's not limited

to being lost in thought, though.

For instance, I can be reacting to a part of my environment that is

not a human being, and all the human beings think I am reacting to

*them*.

I can be doing things like scrunching up my face, for no particular

reason, and they think *that* is about them, too.

Quite often I don't respond to people. Mainly because I am doing

other things and concentrating on other things, not people. People

turn into objects to be navigated around at best. Or else I just

don't have the reaction ability to respond to them right then. They

think my lack of response is very rude or even hostile.

Sometimes I've wished I could get " IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT YOU! " tatooed to

my forehead or something, but I doubt people would understand even

then. (And it is not that I don't care about people, just that my

signals and lack thereof are different enough to get weird reactions

from people.)

Of course, when I do actually try to respond to people, they

frequently don't notice my responses or view them as meaningful.

[Guest guest]

Rhonda wrote:

>One thing I cannot stand is going to get my hair cut. They always ask

>me questions that seem pointless, such as " are you married? " or " do

>you have kids? " and I give short answer responses usually because I

>don't really feel like elaborating on my life, and probably because I

>don't come across as happy-friendly, they probably don't try to do a

>decent job.

I am fortunate in not caring much what my hair looks like. ;-) For

the last few years, I've been going to a cheap place (not a " salon " )

where I'm likely to have a different hair-cutter each time. (Not that

I'd recognize it if I had the same person again.) The amount of

attempt to chat varies but is never very much. Maybe it's because I'm

so much older than the hair-cutters and their usual clientele. (The

shop caters to " youth, " and I am 56.) Also, I think I don't elicit

some of the usual chat because I just don't look like I'm married or

have children.

Twice I actually initiated a thread while being hair cut, but both

times it failed to catch on. I thought perhaps a professional

hair-cutter might be interested in comparing what it's like to cut

human hair vs. what it's like to learn to trim the hair on bear

faces. Nope. I suspect they don't understand what I'm talking about.

It's taken me years to start to feel any confidence in bear hair

trimming, so naturally I find it an interesting topic.

Jane

[Guest guest]

It was 22 Mar 2006, when Rhonda commented:

> Hello,

> I haven't posted in quite a while, but I'm trying to get your thoughts:

>

> There is a big difference to me in having empathy and showing empathy. For

> example, you might be able to relate (either intellectually or by feeling)

> to a situation, but either not have the words to express it or be able to

> show through the socially expected action (for example, hugging).

>

> There is a big difference to me also between 'lacking empathy' and not

> receiving enough information (because of sensory issues or just being

> engaged in thought that causes one to not realize what is going on around

> you) to even know that something is going on that requires attention, and

> in some cases, empathy.

>

> There is also a big difference to me between 'lacking empathy' and not

> understanding/picking up on social cues, whereas maybe if a situation were

> explained, one might be able to understand and to empathize.

>

> I think also that if it can be said that spectrum people lack empathy

> toward NT people, it can just as easily be said that NT lack empathy

> toward spectrum people.

>

> Am I the only one who thinks this? Please let me know whether you

> agree or disagree. (BTW, I am not offended when people disagree with

> me, only when people do so in a degrading way.)

I think the whole lacking empathy thing is hogwash. Then again, to

paraphrase Arthur C e, I think it was, 90 percent of everything is

hogwash. (Might have been Theodore Sturgeon, I always confuse e's

Law and Sturgeon's Law.)

I don't fail to care when other folks are hurt. I may misunderstand

social cues that would tell me exactly how and why they're hurting, but

once I do understand, I do care, deeply, and want to help.

Likewise, I can think that people are hurt in a given situation and be

mistaken about that, too, when they actually aren't hurt at all. That

doesn't demonstrate that I lack empathy, it demonstrates that I have

empathy, but that it is (apparently) unnecessary.

I say apparently, because I may see a cause for pain, that in fact does

cause pain, but the person being hurt may have social reasons for denying

they've been hurt.

What people forget is that all these clever, smoothly delineated divisions

between human behaviors -- some of which are called symptoms and some

habits and some foibles -- are just the opinions of particular falible

human beings, with Dr. before their names. The lines could be reasonably

drawn between entirely different sets of behaviors.

