Do I have Asperger's Syndrome?
Seraph-sama
sorry if I'm annoying anyone), but this is a major issue for me. (I asked
before with incomplete information.) For a while I thought I had AS (my dad
first brought it up when I was 12 or 13, I'm 16 now, and said I might have it).
I asked around and most people said I wasn't autistic. Of course, there were a
lot of things I wouldn't tell them. There are two things that happened recently
that make me think there is a possibility I might have at least a mild case of
it. 1) Recently, a psychologist ran through the diagnostic criteria with me and
said he actually had enough to diagnose me with AS. He later conceded that it
was a possibility that a lot of the "repetitive behaviors" are due just to
musical talent. (I'll explain that later.) 2) Recently, my stepsister's friend
died in a car accident. I'm not comfortable saying this on a newsgroup, but
after hearing this, I felt almost no pain at all, even when I *tried* to. That
really concerned me. I DID comfort her about it though. "I'm sorry your friend
died." The psychologist talked with me about lack of emotional reciprocity and
how people with AS often had this problem. I won't go into a detail about
myself, but here are the facts.
1) I *did* spin things when I was around 2. I took one particular type of toy
and I tried to get all of them spinning at once. BUT, I remember doing this and
the reason I enjoyed spinning them: they were plastic shapes with six
protrusions, all of them in the same plane. So when I spin them (one protrusion
pointing up and another down), it looked like it only had two protrusions, and
that fascinated me.
2) I *did* have very exclusive interests, and that continues up to now. Records
at 3, cymbals at 4, oil painting at 6 (I REALLY impressed people with this),
drawing videogame scenarios throughout elementary school (my teachers got mad
and threw away my drawings because I didn't participate), crafting play
guns/swords/bows & arrows at 8, physics and astronomy at 11 (I read general
audience books on relativity and quantum mechanics), mathematics: college
calculus at 13 (after flunking algebra at 12!), set theory at 14, topology,
abstract algebra, chaos theory, and mathematical logic at 15, and I even
discovered my own theory. And finally, at 15-16, a nameless piece of videogame
music that I thought about almost EVERY day for a year and a half. BUT, it was
a really cool piece of music and I have an especially sensitive musical ear.
Same goes for everything else, they were just intense interests.
3) I have almost no desire to make or have friends. This has been with me my
entire life. When I was in preschool, the teachers thought that because I never
talked to other kids, I was retarted, and they gave me an IQ test. (It said 87,
but now I'm in the gifted program. I don't know what my "real" IQ is.) They
were going to put me in a class for kids with emotional problems. BUT, I do
have lots of
friends at school (I was recently elected school judge), sometimes I enjoy
talking to them (if they have some funny things to say :), and I have
"friendship" feelings for them. And I enjoy talking to people interested in the
same obscure things I'm interested in, like philosophy or music, and in those
cases, I am extremely talkative.
4) I do yell at and hit my two younger brothers very often, BUT I told them I
want to stop. (I am very empathetic at times.)
5) I *do* have repetitive mannerisms, such as finger tapping, walking out to
check the mail 4 times an evening, and formerly pacing. I sit at the same spot
at the table by habit, cook and eat things the same way all the time. BUT, the
first three of these go back down to music: finger tapping and pacing intensify
the music I'm currently thinking about, and checking the mail gave me an excuse
to walk (which intensifies the music). So they are functional, and they aren't
a coping mechanism for overstimulation. (My psychologist said something about
that.) But I am very sensitive to sound, especially when I'm in a tense mood,
and when it's a cacophony of annoying voices or someone snoring/wheezing while
they're asleep. I can very well sit at another seat or cook food a different
way, for example, but my attitude is usually "Why bother?"
6) I am very bad at making eye contact, and my facial expressions are very
often inaccurate. (I have a reputation as a mean person who brushes off small
talk, because of what I do.) BUT, I don't make eye contact because I simply
don't know "when" I'm supposed to, and I was taught "never stare" which
influences it. I have a general idea of when to do it and I can sometimes do it
just fine. And I do have automatic facial features, but almost only for
laughter and anger. (I'll walk around in school with a real serious expression
on my face, and all of a sudden I'll think of something funny and a big smile
will surface out of nowhere. It's embarrassing. And when I'm angry, I'm ANGRY.)
7) There was no delay for me in speech. By my parents' account I was an
extremely articulate toddler. But I had trouble reading - I was caught up in
the idea that there was some magic formula wherein you could determine
by letters alone how to pronounce a word. I read almost exclusively
non-fiction. BUT this is because, for me, fiction is bland and empty, whereas
non-fiction really means something.
8) I have little emotional reciprocity. My psychologist described situations of
extreme lack of reciprocity, such as not shaking someone's hand when they
extend their arm, and not responding when someone says "Hi." No problem with
the former, though I don't care about handshaking, but with the latter, there
have been times where I didn't respond to other kids' Hi's because I "just
didn't feel like it. What's the point?" But they were also walking in an
opposite direction and many times I simply didn't have enough time. My dad was
concerned with my almost whatever-ish responses to his I love you's. That might
just be part of being a teenager. I hurt people's feelings a lot, and I have to
take extra care not to say something that could hurt someone. BUT, I consider
myself an empathetic person and I'm even studying Utilitarian Morality and
putting it to use.
9) I read that the incidence of perfect pitch increases from 1 out of 10,000 to
1 out of 20 among autistics. I have practically perfect pitch - 90% of the
time, I can tell what key on the piano you pressed. But it's not perfect by
some standards.
10) I understand figures of speech. I can immediately figure out what this or
that figure of speech really means, but I have a huge deficit in KNOWLEDGE of
various figures of speech. That might be because I simply never listened or
payed attention to anything throughout my life. I CAN and DO talk slang
sometimes. My speech can be very informal, but kids at school (and my
psychologist) still say I "talk smart". That might be because of all the big
books I've read. :P
11) I have very little social skills, and it's very hard for me to "figure out
what to say now". But this is probably due more to a lack of interest. When
someone says something, I can freeze up, "What do I say? What do I say?" and in
a mad rush to try not to hurt their feelings, I could simply turn away. That
makes me miserable.
12) I *do* think in words very much, as opposed to thinking in pictures.
Thinking visually is something I'm good at though, but I only use it in math.
13) I have no motor problems. I am extremely good at ping-pong (the best in my
P.E. class), and can play a great, stormy game, but when the other player
tosses the ball to me, I can never catch it with my hand and almost always
miss.
14) I do feel extremely different from everyone else. Extremely. I feel like
I've been off on my own, thinking about things on my own, getting deeper and
deeper, while everyone else lives the cool "shallow" social life. But because
of this I am completely lost and disconnected with everyone else. Like the
runner who takes a wrong turn during a race, and runs through blocks and
cities, thinking "Where's the finish line?" (But he's now too far away from
other racers to ask for directions! -_-;;) This might be just the heightened
self-consciousness of being a teenager. Whatever it is, it sucks.
Thanks for taking time helping me. Some of this stuff may look familiar,
because I posted here once. (I'm coming back here with much more stuff.) I
probably forgot a lot of things. Any experts who can explain or aspies who can
relate are appreciated. :)
Seraph-sama
16/m, so don't call me "sera" or nothin'
http://members.tripod.com/~SeraphSama
Mlle Hulot
about yourself that I wouldn't expect, although I suppose all
these behaviours have been brought to your attention and
discussed/proven to you. When I was a teenager I was sort of more
oblivious, a dreamer and overly passive. I was told I was shy and
would grow out of it. Do you feel that the evidence isn't there
or
that it's something else?
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Alwyn
serap...@aol.com (Seraph-sama) wrote:
> Hi everybody.
Hi Seraph-sama!
> I know you all probably get enough posts with this subject
> (I'm
> sorry if I'm annoying anyone),
Oh don't worry about that. This is a support group and we mostly do our
best to support each other.
> but this is a major issue for me. (I asked
> before with incomplete information.)
I remember answering your previous posting. I'll have another go at
answering, for what it's worth.
> For a while I thought I had AS (my
> dad
> first brought it up when I was 12 or 13,
That was perceptive of your father.
> I'm 16 now, and said I might
> have it).
> I asked around and most people said I wasn't autistic.
Agnosticism is the best approach until the evidence accumulates.
> Of course, there
> were a
> lot of things I wouldn't tell them. There are two things that happened
> recently
> that make me think there is a possibility I might have at least a mild
> case of
> it. 1) Recently, a psychologist ran through the diagnostic criteria with
> me and
> said he actually had enough to diagnose me with AS. He later conceded
> that it
> was a possibility that a lot of the "repetitive behaviors" are due just
> to
> musical talent. (I'll explain that later.) 2) Recently, my stepsister's
> friend
> died in a car accident. I'm not comfortable saying this on a newsgroup,
> but
> after hearing this, I felt almost no pain at all, even when I *tried* to.
I'm not sure why you should think that this should be indicative of
Asperger's Syndrome. What i find surprising, though, is that you _tried_
to feel pain. Most of us believe that pain is something to be avoided.
> That
> really concerned me. I DID comfort her about it though. "I'm sorry your
> friend
> died." The psychologist talked with me about lack of emotional
> reciprocity and
> how people with AS often had this problem.
I think that I (not AS) would have felt sympathy with my stepsister for
her loss, but probably no pain. After all, it was her friend, not yours,
and you presumably had little to do with the person.
What you actually did seems to me entirely appropriate.
> I won't go into a detail about
> myself, but here are the facts.
>
> 1) I *did* spin things when I was around 2. I took one particular type of
> toy
> and I tried to get all of them spinning at once. BUT, I remember doing
> this and
> the reason I enjoyed spinning them: they were plastic shapes with six
> protrusions, all of them in the same plane. So when I spin them (one
> protrusion
> pointing up and another down), it looked like it only had two
> protrusions, and
> that fascinated me.
That doesn't say a thing. it's very common for children to be fascinated
by spinning objects.
> 2) I *did* have very exclusive interests, and that continues up to now.
> Records
> at 3, cymbals at 4, oil painting at 6 (I REALLY impressed people with
> this),
> drawing videogame scenarios throughout elementary school (my teachers got
> mad
> and threw away my drawings because I didn't participate), crafting play
> guns/swords/bows & arrows at 8, physics and astronomy at 11 (I read
> general
> audience books on relativity and quantum mechanics), mathematics: college
> calculus at 13 (after flunking algebra at 12!), set theory at 14,
> topology,
> abstract algebra, chaos theory, and mathematical logic at 15, and I even
> discovered my own theory. And finally, at 15-16, a nameless piece of
> videogame
> music that I thought about almost EVERY day for a year and a half. BUT,
> it was
> a really cool piece of music and I have an especially sensitive musical
> ear.
> Same goes for everything else, they were just intense interests.
A question I've often asked myself is how one distinguishes between a
hobby and an aspie special interest. I suppose it's a function of the
intensity and exclusivity involved, but I've never found a clear-cut
answer to this conundrum.
> 3) I have almost no desire to make or have friends. This has been with me
> my
> entire life.
Again, this is not something that points directly to Asperger's
Syndrome. Many aspies have a desperate desire for friends but get
depressed, sometimes severely so, because they can't seem to make any.
One alternative diagnosis your psychologist might like to consider is
Schizoid Personality Disorder. Myself, I don't see it so much as a
disorder as of a personailty trait.
> When I was in preschool, the teachers thought that because I
> never
> talked to other kids, I was retarted, and they gave me an IQ test. (It
> said 87,
> but now I'm in the gifted program. I don't know what my "real" IQ is.)
Well, neither do I. I think IQ scores are pretty meaningless, especially
when one is dealing with autistic people.
> They
> were going to put me in a class for kids with emotional problems.
That would have been a really bad idea.
> BUT, I
> do
> have lots of
> friends at school
Aspies do sometimes have friends, but they are usually few and far
between.
> (I was recently elected school judge), sometimes I
> enjoy
> talking to them (if they have some funny things to say :), and I have
> "friendship" feelings for them. And I enjoy talking to people interested
> in the
> same obscure things I'm interested in, like philosophy or music, and in
> those
> cases, I am extremely talkative.
Again, this of itself doesn't say a thing. Aspies love to talk about
their special interests, but then again, so do we all. it's when this
talkativeness becomes grossly inappropriate that we begin to suspect
that something is wrong.
By the way, I'm interested in philosophy and music too. I liked the
stuff on your site about moral philosophy, but I thought you were unfair
to Kant. There's an awful lot more to him than the Categorical
Imperative. But on the whole, Kant's moralising is best forgotten or at
best treated as a brilliant philosopher's foray into a realm where he
had little competence.
> 4) I do yell at and hit my two younger brothers very often, BUT I told
> them I
> want to stop. (I am very empathetic at times.)
Some people are irascible by nature. It has no necessary connection to
autism. You might give us a clue if you told us what it was that made
you most angry.
> 5) I *do* have repetitive mannerisms, such as finger tapping, walking out
> to
> check the mail 4 times an evening, and formerly pacing. I sit at the same
> spot
> at the table by habit, cook and eat things the same way all the time.
Once again (it's becoming boring!), I see these things as character
traits. Some of us are more prone to routines than others. Myself, I
hate routine and am constantly looking for novelty.
> BUT, the
> first three of these go back down to music: finger tapping and pacing
> intensify
> the music I'm currently thinking about, and checking the mail gave me an
> excuse
> to walk (which intensifies the music). So they are functional, and they
> aren't
> a coping mechanism for overstimulation. (My psychologist said something
> about
> that.) But I am very sensitive to sound, especially when I'm in a tense
> mood,
> and when it's a cacophony of annoying voices or someone snoring/wheezing
> while
> they're asleep.
I hope you don't mind me saying this, but I found the music on your site
extremely annoying. I love music, but I find that the wrong sort really
gets on my nerves.
> I can very well sit at another seat or cook food a
> different
> way, for example, but my attitude is usually "Why bother?"
Well yes, routine tends to make our life simpler, doesn't it?
> 6) I am very bad at making eye contact, and my facial expressions are
> very
> often inaccurate.
Eye-contact is a cultural thing, except in very small children. I find
that Americans demand a lot of it, while English people generally do
their best to avoid it. But if you avoided eye contact as a small child,
it may show an autistic trait.
> (I have a reputation as a mean person who brushes off
> small
> talk, because of what I do.) BUT, I don't make eye contact because I
> simply
> don't know "when" I'm supposed to, and I was taught "never stare" which
> influences it. I have a general idea of when to do it and I can sometimes
> do it
> just fine. And I do have automatic facial features, but almost only for
> laughter and anger. (I'll walk around in school with a real serious
> expression
> on my face, and all of a sudden I'll think of something funny and a big
> smile
> will surface out of nowhere. It's embarrassing.
I find that charming. to be honest. But I also understand how you could
find it embarrassing.
> And when I'm angry, I'm
> ANGRY.)
I bet!
> 7) There was no delay for me in speech. By my parents' account I was an
> extremely articulate toddler. But I had trouble reading - I was caught up
> in
> the idea that there was some magic formula wherein you could determine
> by letters alone how to pronounce a word.
If you had been brought up on a language like mine, that would never
have given you any trouble. I first learnt English from books,
pronouncing the words as if they were Welsh.
> I read almost exclusively
> non-fiction. BUT this is because, for me, fiction is bland and empty,
> whereas
> non-fiction really means something.
Well, it is said that most Asperger people prefer non-fiction to
fiction. But I've come across quite a few of them who are into science
fiction.
> 8) I have little emotional reciprocity. My psychologist described
> situations of
> extreme lack of reciprocity, such as not shaking someone's hand when they
> extend their arm, and not responding when someone says "Hi." No problem
> with
> the former, though I don't care about handshaking, but with the latter,
> there
> have been times where I didn't respond to other kids' Hi's because I
> "just
> didn't feel like it. What's the point?" But they were also walking in an
> opposite direction and many times I simply didn't have enough time. My
> dad was
> concerned with my almost whatever-ish responses to his I love you's. That
> might
> just be part of being a teenager. I hurt people's feelings a lot, and I
> have to
> take extra care not to say something that could hurt someone. BUT, I
> consider
> myself an empathetic person and I'm even studying Utilitarian Morality
> and
> putting it to use.
Again, I'm not sure that what you describe is a characteristic peculiar
to Asperger's Syndrome. Aspies typically have difficulty knowing what is
appropriate in the circumstances. You seem to know about it all but
don't care to do it. That's different, in my opinion.
> 9) I read that the incidence of perfect pitch increases from 1 out of
> 10,000 to
> 1 out of 20 among autistics. I have practically perfect pitch - 90% of
> the
> time, I can tell what key on the piano you pressed. But it's not perfect
> by
> some standards.
My mother had the same sort of pitch sense as you have. It's far from
perfect, but it's a lot better than mine.
> 10) I understand figures of speech. I can immediately figure out what
> this or
> that figure of speech really means, but I have a huge deficit in
> KNOWLEDGE of
> various figures of speech. That might be because I simply never listened
> or
> payed attention to anything throughout my life. I CAN and DO talk slang
> sometimes. My speech can be very informal, but kids at school (and my
> psychologist) still say I "talk smart". That might be because of all the
> big
> books I've read. :P
Some aspies have difficulty with figures of speech, some don't. I've
also found that some of them have huge deficits in vocabulary and
general knowledge which I wouldn't have expected for people of their
age, intelligenced and education.
> 11) I have very little social skills, and it's very hard for me to
> "figure out
> what to say now".
Now this is a very common Asperger characteristic.
> But this is probably due more to a lack of interest.
I wouldn't know about that.
> When
> someone says something, I can freeze up, "What do I say? What do I say?"
> and in
> a mad rush to try not to hurt their feelings, I could simply turn away.
> That
> makes me miserable.
I think an awful lot of aspies would sympathise with you on that.
> 12) I *do* think in words very much, as opposed to thinking in pictures.
> Thinking visually is something I'm good at though, but I only use it in
> math.
Temple Grandin thinks in pictures, and so does our very own Larry
Arnold. I doubt if it's the case for most Asperger people, though.
> 13) I have no motor problems. I am extremely good at ping-pong (the best
> in my
> P.E. class), and can play a great, stormy game, but when the other player
> tosses the ball to me, I can never catch it with my hand and almost
> always
> miss.
Motor coordination problems occur in many autistic people, but it's not
usually regarded as a diagnostic criterion. As for myself, I've never
been able to catch a ball.
> 14) I do feel extremely different from everyone else.
That's very characteristic of Asperger's Syndrome, if I may say so.
> Extremely. I feel
> like
> I've been off on my own, thinking about things on my own, getting deeper
> and
> deeper, while everyone else lives the cool "shallow" social life.
However, I think intellectual people also feel like this too.
> But because
> of this I am completely lost and disconnected with everyone else. Like
> the
> runner who takes a wrong turn during a race, and runs through blocks and
> cities, thinking "Where's the finish line?" (But he's now too far away
> from
> other racers to ask for directions! -_-;;)
That's a brilliant analogy.
> This might be just the
> heightened
> self-consciousness of being a teenager. Whatever it is, it sucks.
I bet it does.
> Thanks for taking time helping me. Some of this stuff may look familiar,
> because I posted here once. (I'm coming back here with much more stuff.)
> I
> probably forgot a lot of things. Any experts who can explain or aspies
> who can
> relate are appreciated. :)
I've done the best I can with the little I know. My feeling is that
there's not enough there to establish for definite that you have
Asperger's Syndrome, although you do have some traits that could
definitely be considered autistic. Perhaps some of the aspies who post
to this group might like to tell us how what you've said relates to
their own experiences.
ALWYN
Antonia
or a "handle"? If so, does it have any special meaning?
I'm answering here instead of following up directly to your post
since I wanted to comment on some things Alwyn wrote.
(Liberally snipped, Alwyn are you aware that your post was 395
lines long?! Even Ayelet and I seldom get *that* long... :-), you
seem to have a problem with uneven lines (I've cleaned them up
here), trying out a new newsreader?)
On Sun, 09 Apr 2000 21:55:00 +0100, Alwyn wrote:
>serap...@aol.com (Seraph-sama) wrote:
>
>> 2) Recently, my stepsister's friend died in a car accident.
>> I'm not comfortable saying this on a newsgroup, but
>> after hearing this, I felt almost no pain at all, even when I *tried* to.
>
>I'm not sure why you should think that this should be indicative of
>Asperger's Syndrome. What i find surprising, though, is that you _tried_
>to feel pain. Most of us believe that pain is something to be avoided.
As an Aspie I don't feel it is at all surprising to try to evoke
the appropriate (or what one thinks is the appropriate) emotion.
We are not isolated, we hear and see people react to things, we
read, we watch tv, and learn the appropriate responses to
different events (sometimes it makes sense, sometimes not). I'm
still amazed that most people (NTs) don't seem to care about
"becoming a real person", or trying to be "good", "empathic",
"human", "compassionate" and all other "Good things" one should
be.
>> I won't go into a detail about
>> myself, but here are the facts.
>>
>> 1) I *did* spin things when I was around 2. I took one particular
>> type of toy and I tried to get all of them spinning at once.
>> BUT, I remember doing this and
>> the reason I enjoyed spinning them:
>> they were plastic shapes with six
>> protrusions, all of them in the same plane.
>> So when I spin them (one protrusion
>> pointing up and another down), it looked like
>> it only had two protrusions, and
>> that fascinated me.
>
>That doesn't say a thing. it's very common for children to be fascinated
>by spinning objects.
But it isn't very common, except for Aspies perhaps :-), to
*remember* and analyse in detail what was/is so enjoyable about
it.
>> 2) I *did* have very exclusive interests, and that continues up to now.
>A question I've often asked myself is how one distinguishes between a
>hobby and an aspie special interest. I suppose it's a function of the
>intensity and exclusivity involved, but I've never found a clear-cut
>answer to this conundrum.
I think one indicator is whether the hobby/special interest is
very unusual in the persons immediate peer-setting. Especially
when it comes to children. It seems like most NT-children are
rather impressionable, if other children tell them that interest
X totally sucks, and there is no external back-up (like an older
sibling sharing the interest, or a parent or *someone*), most
children seem to let it go.
>> BUT, I do have lots of friends at school
>> (I was recently elected school judge), sometimes I
>> enjoy talking to them (if they have some funny things to say :),
>> and I have "friendship" feelings for them.
This somehow sounds *very* Aspish to me, I can't really explain
why.
>> And I enjoy talking
>> to people interested in the same obscure things I'm interested in,
>> like philosophy or music, and in those
>> cases, I am extremely talkative.
>
>Again, this of itself doesn't say a thing. Aspies love to talk about
>their special interests, but then again, so do we all.
Seems to be true.
>it's when this talkativeness becomes grossly inappropriate that
>we begin to suspect that something is wrong.
I'm not so sure about that. As a sole diagnostic tool, wielded by
stupid NTs :-), you might have a point. But from an
Aspie-viewpoint I think what NTs might see as a "grossly
inappropriate talkativeness" is a mix between a)non-existent
social ESP and b)a view that communicating fascinating (to own
self) facts *must* be something people would appreciate.
(As an aside, the idea that men in general tend to prioritize
communicating the *message* while women tend to prioritize
"keeping the channel open" (defining the relationsship between
the parties), is rather interesting in this regard. In some
regards one can view a lot of Aspie-characteristics as typical
male behaviour taken to the extreme, which might explain while
most Aspie women tend to go un- or mis-diagnosed for so long.)
>> 4) I do yell at and hit my two younger brothers very often, BUT I told
>> them I want to stop. (I am very empathetic at times.)
>
>Some people are irascible by nature. It has no necessary connection to
>autism. You might give us a clue if you told us what it was that made
>you most angry.