Hans Asperger drew a line around a set of behaviors, called them a

syndrome, and (decades later) other Drs agreed. That Kanner fella did the

same, and a bit sooner, other Drs agreed. Those lines could have been

drawn in a different place, by a different person, at a different time,

and the result might well have been no less valid.

A syndrome is a convenient generalization about a complex universe of

human behavior, and regardless of the age of the syndrome or the

credentials of those touting it in this weeks' New York Times Best

Sellers, it may just be a set of human behaviors. " Lack of empathy " is a

(seemingly) descriptive phrase for a part of one of those generalizations.

It might be important. Or, it might be no more important than lettuce on

a ham sandwich. Got the ham between two slices of bread, it's a ham

sandwich, lettuce notwithstanding. Until you eat it, when it's a chewed-

up pulp of starch and protein.

" If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a horse have? " Four, of

course, of course. If you call difficulty interpreting body language, or

interpreting colloquial language, or difficulty with " Social Skills, " a

lack of empathy, how much empathy does an autistic person have?

If you call those things symptoms, are you a perseverating Autistic, or a

Dr?

--

B. , another satisfied user of

Pegasus Mail Client and Mercury MTA <http://www.pmail.com>

<ftp://ftp.usm.maine.edu/pegasus/winpmail/w32-431.exe>

[Guest guest]

Alain Toussaint wrote:

> While most NT have been polite to me, a good number of them either lack

> empathy or they literally think I have a handle in my back, [...]

A handle in your back?

--

Camilla

[Guest guest]

Re:

> > While most NT have been polite to me, a good number of them either lack

> > empathy or they literally think I have a handle in my back, [...]

Literally? They've *actually* (for instance) reached around to your

back and groped for a handle to press or turn?

;-)

Yours for better letters,

Kate Gladstone

Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest

handwritingrepair@...

http://learn.to/handwrite, http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair

325 South Manning Boulevard

Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA

telephone 518/482-6763

AND REMEMBER ...

you can order books through my site!

(Amazon.com link -

I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold)

[Guest guest]

>

> What's REALLY amusing to me is when I am

> in my thought with whatever expression goes along with it, and someone

> walks in my path and says, " Why are you looking at me like that? "

>

> Then I say, " Well, I wasn't looking at YOU, and didn't even realize

> you were standing there. " >>>>

You know what is so funny, I rarely look directly at a face.

I can't tell you how often people look perplexed when talking to me, and I

(peripherally) spot them looking along my gaze-line. I catch them trying to

see " what I'm looking at at " . It doesn't at all make sense to them. I see

them look along where they think I'm looking and some actually stop in

midsentence and say, excuse me but what is it you see over there?

K

[Guest guest]

Hello, Simon,

> That's an interesting point. I've often noticed that people look at

me weirdly if my expression changes based on some thought I've had.

Does this sort of thing not happen to most people? Or is it just that

it doesn't happen to them often enough for them to realise it?

I think more people are focused externally than internally, and

probably even more so when they are around people. They're too busy

thinking about what they think the other person thinks to lose

themselves in thought. For me, it's just too much effort (completely

draining) to focus on other people and very easy to lose myself in

thought. I'm sure there are some non-spectrum people who think and

daydream a lot, but the daydreamers aren't usually respected by the

non-daydreamers because it's viewed as wasting time.

Rhonda

> > Then I say, " Well, I wasn't looking at YOU, and didn't even realize

> > you were standing there. " (How could you not see me when you were

> > looking right at me?)

>

> Again. Same sort of question. Do other people not get so inwardly

> focused that they stop paying attention to external input? Or just not

> often enough to not have noticed that they do?

> You *do* hear about this one every once in a while, though. " I was

> lost in thought " , " I was daydreaming " , etc.

>

> Are our internal mindscapes more detailed and absorbing than NTs? I'd

> certainly like to think so.

>

> -Simon

>

[Guest guest]

> I am fortunate in not caring much what my hair looks like. ;-) For

> the last few years, I've been going to a cheap place (not a " salon " )

> where I'm likely to have a different hair-cutter each time. (Not

that I'd recognize it if I had the same person again.)