I agree with Alwyn here. I can add that I used to yell at and hit
my little sister quite a bit, but I think when I was a teenager I
started to get it more under control.
>> 6) I am very bad at making eye contact, and my facial expressions are
>> very often inaccurate.
>
>Eye-contact is a cultural thing, except in very small children. I find
>that Americans demand a lot of it, while English people generally do
>their best to avoid it.
This is true, it seems to be a cultural thing. *BUT* even in a
culture like mine (I live in Finland) were eye-contact isn't a
big thing, I find that people seem to have some kind of in-built
mechanism for it; like it was natural to do in some instances.
For me it isn't, it takes an effort to remember, not a *very*
great effort since I was taught this as a child.
>> (I have a reputation as a mean person who brushes off
>> small talk, because of what I do.) BUT, I don't make eye
>> contact because I simply don't know "when" I'm supposed to,
>> and I was taught "never stare" which
>> influences it.
This seems *so* familiar. This confusion about supposedly
"natural" things, it is quite complicated deciding when to apply
"don't stare" and when to apply "look at people when they talk to
you", isn't it?
>> I have a general idea of when to do it and I can sometimes
>> do it just fine. And I do have automatic facial features,
>> but almost only for laughter and anger.
I think I have an idea about what you mean. Somewhere along the
line I got the idea that it was good if your "neutral" expression
was friendly, somewhat smiling. And I made an effort to make it
so, and succeded. Problem is, I easily forget that it isn't
always appropriate, and my mother tells me it can seem
supercilious and arrogant.
>> (I'll walk around in
>> school with a real serious expression
>> on my face, and all of a sudden I'll think of something funny and a big
>> smile will surface out of nowhere. It's embarrassing.
I know. But I try to look at it from Alwyn's point of view, that
it is charming.
>> 7) There was no delay for me in speech. By my parents' account I was an
>> extremely articulate toddler. But I had trouble reading - I was caught up
>> in the idea that there was some magic formula wherein you could determine
>> by letters alone how to pronounce a word.
Me too. I started to talk at about 2, and in complete sentences
at once. And I also had trouble starting to read, I refused to
read until I was eight and my mother tricked me (by reading aloud
and always stopping at the most exciting moment). I was convinced
good children weren't *supposed* to read until they had been
formally taught to read, taught in the *right* way, in school of
course.
>> I read almost exclusively non-fiction. BUT this is because,
>> for me, fiction is bland and empty, whereas
>> non-fiction really means something.
Interesting, what do you mean by "bland and empty"? Most ACs I
have encountered that don't read fiction say it is because "it
isn't interesting" or something like that.
I read a lot of fiction, or rather: I *read* about as much
fiction as nonfiction, but I *use* a lot of fiction for
relaxation (*light* fiction, at the moment my favorites are
cold-war espionage novels).
>> 8) I have little emotional reciprocity. My psychologist described
>> situations of extreme lack of reciprocity, such as not shaking
>> someone's hand when they extend their arm, and not responding when
>> someone says "Hi."
IMHO, these examples seems to have little to do with *emotion*,
and more to do with social conventions.
>> No problem with the former, though I don't care about handshaking,
>> but with the latter, there have been times where I didn't respond to
>> other kids' Hi's because I "just didn't feel like it. What's the point?"
>> But they were also walking in an opposite direction and many times I simply
>> didn't have enough time.
Though this could be just ordinary NT-rudeness (:-)), the thing
about not having enough time struck me a bit. If I'm not in
"social mode" I frequently feel like that, like I missed the
"appropriate timeslot".
>> My dad was concerned with my almost whatever-ish responses to his
>> I love you's. That might just be part of being a teenager.
Yes, but how was your reactions when you were a child? Were they
"whatever-ish" then too?
>> I hurt people's feelings a lot, and I have to take extra care not
>> to say something that could hurt someone. BUT, I consider
>> myself an empathetic person and I'm even studying Utilitarian Morality
>> and putting it to use.
I somehow find your attitude very Aspish :-).
>Again, I'm not sure that what you describe is a characteristic peculiar
>to Asperger's Syndrome. Aspies typically have difficulty knowing what is
>appropriate in the circumstances. You seem to know about it all but
>don't care to do it. That's different, in my opinion.
There is, but I think the *big* difference between Aspies and NTs
are that NTs somehow know or can feel what is appropriate, at
least in their familiar day-to-day circumstances. Aspies are as
insecure in their own micro-culture as anywhere, everything we
*know* about how to behave is more or less learned/trained or
consciously deducted from watching/reading/asking and analysing.
>> 10) I understand figures of speech. I can immediately figure out what
>> this or that figure of speech really means, but I have a huge deficit in
>> KNOWLEDGE of various figures of speech. That might be because I simply
>> never listened or payed attention to anything throughout my life.
Me too. I think the operative words here was "figure out". Many
NTs seems to "get" figures of speech without figuring them out,
just by the context.
>> I CAN and DO talk slang
>> sometimes. My speech can be very informal, but kids at school (and my
>> psychologist) still say I "talk smart". That might be because of all the
>> big books I've read. :P
Did you have to make an effort, even a small one, to incorporate
slang and informal speech in your repertoire? I know I did, and
people mostly *still* thought it was a bit on the correct side
:-(. As one get older it isn't that much of a problem (I think)
any more.
>> 12) I *do* think in words very much, as opposed to thinking in pictures.
>> Thinking visually is something I'm good at though, but I only use it in
>> math.
So do I. Until just some years ago (I'm 27 now) I was convinced
that I *couldn't* think in anything other than words.
Unfortunately it is so long ago since I had to do any math that I
can't test this new-found (re-found?) skill at that.
>> But because of this I am completely lost and disconnected with
>> everyone else. Like the runner who takes a wrong turn during a
>> race, and runs through blocks and
>> cities, thinking "Where's the finish line?"
>> (But he's now too far away from
>> other racers to ask for directions! -_-;;)
>
>That's a brilliant analogy.
I agree with Alwyn, it really is. It gets quite exhausting I
think, so often beeing effectively "lost" and having to either
backtrack or go off in some direction and *hope* that you find
your way back to the track.
>> This might be just the
>> heightened self-consciousness of being a teenager.
You wish! :-)
That is what *I* thought when I was a severely depressed teenager
(hadn't ever heard about Asperger then, neither had any
"professional")... NOW I think I'm emotionally a self-conscious
teenager, but on the upside, I'm not severly depressed any more.
The typical teenagey-self-consciousness isn't IMO that analytical
(which is nice in a way).
--
As you might see I have a new e-mail adress. The old one is still in use, if you
have it and can un-munge it. The new one is totally un-munged (use as is) and I
will read things sent to it also. The "Aspsusa" comes from my initials,
Antonia Susanna Palmén, and the first part of my middle name, SUSAnna.
Alwyn
> I'm answering here instead of following up directly to your post
> since I wanted to comment on some things Alwyn wrote.
Thank you, I find that a useful corrective.
> (Liberally snipped, Alwyn are you aware that your post was 395
> lines long?! Even Ayelet and I seldom get *that* long... :-),
Sorry, i never thought to count. It never occurred to me that I could
possibly be in the same league as you and Ayelet for verbosity. :-)
> you
> seem to have a problem with uneven lines (I've cleaned them up
> here), trying out a new newsreader?)
Well, you can largely blame my newsreader (NewsWatcher 3.0) for that. I
suppose I could tidy it up by hand, but I honestly can't be bothered.
> On Sun, 09 Apr 2000 21:55:00 +0100, Alwyn wrote:
>
> >serap...@aol.com (Seraph-sama) wrote:
> >
> >> 2) Recently, my stepsister's friend died in a car accident.
> >> I'm not comfortable saying this on a newsgroup, but
> >> after hearing this, I felt almost no pain at all, even when I *tried*
> >> to.
> >
> >I'm not sure why you should think that this should be indicative of
> >Asperger's Syndrome. What i find surprising, though, is that you _tried_
> >to feel pain. Most of us believe that pain is something to be avoided.
>
> As an Aspie I don't feel it is at all surprising to try to evoke
> the appropriate (or what one thinks is the appropriate) emotion.
I can honestly say that it would never occur to me to try to feel
emotions that don't come naturally. What's the point?
On the other hand, I will sometimes put on a show of emotion if the
occasion seems to demand it. Some people might think of it as insincere,
but I think of it as good manners; it's something every one of us does
from time to time. 'Rejoice with those that rejoice, weep with those
that weep,' and so on.
> We are not isolated, we hear and see people react to things, we
> read, we watch tv, and learn the appropriate responses to
> different events (sometimes it makes sense, sometimes not). I'm
> still amazed that most people (NTs) don't seem to care about
> "becoming a real person", or trying to be "good", "empathic",
> "human", "compassionate" and all other "Good things" one should
> be.
I doubt if I've ever asked myself whether I'm a 'real' person or even a
'good' one. My only aspiration is to be happy and to see others equally
happy.
<snip>
> But it isn't very common, except for Aspies perhaps :-), to
> *remember* and analyse in detail what was/is so enjoyable about
> it.
Hmm, you may have a point there. But some people are just analytical by
nature.
> >A question I've often asked myself is how one distinguishes between a
> >hobby and an aspie special interest. I suppose it's a function of the
> >intensity and exclusivity involved, but I've never found a clear-cut
> >answer to this conundrum.
>
> I think one indicator is whether the hobby/special interest is
> very unusual in the persons immediate peer-setting. Especially
> when it comes to children. It seems like most NT-children are
> rather impressionable, if other children tell them that interest
> X totally sucks, and there is no external back-up (like an older
> sibling sharing the interest, or a parent or *someone*), most
> children seem to let it go.
Well, i don't know. I used to go to village schools, and the children
there were pretty ordinary. I used to read encyclopedias and learn
everything I could about classical music, which must have been most
atypical for the children around me. When I got older, I wnet to a
bigger school and encountered children who were at least as interested
in these things as myself.
> >> BUT, I do have lots of friends at school
> >> (I was recently elected school judge), sometimes I
> >> enjoy talking to them (if they have some funny things to say :),
> >> and I have "friendship" feelings for them.
>
> This somehow sounds *very* Aspish to me, I can't really explain
> why.
It's only the turn of phrase that I find remarkable, but then, language
is very much a matter of choice. I would never say 'I have "friendship"
feelings for them,' but rather 'I have friendly feelings for them,' or
'I like them a lot.' There does seem to be something slighly 'forced'
about that 'friendship' in inverted commas.
<snip>
> >it's when this talkativeness becomes grossly inappropriate that
> >we begin to suspect that something is wrong.
>
> I'm not so sure about that. As a sole diagnostic tool, wielded by
> stupid NTs :-), you might have a point. But from an
> Aspie-viewpoint I think what NTs might see as a "grossly
> inappropriate talkativeness" is a mix between a)non-existent
> social ESP and b)a view that communicating fascinating (to own
> self) facts *must* be something people would appreciate.
I agree with this.
> (As an aside, the idea that men in general tend to prioritize
> communicating the *message* while women tend to prioritize
> "keeping the channel open" (defining the relationsship between
> the parties), is rather interesting in this regard.
I do wonder if this is true overall. Perhaps the men I socialise with
are not representative.
> In some
> regards one can view a lot of Aspie-characteristics as typical
> male behaviour taken to the extreme, which might explain while
> most Aspie women tend to go un- or mis-diagnosed for so long.)
An interesting thought.
> >> 4) I do yell at and hit my two younger brothers very often, BUT I told
> >> them I want to stop. (I am very empathetic at times.)
> >
> >Some people are irascible by nature. It has no necessary connection to
> >autism. You might give us a clue if you told us what it was that made
> >you most angry.
>
> I agree with Alwyn here. I can add that I used to yell at and hit
> my little sister quite a bit, but I think when I was a teenager I
> started to get it more under control.
I don't think I've ever had much of a temper. What I can recall being
guilty of is merciless teasing. My father used to refer to it as
*chwarae'n troi'n chwerw*, 'play turning bitter'.
> >> 6) I am very bad at making eye contact, and my facial expressions are
> >> very often inaccurate.
> >
> >Eye-contact is a cultural thing, except in very small children. I find
> >that Americans demand a lot of it, while English people generally do
> >their best to avoid it.
>
> This is true, it seems to be a cultural thing. *BUT* even in a
> culture like mine (I live in Finland) were eye-contact isn't a
> big thing, I find that people seem to have some kind of in-built
> mechanism for it; like it was natural to do in some instances.
> For me it isn't, it takes an effort to remember, not a *very*
> great effort since I was taught this as a child.
My impression is that NTs adjust their eye-contact according to the
importance of the person they are talking to. I find, for instance, that
shop assistants here hardly ever afford their customers the luxury of
eye contact unless they are either making an effort to be polite or find
the customer particularly attractive.
> >> (I have a reputation as a mean person who brushes off
> >> small talk, because of what I do.) BUT, I don't make eye
> >> contact because I simply don't know "when" I'm supposed to,
> >> and I was taught "never stare" which
> >> influences it.
>
> This seems *so* familiar. This confusion about supposedly
> "natural" things, it is quite complicated deciding when to apply
> "don't stare" and when to apply "look at people when they talk to
> you", isn't it?
Staring is an often used device for putting people down or asserting
one's dominance. Therefore an inappopropriate stare can easily cause
offence. What I, and, I think, most people do, is glance for a moment
and then look away.
<snip>
> I read a lot of fiction, or rather: I *read* about as much
> fiction as nonfiction, but I *use* a lot of fiction for
> relaxation (*light* fiction, at the moment my favorites are
> cold-war espionage novels).
It's typical of me that I read a lot of fiction in foreign languages in
order to increase my vocabulary. I've even read John le Carré in German
and Italian, Leon Uris (that trashy American!) in Dutch.
<snip>
> >> My dad was concerned with my almost whatever-ish responses to his
> >> I love you's. That might just be part of being a teenager.
>
> Yes, but how was your reactions when you were a child? Were they
> "whatever-ish" then too?
I've posted on this before. If my father had ever had the bad taste to
say to me 'I love you,' I would have wanted to run away and hide out of
embarrassment. i find it difficult to imagine a culture in which it is
normal for parents to say this kind of thing.
> >> I hurt people's feelings a lot, and I have to take extra care not
> >> to say something that could hurt someone. BUT, I consider
> >> myself an empathetic person and I'm even studying Utilitarian Morality
> >> and putting it to use.
>
> I somehow find your attitude very Aspish :-).
Again, what I find unusual is the language. 'I consider myself an
empathetic person and I'm even studying Utilitarian Morality and putting
it to use' sounds such an *elevated* way to talk about oneself; it
reminds me of the student in Lionel Trilling's short story, 'At this
time, of this place'. (Now the thought strikes me: was that student
really an aspie? Trilling would have known nothing about Asperger's
Syndrome, but he may well have based the character on one of his own
students.)
> >Again, I'm not sure that what you describe is a characteristic peculiar
> >to Asperger's Syndrome. Aspies typically have difficulty knowing what is
> >appropriate in the circumstances. You seem to know about it all but
> >don't care to do it. That's different, in my opinion.
>
> There is, but I think the *big* difference between Aspies and NTs
> are that NTs somehow know or can feel what is appropriate, at
> least in their familiar day-to-day circumstances. Aspies are as
> insecure in their own micro-culture as anywhere, everything we
> *know* about how to behave is more or less learned/trained or
> consciously deducted from watching/reading/asking and analysing.
That's a valuable clarification, thank you.
> >> 10) I understand figures of speech. I can immediately figure out what
> >> this or that figure of speech really means, but I have a huge deficit
> >> in
> >> KNOWLEDGE of various figures of speech. That might be because I simply
> >> never listened or payed attention to anything throughout my life.
>
> Me too. I think the operative words here was "figure out". Many
> NTs seems to "get" figures of speech without figuring them out,
> just by the context.
I'm just not sure about this. It seems to me that NTs have to think hard
about what an unfamiliar figure of speech might mean too, and they may
have to draw from the context to work it out.
> >> I CAN and DO talk slang
> >> sometimes. My speech can be very informal, but kids at school (and my
> >> psychologist) still say I "talk smart". That might be because of all
> >> the
> >> big books I've read. :P
>
> Did you have to make an effort, even a small one, to incorporate
> slang and informal speech in your repertoire? I know I did, and
> people mostly *still* thought it was a bit on the correct side
> :-(. As one get older it isn't that much of a problem (I think)
> any more.
Everybody has difficulty finding the right words for the occasion, I
think. But what amazes me about some people (aspies included) is that
they wilkl use difficult words (sometimes inappropriately) where easy
ones will do just as well to get their meaning over. In some cases, I
will see it as 'pomposity', wanting to sound important and
knowledgeable, but I'm sure that's not the case where aspies are
concerned.
One aspie talked to me about the 'perseveration' on his nose. I asked:
'Do you mean perspiration?' He then apologised profusely for his
mistake. But why couldn't he have said: 'My nose gets sweaty.'? - nice,
easy words that everyone understands.
As an aside, I once read in a genteel nineteenth-century novel (was it
Elizabeth Gaskell's 'Cranford'?) how a young lady was reproved for
saying that she 'sweated'. She was told: 'Horses sweat, gentlemen
perspire and ladies simply glow.'
<snip>
> >> This might be just the
> >> heightened self-consciousness of being a teenager.
>
> You wish! :-)
> That is what *I* thought when I was a severely depressed teenager
> (hadn't ever heard about Asperger then, neither had any
> "professional")... NOW I think I'm emotionally a self-conscious
> teenager, but on the upside, I'm not severly depressed any more.
> The typical teenagey-self-consciousness isn't IMO that analytical
> (which is nice in a way).
What I remember about teenage self-consciousness is that I could feel
very uncomfortable amongst adults, as if I was continually under ths
spotlight; I felt no trace of this when I was with other teenagers.
Liberation came as I gradually realised that adults were just overgrown
teenagers. :-)
Alwyn
Sherry Kosmalski
of Alwyn's response>
>I've posted on this before. If my father had ever had the bad taste to
>say to me 'I love you,' I would have wanted to run away and hide out of
>embarrassment. i find it difficult to imagine a culture in which it is
>normal for parents to say this kind of thing.
Yes, I remember you mentioning this before, Alwyn. I don't want to appear
confrontational, (remember I am a mother of three) but why on earth would you
find it hard accept an expression of love between a parent and child? Although
the type of love would be different than that between two lovers, those same
two lovers would no doubt verbally express their feelings to each other, so
what would make it different for the parent/child relationship?
My father told me many times that he loved me, and for that I am very grateful.
My mother, on the other hand, never spoke those words, and I felt the void
caused by that immensely. My father has since passed away, and I am thankful
that I have the memories of his words to keep in my heart.
My husband's family is very outwardly expressive of their feelings of care for
each other. His male cousins (they are Polish) often hug and kiss each other
on the cheek in greeting and departure. In fact, I admit to having been
overwhelmed by such a show of emotion while first dating, but came to
appreciate it and hope to pass on that openess to my children.
>One aspie talked to me about the 'perseveration' on his nose. I asked:
>'Do you mean perspiration?' He then apologised profusely for his
>mistake. But why couldn't he have said: 'My nose gets sweaty.'? - nice,
>easy words that everyone understands.
>
>As an aside, I once read in a genteel nineteenth-century novel (was it
>Elizabeth Gaskell's 'Cranford'?) how a young lady was reproved for
>saying that she 'sweated'. She was told: 'Horses sweat, gentlemen
>perspire and ladies simply glow.'
>
I love this! I used to say (while a teenager) that "guys sweat, girls
perspire", and "guys fart, girls pass gas" to excuse our feminine behaviors.
Sherry, mom to Danny, 10, HFA, Dave, 13, Laura, 7 (both NT), devoted wife to
Ron (hard working hubby), :-)
Larry Arnold
Seraph-sama <serap...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:<20000409124540...@ng-cr1.aol.com>...
Well I feel nothing if people who are nothing to do with me die. I only feel
the pain of personal loss if it is someone I know well and I am going to
miss them. I did not feel anything when my girlfreinds mother died, and I
have always felt a little guilty about this.
I felt disbelief and sadness at my fathers death and anger and sadness at my
mothers death, I am not sure what you mean by pain exactly.
> 1) I *did* spin things when I was around 2. I took one particular type of
toy
> and I tried to get all of them spinning at once. BUT, I remember doing
this and
> the reason I enjoyed spinning them: they were plastic shapes with six
> protrusions, all of them in the same plane. So when I spin them (one
protrusion
> pointing up and another down), it looked like it only had two protrusions,
and
> that fascinated me.
It will come as no surprise to members of this NG that I used to spin
things, I used to take clocks apart and spin the delicate balance wheels,
also had spinning toys but I think all kids had them it is not a core
diagnostic criteria for AS just an observation of behavior which as Alwyn
says is not exclucive to autistics.
>
> 2) I *did* have very exclusive interests, and that continues up to now.
Records
> at 3, cymbals at 4, oil painting at 6 (I REALLY impressed people with
this),
> drawing videogame scenarios throughout elementary school (my teachers got
mad
> and threw away my drawings because I didn't participate), crafting play
> guns/swords/bows & arrows at 8, physics and astronomy at 11 (I read
general
> audience books on relativity and quantum mechanics), mathematics: college
> calculus at 13 (after flunking algebra at 12!), set theory at 14,
topology,
> abstract algebra, chaos theory, and mathematical logic at 15, and I even
> discovered my own theory. And finally, at 15-16, a nameless piece of
videogame
> music that I thought about almost EVERY day for a year and a half. BUT, it
was
> a really cool piece of music and I have an especially sensitive musical
ear.
> Same goes for everything else, they were just intense interests.
>
I don't know how obsessive is obsessive, my interests were obsesive enough
to attract teasing from my school fellows I also had the desire to know all
there was to know about the subject there being an element of collecting
facts. Your interests do not seem to last very long.
> 3) I have almost no desire to make or have friends. This has been with me
my
> entire life. When I was in preschool, the teachers thought that because I
never
> talked to other kids, I was retarted, and they gave me an IQ test. (It
said 87,
> but now I'm in the gifted program. I don't know what my "real" IQ is.)
They
> were going to put me in a class for kids with emotional problems. BUT, I
do
> have lots of
> friends at school (I was recently elected school judge), sometimes I enjoy
> talking to them (if they have some funny things to say :), and I have
> "friendship" feelings for them. And I enjoy talking to people interested
in the
> same obscure things I'm interested in, like philosophy or music, and in
those
> cases, I am extremely talkative.
At school I had one or two freinds but no great desire to make friends
beyond this, as an adult I have more desire to make friends but no ability
to. I do not fully understand the concept of friendship as to where
friendship begins and aquantance ends.
>
> 4) I do yell at and hit my two younger brothers very often, BUT I told
them I
> want to stop. (I am very empathetic at times.)
>
Well I was really explosive and had little control over this, I used to
react out of all proportion to small things.
> 5) I *do* have repetitive mannerisms, such as finger tapping, walking out
to
> check the mail 4 times an evening, and formerly pacing. I sit at the same
spot
> at the table by habit, cook and eat things the same way all the time. BUT,
the
> first three of these go back down to music: finger tapping and pacing
intensify
> the music I'm currently thinking about, and checking the mail gave me an
excuse
> to walk (which intensifies the music). So they are functional, and they
aren't
> a coping mechanism for overstimulation. (My psychologist said something
about.
You seem to be looking for an excuse to justify your mannerisms, do you
enjoy them, do they do something for you. I stim when I am tense and also
when I am excited. I like to rock.
> that.) But I am very sensitive to sound, especially when I'm in a tense
mood,
> and when it's a cacophony of annoying voices or someone snoring/wheezing
while
> they're asleep. I can very well sit at another seat or cook food a
different
> way, for example, but my attitude is usually "Why bother?"