It's usually just the principle. I have straight hair. I say, " Cut it

straight across the back, with no taper, " and the result is a huge

taper. I get interrogated: When was the last time your hair was cut.

Where did you get your hair cut last--whoever cut it did a terrible

job. Your hair is in terrible condition....and then they try to give

me advice about it. I really would just like to go in, get my hair cut

and leave. Many times, if my hair starts to irritate me, I do just cut

it myself, but I don't see a reason to get a lecture about it.

Rhonda

The amount of

> attempt to chat varies but is never very much. Maybe it's because I'm

> so much older than the hair-cutters and their usual clientele. (The

> shop caters to " youth, " and I am 56.) Also, I think I don't elicit

> some of the usual chat because I just don't look like I'm married or

> have children.

>

> Twice I actually initiated a thread while being hair cut, but both

> times it failed to catch on. I thought perhaps a professional

> hair-cutter might be interested in comparing what it's like to cut

> human hair vs. what it's like to learn to trim the hair on bear

> faces. Nope. I suspect they don't understand what I'm talking about.

> It's taken me years to start to feel any confidence in bear hair

> trimming, so naturally I find it an interesting topic.

>

> Jane

>

[Guest guest]

Try going to a men's barber shop. They don't play games there like " salons "

do. I've gotten the fastest, most-no-nonsense haircuts from barber shops,

even though I'm usually the only woman there. You say " cut straight across

and do nothing else, " and that's what they'll do.

Elayne

http://www.huntfamilyhome.net

" The government thinks you're an idiot. " -- Radley Balko,

www.theagitator.com

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Rhonda

> I have straight hair. I say, " Cut it

> straight across the back, with no taper, " and the result is a huge

> taper.

[Guest guest]

That sounds like the basic definition of extroversion as compared to

introversion. How much does introversion overlap with the autistic

spectrum?

Ettina

>

> Hello, Simon,

>

>

> > That's an interesting point. I've often noticed that people look

at

> me weirdly if my expression changes based on some thought I've had.

> Does this sort of thing not happen to most people? Or is it just

that

> it doesn't happen to them often enough for them to realise it?

>

> I think more people are focused externally than internally, and

> probably even more so when they are around people. They're too busy

> thinking about what they think the other person thinks to lose

> themselves in thought. For me, it's just too much effort

(completely

> draining) to focus on other people and very easy to lose myself in

> thought. I'm sure there are some non-spectrum people who think and

> daydream a lot, but the daydreamers aren't usually respected by the

> non-daydreamers because it's viewed as wasting time.

>

> Rhonda

>

>

> > > Then I say, " Well, I wasn't looking at YOU, and didn't even

realize

> > > you were standing there. " (How could you not see me when you

were

> > > looking right at me?)

> >

> > Again. Same sort of question. Do other people not get so inwardly

> > focused that they stop paying attention to external input? Or

just not

> > often enough to not have noticed that they do?

> > You *do* hear about this one every once in a while, though. " I

was

> > lost in thought " , " I was daydreaming " , etc.

> >

> > Are our internal mindscapes more detailed and absorbing than

NTs? I'd

> > certainly like to think so.

> >

> > -Simon

> >

>

[Guest guest]

" lack of joint visual attention " could be reinterpreted

as " obsession with the visual points of focus of other people " in a

thing where autistics are assumed to be normal.

Like Dzopok in the book I'm writing, a land of autistics. One of the

characters in my story, Vgos, is an NT from Dzopok or as the Dzo

say " other-spirit " .

What would it be like for someone who has always been viewed as an

outcast to enter a society where xe's the norm and the kind of

people xe grew up with are outcasts?

Ettina

> >

> > What's REALLY amusing to me is when I am

> > in my thought with whatever expression goes along with it, and

someone

> > walks in my path and says, " Why are you looking at me like that? "

> >

> > Then I say, " Well, I wasn't looking at YOU, and didn't even

realize

> > you were standing there. " >>>>

>

>

>

> You know what is so funny, I rarely look directly at a face.