Certain sounds sound very loud to me, particularly at certain pitches, it is
more than annoyance.
>
> 6) I am very bad at making eye contact, and my facial expressions are very
> often inaccurate. (I have a reputation as a mean person who brushes off
small
> talk, because of what I do.) BUT, I don't make eye contact because I
simply
> don't know "when" I'm supposed to, and I was taught "never stare" which
> influences it. I have a general idea of when to do it and I can sometimes
do it
> just fine. And I do have automatic facial features, but almost only for
> laughter and anger. (I'll walk around in school with a real serious
expression
> on my face, and all of a sudden I'll think of something funny and a big
smile
> will surface out of nowhere. It's embarrassing. And when I'm angry, I'm
ANGRY.)
I can do eye contact but am more comfortable not doing it else I tend to
stare at a certain point in the others face.
>
> 7) There was no delay for me in speech. By my parents' account I was an
> extremely articulate toddler. But I had trouble reading - I was caught up
in
> the idea that there was some magic formula wherein you could determine
> by letters alone how to pronounce a word. I read almost exclusively
> non-fiction. BUT this is because, for me, fiction is bland and empty,
whereas
> non-fiction really means something.
>
Speech delay is not necessary for aspergers, it is what seperates aspergers
from Kanners Autism.
> 8) I have little emotional reciprocity. My psychologist described
situations of
> extreme lack of reciprocity, such as not shaking someone's hand when they
> extend their arm, and not responding when someone says "Hi." No problem
with
> the former, though I don't care about handshaking, but with the latter,
there
> have been times where I didn't respond to other kids' Hi's because I "just
> didn't feel like it. What's the point?" But they were also walking in an
> opposite direction and many times I simply didn't have enough time. My dad
was
> concerned with my almost whatever-ish responses to his I love you's. That
might
> just be part of being a teenager. I hurt people's feelings a lot, and I
have to
> take extra care not to say something that could hurt someone. BUT, I
consider
> myself an empathetic person and I'm even studying Utilitarian Morality and
> putting it to use.
>
I do not like physical contact at all and like a lot of personal space. I
can be very cold and unfeeling when reacting to other peoples emotions, I
see no purpose in joining in, in fact I find it hard to read facial
expressions and sense people emotions. I do not react to greetings because I
am never sure of how I am suposed to react.
> 9) I read that the incidence of perfect pitch increases from 1 out of
10,000 to
> 1 out of 20 among autistics. I have practically perfect pitch - 90% of the
> time, I can tell what key on the piano you pressed. But it's not perfect
by
> some standards.
I don't think I quite have perfect pitch but I play music by ear. I can
certainly hear wrong notes though !
>
> 10) I understand figures of speech. I can immediately figure out what this
or
> that figure of speech really means, but I have a huge deficit in KNOWLEDGE
of
> various figures of speech. That might be because I simply never listened
or
> payed attention to anything throughout my life. I CAN and DO talk slang
> sometimes. My speech can be very informal, but kids at school (and my
> psychologist) still say I "talk smart". That might be because of all the
big
> books I've read. :P
According to my pysch I do not understand figures of speech. I think I do if
they are familiar to me, but not at an intuitive level. I am better at using
them than understanding them back as they give me very odd pictures in my
mind.
>
> 11) I have very little social skills, and it's very hard for me to "figure
out
> what to say now". But this is probably due more to a lack of interest.
When
> someone says something, I can freeze up, "What do I say? What do I say?"
and in
> a mad rush to try not to hurt their feelings, I could simply turn away.
That
> makes me miserable.
>
> 12) I *do* think in words very much, as opposed to thinking in pictures.
> Thinking visually is something I'm good at though, but I only use it in
math.
I think I read somewhere else that thinking in pictures does not an autistic
make. I think so much in pictures that I often do not know the words for
things I am thinking of.
>
> 13) I have no motor problems. I am extremely good at ping-pong (the best
in my
> P.E. class), and can play a great, stormy game, but when the other player
> tosses the ball to me, I can never catch it with my hand and almost always
> miss.
I am not well co-ordinated, I have difficulty in placing my hands exactly
where I want them to go, so I don't write well. I also have a poor sense of
balance. I have seen aspies better co-ordinated than me so it is not a sure
fire diagnostic sign
>
> 14) I do feel extremely different from everyone else. Extremely. I feel
like
> I've been off on my own, thinking about things on my own, getting deeper
and
> deeper, while everyone else lives the cool "shallow" social life. But
because
> of this I am completely lost and disconnected with everyone else. Like the
> runner who takes a wrong turn during a race, and runs through blocks and
> cities, thinking "Where's the finish line?" (But he's now too far away
from
> other racers to ask for directions! -_-;;) This might be just the
heightened
> self-consciousness of being a teenager. Whatever it is, it sucks.
>
There are many ways of being different, I noticed in your web site you did
not particularly like the idea of being thought autistic. It is not such a
bad way to be, we are no less human than anyone else. If you are aspie you
will hopefully lern this. When I was diagnosed it was a relief to me to know
why I was different. Not all aspies will have the same set of symptoms as
me, in some people one aspect is more prominent than another it is a
spectrum after all.
Larry
--
L'autisme c'est moi
Antonia
>In article <4ie3fsg5p1pn9i78k...@4ax.com>, Antonia wrote:
>> you
>> seem to have a problem with uneven lines (I've cleaned them up
>> here), trying out a new newsreader?)
>
>Well, you can largely blame my newsreader (NewsWatcher 3.0) for that. I
>suppose I could tidy it up by hand, but I honestly can't be bothered.
Mmm. You could probably adjust the hard-wrapping line-length when
quoting, you probably have it set to 72, which messes up quoting
when you reply to someone who uses 70+. Also Seraph-sama's
line-length was *at least* 78 which is a bit much.
As for doing it by hand, I know it's a drag, but it makes it
easier to read. There *are* some utilities out there that do it
for you (cleans up uneven quoted lines), but I have never gotten
around to using them (much faster to do it by hand :-)).
Also, you could tweak your newsreader to include the
"From:"-header instead of the "Reply-to:"-header in your
attribution line.
>> On Sun, 09 Apr 2000 21:55:00 +0100, Alwyn wrote:
>>
>> >serap...@aol.com (Seraph-sama) wrote:
>> >
>> >> 2) Recently, my stepsister's friend died in a car accident.
>> >> I'm not comfortable saying this on a newsgroup, but
>> >> after hearing this, I felt almost no pain at all, even when I *tried*
>> >> to.
>> >
>> >I'm not sure why you should think that this should be indicative of
>> >Asperger's Syndrome. What i find surprising, though, is that you _tried_
>> >to feel pain. Most of us believe that pain is something to be avoided.
>>
>> As an Aspie I don't feel it is at all surprising to try to evoke
>> the appropriate (or what one thinks is the appropriate) emotion.
>
>I can honestly say that it would never occur to me to try to feel
>emotions that don't come naturally. What's the point?
"Being good"? :-) Nah, but if you are *used* to handling your
emotions rather in the same way as your behaviour (since "what
comes naturally" is often far too strange and out of sync with
expectations) it seems rather natural to at least try.
Also, from an early age we all learn that being truthful is
virtue. We also learn that certain behaviours, certain reactions,
are expected in certain situations. If then your "natural"
reaction is very different from the expected one the choices are
in essence to either fake the reaction (act, lie) or try to evoke
a more "appropriate" emotion in yourself. Since most people,
aspies included, hold the opinion that falseness and deceit are
*bad*, the natural alternative is to try to change what you feel
to be in line with your (expected) response.
The other alternative is of course to go with what you feel, and
disregard what is expected of you, which is something that plain
selfpreservation makes impossible. Or at least it makes your life
very lonely and hard.
>On the other hand, I will sometimes put on a show of emotion if the
>occasion seems to demand it. Some people might think of it as insincere,
>but I think of it as good manners; it's something every one of us does
>from time to time. 'Rejoice with those that rejoice, weep with those
>that weep,' and so on.
Exactly this is something that I believe is rather difficult for
Aspies to do, expecially if we've never been told "it's OK to
fake it", and why.
>> But it isn't very common, except for Aspies perhaps :-), to
>> *remember* and analyse in detail what was/is so enjoyable about
>> it.
>
>Hmm, you may have a point there. But some people are just analytical by
>nature.
Yes. But I think the tendency might be more common among ACs than
the population in general. Since we mostly lack this mystical
"social ESP" we need to use analytical thinking a lot more (than
NTs) to understand, and cope with, people (and ourselves).
>Well, i don't know. I used to go to village schools, and the children
>there were pretty ordinary. I used to read encyclopedias and learn
>everything I could about classical music, which must have been most
>atypical for the children around me. When I got older, I wnet to a
>bigger school and encountered children who were at least as interested
>in these things as myself.
But you probably *did* have some interests in common with the
children at the village school? I mean, there were *something*
you could converse with them about in a natural fashion?
>> >> BUT, I do have lots of friends at school
>> >> (I was recently elected school judge), sometimes I
>> >> enjoy talking to them (if they have some funny things to say :),
>> >> and I have "friendship" feelings for them.
>>
>> This somehow sounds *very* Aspish to me, I can't really explain
>> why.
>
>It's only the turn of phrase that I find remarkable, but then, language
>is very much a matter of choice. I would never say 'I have "friendship"
>feelings for them,' but rather 'I have friendly feelings for them,' or
>'I like them a lot.' There does seem to be something slighly 'forced'
>about that 'friendship' in inverted commas.
Well, I don't know about 'forced', to me it seems like a rather
natural way to indicate an unsurity about what exactly
"friendship" and feelings related to it entail.
>> (As an aside, the idea that men in general tend to prioritize
>> communicating the *message* while women tend to prioritize
>> "keeping the channel open" (defining the relationsship between
>> the parties), is rather interesting in this regard.
>
>I do wonder if this is true overall. Perhaps the men I socialise with
>are not representative.
Probably not. I think the women in my family isn't very
representative either, and neither is my boyfriend. But after I
read among other things Deborah Tannen's book "You just don't
understand! Talking in couples" a few years ago I started to
understand esp. communications between women *much* better. (I
also started to understand why my boyfriend got upset with my
conversation style, he has a, at least superficially, much more
feminine style than most men, and often finds my way of talking
unnecessarily aggressive.)
>I don't think I've ever had much of a temper. What I can recall being
>guilty of is merciless teasing. My father used to refer to it as
>*chwarae'n troi'n chwerw*, 'play turning bitter'.
How repulsively NT of you! :-)
>My impression is that NTs adjust their eye-contact according to the
>importance of the person they are talking to. I find, for instance, that
>shop assistants here hardly ever afford their customers the luxury of
>eye contact unless they are either making an effort to be polite or find
>the customer particularly attractive.
Mmm. An interesting obsevation, and most likely true. Makes sense
from the perspective that you would want to capture "important
peoples" attention more, and eye-contact seems to be a prime tool
for that.
>> This seems *so* familiar. This confusion about supposedly
>> "natural" things, it is quite complicated deciding when to apply
>> "don't stare" and when to apply "look at people when they talk to
>> you", isn't it?
>
>Staring is an often used device for putting people down or asserting
>one's dominance. Therefore an inappopropriate stare can easily cause
>offence. What I, and, I think, most people do, is glance for a moment
>and then look away.
Yes. But do you *inherently know* that staring can be used/viewed
this way? I know it only because I have read it somewhere, and
then verified it by "field-study". I could *never* intuitively
know something like that. However, since I've learned this I can
use it, both in the sense of avoiding giving that impression and
using it for asserting myself if I need to.
>It's typical of me that I read a lot of fiction in foreign languages in
>order to increase my vocabulary. I've even read John le Carré in German
>and Italian, Leon Uris (that trashy American!) in Dutch.
:-) I have read most of Kemelmanns "***-day the Rabbi..."-
mysteries in German! Reading *translations* of light fiction is
really a very enjoyable way of keeping a dormant foreign language
at least somewhat alive.
>I've posted on this before. If my father had ever had the bad taste to
>say to me 'I love you,' I would have wanted to run away and hide out of
>embarrassment. i find it difficult to imagine a culture in which it is
>normal for parents to say this kind of thing.
I agree, somewhat. But I think the point isn't so much on *how*
the affection is presented as on the fact that it is.
>> Me too. I think the operative words here was "figure out". Many
>> NTs seems to "get" figures of speech without figuring them out,
>> just by the context.
>
>I'm just not sure about this. It seems to me that NTs have to think hard
>about what an unfamiliar figure of speech might mean too, and they may
>have to draw from the context to work it out.
Ye-es. But I have found that many NTs have *no* trouble using
figures of speech without having a clue about what the original
or literal meaning might be. I always feel a need to in some way
relate the literal meaning to the figurative meaning.
>Everybody has difficulty finding the right words for the occasion, I
>think. But what amazes me about some people (aspies included) is that
>they wilkl use difficult words (sometimes inappropriately) where easy
>ones will do just as well to get their meaning over. In some cases, I
>will see it as 'pomposity', wanting to sound important and
>knowledgeable, but I'm sure that's not the case where aspies are
>concerned.
>
>One aspie talked to me about the 'perseveration' on his nose. I asked:
>'Do you mean perspiration?' He then apologised profusely for his
>mistake. But why couldn't he have said: 'My nose gets sweaty.'? - nice,
>easy words that everyone understands.
But for an Aspie it is very hard to grasp the concept that
"sweat" is somehow easier or more basic than "perspiration",
especially if s/he wants to use a word that is closer connected
to the process than to the actual product.
Perhaps this has something to with a different kind of memory?
Even though you probably hear "sweat" more often than
"perspiration" they are both as "strong" or as "near" when you
need to fetch a word.
>What I remember about teenage self-consciousness is that I could feel
>very uncomfortable amongst adults, as if I was continually under ths
>spotlight; I felt no trace of this when I was with other teenagers.
This I think is really the ultimate proof of your NT-ness! :-)
>Liberation came as I gradually realised that adults were just overgrown
>teenagers. :-)
For me ít was a great relief to find out that there *were*
sensible people roughly of my own age... :-)
Seraph-sama
>I'm not sure why you should think that this should be indicative of
>Asperger's Syndrome. What i find surprising, though, is that you _tried_
>to feel pain. Most of us believe that pain is something to be avoided.
I think it may have been more of an attempt to "prove" to myself that I didn't
have AS, but the information you gave me was helpful.
>> That
>One alternative diagnosis your psychologist might like to consider is
>Schizoid Personality Disorder. Myself, I don't see it so much as a
>disorder as of a personailty trait.
What is Schizoid Personality Disorder? I haven't heard of that one.
>Again, this of itself doesn't say a thing. Aspies love to talk about
>their special interests, but then again, so do we all. it's when this
>talkativeness becomes grossly inappropriate that we begin to suspect
>that something is wrong.
To what extent would this be?
>By the way, I'm interested in philosophy and music too. I liked the
>stuff on your site about moral philosophy, but I thought you were unfair
>to Kant. There's an awful lot more to him than the Categorical
>Imperative. But on the whole, Kant's moralising is best forgotten or at
>best treated as a brilliant philosopher's foray into a realm where he
>had little competence.
(:nods: Kant is one of my favorite philosophers, like it says. A brilliant
critical philosopher, but I was only critiquing the moral philosophy.)
>Some people are irascible by nature. It has no necessary connection to
>autism. You might give us a clue if you told us what it was that made
>you most angry.
It's usually when they do or say something really stupid. Or selfish. Most
people seem to tolerate that better than I do.
>I hope you don't mind me saying this, but I found the music on your site
>extremely annoying. I love music, but I find that the wrong sort really
>gets on my nerves.
(Then I'm taking it down. I received too many complaints. I wonder how damn
sensitive my ear must be. That also happens to be the MIDI form of the
one-and-a-half year music I was talking about. -_-)
Seraph-sama
>Hello Seraph-sama (is that really your name, or is it a pen-name
>or a "handle"? If so, does it have any special meaning?
It's not my real name; it's just a handle. No special meaning really, except
the suffix -sama is just because I like Japan/anime.
>I think one indicator is whether the hobby/special interest is
>very unusual in the persons immediate peer-setting. Especially
>when it comes to children. It seems like most NT-children are
>rather impressionable, if other children tell them that interest
>X totally sucks, and there is no external back-up (like an older
>sibling sharing the interest, or a parent or *someone*), most
>children seem to let it go.
If I had an interest, say advanced math, I usually wouldn't care what my peer
group thought about it, but my feelings would be hurt if it were ridiculed.
>>> BUT, I do have lots of friends at school
>>> (I was recently elected school judge), sometimes I
>>> enjoy talking to them (if they have some funny things to say :),
>>> and I have "friendship" feelings for them.
>
>This somehow sounds *very* Aspish to me, I can't really explain
>why.
>
>>> And I enjoy talking
>>> to people interested in the same obscure things I'm interested in,
>>> like philosophy or music, and in those
>>> cases, I am extremely talkative.
>>
>>Again, this of itself doesn't say a thing. Aspies love to talk about
>>their special interests, but then again, so do we all.
>
>Seems to be true.
>
>>it's when this talkativeness becomes grossly inappropriate that
>>we begin to suspect that something is wrong.
>
>I'm not so sure about that. As a sole diagnostic tool, wielded by
>stupid NTs :-), you might have a point. But from an
>Aspie-viewpoint I think what NTs might see as a "grossly
>inappropriate talkativeness" is a mix between a)non-existent
>social ESP and b)a view that communicating fascinating (to own
>self) facts *must* be something people would appreciate.
I find that although I am interested in certain things, the fact that people
don't talk about them must mean they aren't interested.
>This seems *so* familiar. This confusion about supposedly
>"natural" things, it is quite complicated deciding when to apply
>"don't stare" and when to apply "look at people when they talk to
>you", isn't it?
Definitely. Although I think it might be appropriate for when either you are
talking to them or they are talking to you. But, dunno.
>Interesting, what do you mean by "bland and empty"? Most ACs I
>have encountered that don't read fiction say it is because "it
>isn't interesting" or something like that.
>I read a lot of fiction, or rather: I *read* about as much
>fiction as nonfiction, but I *use* a lot of fiction for
>relaxation (*light* fiction, at the moment my favorites are
>cold-war espionage novels).
By "bland and empty" I basically mean "uninteresting" in that it's "just a
story". I don't care very much about what plotlines people can conjure up.
Although, in RPGs (role playing games) I can be very interested in the
storyline.
>Though this could be just ordinary NT-rudeness (:-)), the thing
>about not having enough time struck me a bit. If I'm not in
>"social mode" I frequently feel like that, like I missed the
>"appropriate timeslot".
Can you explain more about "social mode"? That's something that stood out to
me. Sometimes I will be in a quiet, contemplative mode, where I withdraw and
say things to myself in my head about what's going on. Other times, I will be
more extroverted and can talk to people without being as focused on myself.
Although I can easily slip from social mode into introverted, it takes a few
minutes to engage socially. Is that what you're talking about?
>>> My dad was concerned with my almost whatever-ish responses to his
>>> I love you's. That might just be part of being a teenager.
>
>Yes, but how was your reactions when you were a child? Were they
>"whatever-ish" then too?
They weren't nearly as whatever-ish as they are now, although I remember being
somewhat indifferent.
>Did you have to make an effort, even a small one, to incorporate
>slang and informal speech in your repertoire? I know I did, and
>people mostly *still* thought it was a bit on the correct side
>:-(. As one get older it isn't that much of a problem (I think)
>any more.
I do make efforts to incorporate slang. But, sometimes I can talk slang without
effort. (By slang I mean cursing every other sentence. But I almost never
employ figures of speech by habit alone.)
>I agree with Alwyn, it really is. It gets quite exhausting I
>think, so often beeing effectively "lost" and having to either
>backtrack or go off in some direction and *hope* that you find
>your way back to the track.
Definitely. I feel as though I am at a disadvantage in that I want to become
more socially adept, but in order to find out how, I must talk to the other
kids about it, which is social in itself.
Seraph-sama
>You seem to be looking for an excuse to justify your mannerisms, do you
>enjoy them, do they do something for you. I stim when I am tense and also
>when I am excited. I like to rock.
They do something for me, especially the pacing and checking for mail (which I
don't do much anymore). The finger tapping does something to a lesser extent,
but I only do this in school, when I am extremely bored, and I "just feel like
it".
>Certain sounds sound very loud to me, particularly at certain pitches, it is
>more than annoyance.
I am the same way. Certain sounds are much more annoying than others for me. I
don't mind a loud blender but I can't stand snoring. Same thing goes for the
pitches - unfortunately my little brother has a voice range right around the
annoying pitch.
>I can do eye contact but am more comfortable not doing it else I tend to
>stare at a certain point in the others face.
Same here.
>I do not like physical contact at all and like a lot of personal space. I
>can be very cold and unfeeling when reacting to other peoples emotions, I
>see no purpose in joining in, in fact I find it hard to read facial
>expressions and sense people emotions. I do not react to greetings because I
>am never sure of how I am suposed to react.
I don't mind physical contact very much - I am used to hugging, etc. girls in
my school - except with teachers. But I think that only has to do with my
general annoyance with them. I can read others' facial expressions, though.
>I don't think I quite have perfect pitch but I play music by ear. I can
>certainly hear wrong notes though !
Definitely. :)
>There are many ways of being different, I noticed in your web site you did
>not particularly like the idea of being thought autistic. It is not such a
>bad way to be, we are no less human than anyone else. If you are aspie you
>will hopefully lern this. When I was diagnosed it was a relief to me to know
>why I was different. Not all aspies will have the same set of symptoms as
>me, in some people one aspect is more prominent than another it is a
>spectrum after all.
Agreed. If I have AS I would more likely accept it and find ways around the
challenges it poses - and take advantage of some of its benefits! :)
Mlle Hulot
soundtrack to the Hitchcock movie 'Psycho'.
Asperger's (or not) becomes much more apparent when you try to
enter the workforce...job interviews and work itself require a
high (NT) level of social skills, which one's family and school
may be prepared to overlook or tolerate.
Alwyn
serap...@aol.com (Seraph-sama) wrote:
> Alwyn wrote:
> >I'm not sure why you should think that this should be indicative of
> >Asperger's Syndrome. What i find surprising, though, is that you _tried_
> >to feel pain. Most of us believe that pain is something to be avoided.
>
> I think it may have been more of an attempt to "prove" to myself that I
> didn't
> have AS,
OK, I understand, but such attempts may lead you astray.
> but the information you gave me was helpful.
Thank you. That's always nice to hear.
> >One alternative diagnosis your psychologist might like to consider is
> >Schizoid Personality Disorder. Myself, I don't see it so much as a
> >disorder as of a personailty trait.
>
> What is Schizoid Personality Disorder? I haven't heard of that one.
Look at:
http://www.mentalhealth.com/dis/p20-pe02.html
> >Again, this of itself doesn't say a thing. Aspies love to talk about
> >their special interests, but then again, so do we all. it's when this
> >talkativeness becomes grossly inappropriate that we begin to suspect
> >that something is wrong.
>
> To what extent would this be?
When the people you are talking to show signs of boredom, annoyance or
wish to get away. There's a good example at the beginning of Tony
Attwood's 'Asperger's Syndrome, a guid for parents and professionals',
Jessica Kingsley, London, 1998. A girl intercepts the postman with the
line: 'Do you like Deltics?' (a kind of fast locomotive) and proceeds to
lecture him on the subject until he is able to make his getaway. There
is another example concerning trains taken from a book by Bill Bryson,
the travel writer.