> I can't tell you how often people look perplexed when talking to

me, and I

> (peripherally) spot them looking along my gaze-line. I catch them

trying to

> see " what I'm looking at at " . It doesn't at all make sense to

them. I see

> them look along where they think I'm looking and some actually

stop in

> midsentence and say, excuse me but what is it you see over there?

>

>

> K

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Sorry to get off topic, but I've wondered this for a while. I read somewhere

that introverts like a calming physical pressure, like that brought about by

crossing ones legs or leaning against something, which many autistics feel

calmed by as well. Is that the case and can you link me to some information

on that? I can't recall where I read it and it was some time ago.

-Ari

>

> That sounds like the basic definition of extroversion as compared to

> introversion. How much does introversion overlap with the autistic

> spectrum?

> Ettina

>

> >

> > Hello, Simon,

> >

> >

> > > That's an interesting point. I've often noticed that people look

> at

> > me weirdly if my expression changes based on some thought I've had.

> > Does this sort of thing not happen to most people? Or is it just

> that

> > it doesn't happen to them often enough for them to realise it?

> >

> > I think more people are focused externally than internally, and

> > probably even more so when they are around people. They're too busy

> > thinking about what they think the other person thinks to lose

> > themselves in thought. For me, it's just too much effort

> (completely

> > draining) to focus on other people and very easy to lose myself in

> > thought. I'm sure there are some non-spectrum people who think and

> > daydream a lot, but the daydreamers aren't usually respected by the

> > non-daydreamers because it's viewed as wasting time.

> >

> > Rhonda

> >

> >

> > > > Then I say, " Well, I wasn't looking at YOU, and didn't even

> realize

> > > > you were standing there. " (How could you not see me when you

> were

> > > > looking right at me?)

> > >

> > > Again. Same sort of question. Do other people not get so inwardly

> > > focused that they stop paying attention to external input? Or

> just not

> > > often enough to not have noticed that they do?

> > > You *do* hear about this one every once in a while, though. " I

> was

> > > lost in thought " , " I was daydreaming " , etc.

> > >

> > > Are our internal mindscapes more detailed and absorbing than

> NTs? I'd

> > > certainly like to think so.

> > >

> > > -Simon

> > >

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I want to read your book, Ettina, when you finish it!

Yours for better letters,

Kate Gladstone

Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest

handwritingrepair@...

http://learn.to/handwrite, http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair

325 South Manning Boulevard

Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA

telephone 518/482-6763

AND REMEMBER ...

you can order books through my site!

(Amazon.com link -

I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold)

[Guest guest]

> Sorry to get off topic, but I've wondered this for a while. I read

> somewhere that introverts like a calming physical pressure, like that brought

about

> by crossing ones legs or leaning against something

Huh. If it's true, that would explain why I cross my legs and lean

against things a lot. I even got made fun of for it in gradeschool...

though why was odd enough behaviour for an NT to notice I still don't

know.

I could understand if it was my more recently acquired habit of

crossing my legs *without* leaning on anything (that is, while

standing on only one leg)... but don't NTs often lean against things

themselves? Maybe I just looked like I was trying too hard to blend in

and be casual while I was doing it.

-Simon

[Guest guest]

I often find crossing my legs (while sitting down) very relaxing as well.

Something about the slight pressure brought on by turning the knees is kind

of nice. I don't know if its a particularly autistic trait though, and I

know plenty of NTs do the same.

>

>

> > Sorry to get off topic, but I've wondered this for a while. I read

> > somewhere that introverts like a calming physical pressure, like that

> brought about

> > by crossing ones legs or leaning against something

>

> Huh. If it's true, that would explain why I cross my legs and lean

> against things a lot. I even got made fun of for it in gradeschool...

> though why was odd enough behaviour for an NT to notice I still don't

> know.

> I could understand if it was my more recently acquired habit of

> crossing my legs *without* leaning on anything (that is, while

> standing on only one leg)... but don't NTs often lean against things

> themselves? Maybe I just looked like I was trying too hard to blend in

> and be casual while I was doing it.

>

> -Simon

>

>

>

>