> >By the way, I'm interested in philosophy and music too. I liked the
> >stuff on your site about moral philosophy, but I thought you were unfair
> >to Kant. There's an awful lot more to him than the Categorical
> >Imperative. But on the whole, Kant's moralising is best forgotten or at
> >best treated as a brilliant philosopher's foray into a realm where he
> >had little competence.
>
> (:nods: Kant is one of my favorite philosophers, like it says. A
> brilliant
> critical philosopher, but I was only critiquing the moral philosophy.)
Kant says that if I get any gratification from an act I commit, then
that act is morally without value.
If I pass by a lake one day and see Seraph-sama in difficulties, I
plunge into the lake and bring him to shore. Kant will say: 'Your act
was valueless because Seraph-same is a person you like.'
If, the following day, I pass by a same lake and saee an old drunk
drowning, I plunge into the lake with equal alacrity and rescue him. i
say to Kant: 'See, I didn't care for this person at all, and still I
rescued him!' Kant will say: 'You are self-satisfied, young man. Zero
marks for morailty.'
Now I'm in a double-bind; there's nothing I can do to make Kant decide
that any act of mine has moral worth. Kant's philosophy therefore leads
to moral nihilism, which is the exact opposite of what the philosper
intended.
> >Some people are irascible by nature. It has no necessary connection to
> >autism. You might give us a clue if you told us what it was that made
> >you most angry.
>
> It's usually when they do or say something really stupid. Or selfish.
> Most
> people seem to tolerate that better than I do.
Well, there are times when I get irritated like that, but it isn't too
bad, since I feel my irritation is entirely justified. It never reaches
the point of explosive anger, though.
What makes me feel more like exploding is when I make a mistake, I
correct it, and then I make yet another mistake. Then I have to tell
myself to calm down.
Alwyn
Alwyn
sdkk...@aol.com (Sherry Kosmalski) wrote:
> Yes, I remember you mentioning this before, Alwyn. I don't want to
> appear
> confrontational,
Oh, feel free! :-)
> (remember I am a mother of three) but why on earth would
> you
> find it hard accept an expression of love between a parent and child?
> Although
> the type of love would be different than that between two lovers, those
> same
> two lovers would no doubt verbally express their feelings to each other,
> so
> what would make it different for the parent/child relationship?
Becasue it wasn't donw where i grew up, that's all. It takes a lot to
get away from the influences of your formative years, and I'm not there
yet as far as expressing these emotions between parents and children is
concerned. I thought of the relationship as one of duty: parents have a
duty to feed, clothe and house their children, while they in turn owe
their parents a duty of respect and obedience. Only after I lost my
family at the age of seventeen did I feel any more than this.
> My father told me many times that he loved me, and for that I am very
> grateful.
> My mother, on the other hand, never spoke those words, and I felt the
> void
> caused by that immensely. My father has since passed away, and I am
> thankful
> that I have the memories of his words to keep in my heart.
I can all too well understand that.
> My husband's family is very outwardly expressive of their feelings of
> care for
> each other. His male cousins (they are Polish) often hug and kiss each
> other
> on the cheek in greeting and departure. In fact, I admit to having been
> overwhelmed by such a show of emotion while first dating, but came to
> appreciate it and hope to pass on that openess to my children.
We were used to people of many nationalities, Polish, French, Italian,
German and so on. I particularly liked the Polich habit of kissing a
woman's hand on meeting her.
> I love this! I used to say (while a teenager) that "guys sweat, girls
> perspire", and "guys fart, girls pass gas" to excuse our feminine
> behaviors.
My equivalent of that would be: 'Men fart, women break wind and ladies
are too polite to do anything at all.'
Alwyn
Alwyn
> On Mon, 10 Apr 2000 17:13:21 +0100, Alwyn wrote:
>
> >In article <4ie3fsg5p1pn9i78k...@4ax.com>, Antonia wrote:
>
> >> you
> >> seem to have a problem with uneven lines (I've cleaned them up
> >> here), trying out a new newsreader?)
> >
> >Well, you can largely blame my newsreader (NewsWatcher 3.0) for that. I
> >suppose I could tidy it up by hand, but I honestly can't be bothered.
>
> Mmm. You could probably adjust the hard-wrapping line-length when
> quoting, you probably have it set to 72, which messes up quoting
> when you reply to someone who uses 70+.
I've had complaints about this in the past. What do you think I should
set it to?
> Also Seraph-sama's
> line-length was *at least* 78 which is a bit much.
> As for doing it by hand, I know it's a drag, but it makes it
> easier to read. There *are* some utilities out there that do it
> for you (cleans up uneven quoted lines), but I have never gotten
> around to using them (much faster to do it by hand :-)).
Probably, but I'm still a lazy sod and will only do things like this if
I get enough kidks in the backside.
> Also, you could tweak your newsreader to include the
> "From:"-header instead of the "Reply-to:"-header in your
> attribution line.
I don't think my newsreader allows me such flexibility. Perhaps I should
write to the author about it.
> >I can honestly say that it would never occur to me to try to feel
> >emotions that don't come naturally. What's the point?
>
> "Being good"? :-) Nah, but if you are *used* to handling your
> emotions rather in the same way as your behaviour (since "what
> comes naturally" is often far too strange and out of sync with
> expectations) it seems rather natural to at least try.
Well, I just regulate the outward appearance. And the outward appearance
can have an effect on what's going on inside too.
> Also, from an early age we all learn that being truthful is
> virtue. We also learn that certain behaviours, certain reactions,
> are expected in certain situations. If then your "natural"
> reaction is very different from the expected one the choices are
> in essence to either fake the reaction (act, lie) or try to evoke
> a more "appropriate" emotion in yourself. Since most people,
> aspies included, hold the opinion that falseness and deceit are
> *bad*, the natural alternative is to try to change what you feel
> to be in line with your (expected) response.
I understand what you're saying.
> The other alternative is of course to go with what you feel, and
> disregard what is expected of you, which is something that plain
> selfpreservation makes impossible. Or at least it makes your life
> very lonely and hard.
Well, I try to steer a middle course between being myself and appearing
to be what is expected of me. Perhaps this would be more difficult for
me if I were an aspie.
> >On the other hand, I will sometimes put on a show of emotion if the
> >occasion seems to demand it. Some people might think of it as insincere,
> >but I think of it as good manners; it's something every one of us does
> >from time to time. 'Rejoice with those that rejoice, weep with those
> >that weep,' and so on.
>
> Exactly this is something that I believe is rather difficult for
> Aspies to do, expecially if we've never been told "it's OK to
> fake it", and why.
Attwood has a story about a little girl called Helen, who receives a
present she doesn't want and thanks her parents for it. The author says
that most Asperger children of Helen's age do not understand why she did
this. (Myself, I was never quite as well behaved as Helen was.)
<snip>
> >Well, i don't know. I used to go to village schools, and the children
> >there were pretty ordinary. I used to read encyclopedias and learn
> >everything I could about classical music, which must have been most
> >atypical for the children around me. When I got older, I wnet to a
> >bigger school and encountered children who were at least as interested
> >in these things as myself.
>
> But you probably *did* have some interests in common with the
> children at the village school? I mean, there were *something*
> you could converse with them about in a natural fashion?
Oh yes, I used to play with them a lot. It wzs more like I had something
'extra', and I never spoke to them about that.
<snip>
> >It's only the turn of phrase that I find remarkable, but then, language
> >is very much a matter of choice. I would never say 'I have "friendship"
> >feelings for them,' but rather 'I have friendly feelings for them,' or
> >'I like them a lot.' There does seem to be something slighly 'forced'
> >about that 'friendship' in inverted commas.
>
> Well, I don't know about 'forced', to me it seems like a rather
> natural way to indicate an unsurity about what exactly
> "friendship" and feelings related to it entail.
I agree.
> (I
> also started to understand why my boyfriend got upset with my
> conversation style, he has a, at least superficially, much more
> feminine style than most men, and often finds my way of talking
> unnecessarily aggressive.)
I see this so often when apsies talk. i have to remind myself that the
person concenred probably doesn't mean to sound confrontational.
> >I don't think I've ever had much of a temper. What I can recall being
> >guilty of is merciless teasing. My father used to refer to it as
> >*chwarae'n troi'n chwerw*, 'play turning bitter'.
>
> How repulsively NT of you! :-)
Well, it's not something I'm proud of. My brother and I used to tease
each other until things got out of hand. These days, I have to remind
myself that aspies can sometimes get offended at even the gentlest of
teasing.
<snip>
> >Staring is an often used device for putting people down or asserting
> >one's dominance. Therefore an inappopropriate stare can easily cause
> >offence. What I, and, I think, most people do, is glance for a moment
> >and then look away.
>
> Yes. But do you *inherently know* that staring can be used/viewed
> this way?
I honestly haven't a clue how I learnt this.
> I know it only because I have read it somewhere, and
> then verified it by "field-study". I could *never* intuitively
> know something like that. However, since I've learned this I can
> use it, both in the sense of avoiding giving that impression and
> using it for asserting myself if I need to.
If I'm really annoyed with someone, I 'stare through' him or her, as if
they didn't exist. They seem to find this most disconcerting.
<snip>
> >> Me too. I think the operative words here was "figure out". Many
> >> NTs seems to "get" figures of speech without figuring them out,
> >> just by the context.
> >
> >I'm just not sure about this. It seems to me that NTs have to think hard
> >about what an unfamiliar figure of speech might mean too, and they may
> >have to draw from the context to work it out.
>
> Ye-es. But I have found that many NTs have *no* trouble using
> figures of speech without having a clue about what the original
> or literal meaning might be. I always feel a need to in some way
> relate the literal meaning to the figurative meaning.
Well, you have expressions like: 'She sent me off with a flea in my
ear.' I reaaly haven't a clue what the origin of that is, althoug I
suppose it must have had an origin somewhere.
<snip>
> >One aspie talked to me about the 'perseveration' on his nose. I asked:
> >'Do you mean perspiration?' He then apologised profusely for his
> >mistake. But why couldn't he have said: 'My nose gets sweaty.'? - nice,
> >easy words that everyone understands.
>
> But for an Aspie it is very hard to grasp the concept that
> "sweat" is somehow easier or more basic than "perspiration",
> especially if s/he wants to use a word that is closer connected
> to the process than to the actual product.
Why should this be? i would have thought it was obvious to everyone,
including aspies, that short words are easier than long ones.
> Perhaps this has something to with a different kind of memory?
> Even though you probably hear "sweat" more often than
> "perspiration" they are both as "strong" or as "near" when you
> need to fetch a word.
I'm not sure I follow. But one of the difficulties of the English
language is that it has so many synonyms, often Germanic-Latinate pairs.
I find on the whole that the Germanic vocabulary is more immediate.
> >What I remember about teenage self-consciousness is that I could feel
> >very uncomfortable amongst adults, as if I was continually under ths
> >spotlight; I felt no trace of this when I was with other teenagers.
>
> This I think is really the ultimate proof of your NT-ness! :-)
>
> >Liberation came as I gradually realised that adults were just overgrown
> >teenagers. :-)
>
> For me ít was a great relief to find out that there *were*
> sensible people roughly of my own age... :-)
Now that I'm 'grown up', I feel that everybody is my peer, and age
doesn't matter. That is the real liberation.
Alwyn
Antonia
>Antonia wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Apr 2000 17:13:21 +0100, Alwyn wrote:
>>
>> >Well, you can largely blame my newsreader (NewsWatcher 3.0) for that. I
>> >suppose I could tidy it up by hand, but I honestly can't be bothered.
>>
>> Mmm. You could probably adjust the hard-wrapping line-length when
>> quoting, you probably have it set to 72, which messes up quoting
>> when you reply to someone who uses 70+.
>
>I've had complaints about this in the past. What do you think I should
>set it to?
That depends, if it's possible to set a different "hard" wrap or
"quote-wrap" it is quite ok to have the linelength set at
something rather small for your own text. I have mine at 65
charachters, but my newsreader recognizes lines that begins with
> as quotes and doesn't wrap them at all. Your newsreader seems
to wrap *all* lines uniformly at 72, which isn't very good. 76
seems to be a good compromise. If you could lose the blank space
after the > that might also be a help (sure, it looks nice, but
not *that* nice).
>> Also Seraph-sama's
>> line-length was *at least* 78 which is a bit much.
>> As for doing it by hand, I know it's a drag, but it makes it
>> easier to read. There *are* some utilities out there that do it
>> for you (cleans up uneven quoted lines), but I have never gotten
>> around to using them (much faster to do it by hand :-)).
>
>Probably, but I'm still a lazy sod and will only do things like this if
>I get enough kidks in the backside.
Kick! Kick! (the last own was for checking for typos.)
>> Also, you could tweak your newsreader to include the
>> "From:"-header instead of the "Reply-to:"-header in your
>> attribution line.
>
>I don't think my newsreader allows me such flexibility. Perhaps I should
>write to the author about it.
It ought to. "Reply-to:" -headers are rather off-standard in
news, and many people set them to things like "don't" or "group",
indicating that they'd rather see the answers in the NG than in
their own inbox. It looks rather silly when your quotes begin "in
article xxxxx, Don't wrote:" (I can't stand to see it, so I
laboriously change it by hand when I reply to you quoting me).
Your newsreader seems to let "reply-to:" take precedence over
"From:", which it shouldn't.
I looked up your newsreader via www.newsreaders.com and the
GNKSA-site (easy to find mirror at
http://www.newsreaders.com/gnksa/), perhaps a look at this manual
page would be of some help to you:
http://www.best.com/~smfr/mtnw/docs/ListsAndText.html#Working_with_Text.
>> The other alternative is of course to go with what you feel, and
>> disregard what is expected of you, which is something that plain
>> selfpreservation makes impossible. Or at least it makes your life
>> very lonely and hard.
>
>Well, I try to steer a middle course between being myself and appearing
>to be what is expected of me. Perhaps this would be more difficult for
>me if I were an aspie.
Probably. What you describe is what I try to do also, but it
wasn't an easy thing to decide to do, or rather decide that it
was an acceptable thing to do.
>> Exactly this is something that I believe is rather difficult for
>> Aspies to do, expecially if we've never been told "it's OK to
>> fake it", and why.
>
>Attwood has a story about a little girl called Helen, who receives a
>present she doesn't want and thanks her parents for it. The author says
>that most Asperger children of Helen's age do not understand why she did
>this. (Myself, I was never quite as well behaved as Helen was.)
I understand it completely. I was too was never quite as well
behaved as Helen, but I always felt quite bad about it. Deficient
somehow for not being able to overcome my own feeling of
disappointment for the "requiered" feeling of gratitude.
>> But you probably *did* have some interests in common with the
>> children at the village school? I mean, there were *something*
>> you could converse with them about in a natural fashion?
>
>Oh yes, I used to play with them a lot. It wzs more like I had something
>'extra', and I never spoke to them about that.
That was rather my point. Even though you had something "extra",
you also had the ability to understand/participate in your
age-peers activities. I think I'm a rather typical Aspie in the
sense that I really had trouble understanding some of the things
my classmates were interested in, and why.
>> >I don't think I've ever had much of a temper. What I can recall being
>> >guilty of is merciless teasing. My father used to refer to it as
>> >*chwarae'n troi'n chwerw*, 'play turning bitter'.
>>
>> How repulsively NT of you! :-)
>
>Well, it's not something I'm proud of. My brother and I used to tease
>each other until things got out of hand. These days, I have to remind
>myself that aspies can sometimes get offended at even the gentlest of
>teasing.
Mmm. On the other hand, older aspies that have survived school
and teasing without the benefit of a diagnosis perhaps develop a
rather thick skin, and perhaps even a distance to the whole
phenomena. Of course many don't.
I think the worst thing about teasing is that it is *very* hard
to understand that teasing can have very different purposes in
different circumstances.
It can be bullying, and serve as a way of turning a group
*against* someone different, an us vs "that dork" thing. But it
can also be somekind of "testing", sparring. It can also be a
kind of "bonding" thing, as in "I wouldn't be able to tease you
in this way if I didn't know that you you know me this well and
couldn't possibly mean to hurt you".
And in all cases it *can* sometimes be just for entertainment,
some people just can't pass up the opportunity to show their wit
or memory and ability to combine these things.
But for aspies I think it can be especially hard to distinguish
the sub-text behind teasing. Especially so if we've never heard
about the concept of subtext in communication at all.
>> I know it only because I have read it somewhere, and
>> then verified it by "field-study". I could *never* intuitively
>> know something like that. However, since I've learned this I can
>> use it, both in the sense of avoiding giving that impression and
>> using it for asserting myself if I need to.
>
>If I'm really annoyed with someone, I 'stare through' him or her, as if
>they didn't exist. They seem to find this most disconcerting.
But how did you *know* to do this? For me it wouldn't be the
instinctive thing to do (I think I learnt it from books or
movies), the instinctive thing would be to hit them or just go
away.
>> Ye-es. But I have found that many NTs have *no* trouble using
>> figures of speech without having a clue about what the original
>> or literal meaning might be. I always feel a need to in some way
>> relate the literal meaning to the figurative meaning.
>
>Well, you have expressions like: 'She sent me off with a flea in my
>ear.' I reaaly haven't a clue what the origin of that is, althoug I
>suppose it must have had an origin somewhere.
I would suppose "a flea in my ear" means roughly a slap on the
cheek, as in if you'd just made her an indecent proposal. (In
Swedish a slap on the cheek is sometimes called an "örfil", and
also means that it is (or should be) *hard* and not only reaching
your cheek but also your ear.) "A flea in the ear" might suggest
the nasty ringing noise in your ear that result from someone
hitting you hard on the cheek/ear.
So the phrase is a way of expressing that someone emphatically
said NO to some suggestion.
Am I right?
>> But for an Aspie it is very hard to grasp the concept that
>> "sweat" is somehow easier or more basic than "perspiration",
>> especially if s/he wants to use a word that is closer connected
>> to the process than to the actual product.
>
>Why should this be? i would have thought it was obvious to everyone,
>including aspies, that short words are easier than long ones.
Why would shorter words be easier? Except for the fact that they
have fewer syllables and are often easier to pronounce?
Shorter words are often more difficult in the fact that they are
often more general, with less strict definitions.
--
Antonia (Tona) Palmén
HTML is great. On the web. Not on usenet. Not in my inbox.
The answer is: 101010
Antonia
attentive here the last days.
On 11 Apr 2000 20:22:22 GMT, Seraph-sama wrote:
>Antonia Aspsusa wrote:
>>I think one indicator is whether the hobby/special interest is
>>very unusual in the persons immediate peer-setting. Especially
>>when it comes to children. It seems like most NT-children are
>>rather impressionable, if other children tell them that interest
>>X totally sucks, and there is no external back-up (like an older
>>sibling sharing the interest, or a parent or *someone*), most
>>children seem to let it go.
>
>If I had an interest, say advanced math, I usually wouldn't care what my peer
>group thought about it, but my feelings would be hurt if it were ridiculed.
Do you mean this litterally, that you feel hurt if they ridicule
*it*, or did you mean that you feel that *you* are being
ridiculed?
Not that it matters in any way, I think. I'm just curious. I find
that I for some reason get much more upset if people attack or
ridicule ideas or things I believe in/like/am interested in, than
if they attack *me*.
>>I'm not so sure about that. As a sole diagnostic tool, wielded by
>>stupid NTs :-), you might have a point. But from an
>>Aspie-viewpoint I think what NTs might see as a "grossly
>>inappropriate talkativeness" is a mix between a)non-existent
>>social ESP and b)a view that communicating fascinating (to own
>>self) facts *must* be something people would appreciate.
>
>I find that although I am interested in certain things, the fact that people
>don't talk about them must mean they aren't interested.
How do you come to this conclusion? Is it simple logic ("If they
were interested they would ask"), or some kind of "intuition"?
>>This seems *so* familiar. This confusion about supposedly
>>"natural" things, it is quite complicated deciding when to apply
>>"don't stare" and when to apply "look at people when they talk to
>>you", isn't it?
>
>Definitely. Although I think it might be appropriate for when either you are
>talking to them or they are talking to you. But, dunno.
It's a cultural thing. I'm fortunate in the respect that my
culture doesn't demand lots of eye-contact, so I've never really
had much problem with it. I have however learnt to use it, and
find that some people respond surprisingly well to eye-contact.
>>Interesting, what do you mean by "bland and empty"? Most ACs I
>>have encountered that don't read fiction say it is because "it
>>isn't interesting" or something like that.
>>I read a lot of fiction, or rather: I *read* about as much
>>fiction as nonfiction, but I *use* a lot of fiction for
>>relaxation (*light* fiction, at the moment my favorites are
>>cold-war espionage novels).
>
>By "bland and empty" I basically mean "uninteresting" in that it's "just a
>story". I don't care very much about what plotlines people can conjure up.
>Although, in RPGs (role playing games) I can be very interested in the
>storyline.
Hmm. I tend to "use" the story to keep the interesting things
"together", or to keep my interest. The things that interest me
can be certain characters in the book, or descriptions of places
and times or political ideas.
>>Though this could be just ordinary NT-rudeness (:-)), the thing
>>about not having enough time struck me a bit. If I'm not in
>>"social mode" I frequently feel like that, like I missed the
>>"appropriate timeslot".
>
>Can you explain more about "social mode"? That's something that stood out to
>me. Sometimes I will be in a quiet, contemplative mode, where I withdraw and
>say things to myself in my head about what's going on. Other times, I will be
>more extroverted and can talk to people without being as focused on myself.
>Although I can easily slip from social mode into introverted, it takes a few
>minutes to engage socially. Is that what you're talking about?
Ye-es, I think what I'm talking about is a bit like that. Except
that I also mean a kind of "super-social" mode that I have
developed: a kind of concentration on people (what they are
saying/signaling/"meaning") and the situation, and on my own
"role" in this situation. The things about "saying things to
myself in my head about what's going on" is somethiong I utilize
rather a lot in this mode, a bit like putting captions on the
movie of social reality.
It can be very nice, fun and rewarding, but it is *really* hard
work. And it takes a lot of practice, and even as it gets easier
it is still very tiring.
Simply put it is a bit like approaching a cocktail-party as one
would approach a computer game.
I think what you're talking about is more like the switch one
makes several times a day from doing/being "oneself" to
"receiving". I used to feel terribly guilty about not being able
to be in "super-social mode" *all* the time (after all, everyone
*else* seemed to be able to do it!), but since I've identified
myself as an aspie I feel better about it. "Switching off" has
become something necessary that is *good* for me, instead of just
being a failure to be "nice" or human.
>>>> My dad was concerned with my almost whatever-ish responses to his
>>>> I love you's. That might just be part of being a teenager.
>>
>>Yes, but how was your reactions when you were a child? Were they
>>"whatever-ish" then too?
>
>They weren't nearly as whatever-ish as they are now, although I remember being
>somewhat indifferent.
That (the change to more "whatever-ish") is probably more your
age than aspieness then.
>>Did you have to make an effort, even a small one, to incorporate
>>slang and informal speech in your repertoire? I know I did, and
>>people mostly *still* thought it was a bit on the correct side
>>:-(. As one get older it isn't that much of a problem (I think)
>>any more.
>
>I do make efforts to incorporate slang. But, sometimes I can talk slang without
>effort. (By slang I mean cursing every other sentence. But I almost never
>employ figures of speech by habit alone.)
I too can/could sometimes do it almost without effort, if I was
in a very "secure", familiar setting.
>>I agree with Alwyn, it really is. It gets quite exhausting I
>>think, so often beeing effectively "lost" and having to either
>>backtrack or go off in some direction and *hope* that you find
>>your way back to the track.
>
>Definitely. I feel as though I am at a disadvantage in that I want to become
>more socially adept, but in order to find out how, I must talk to the other
>kids about it, which is social in itself.
Mmm. That is the catch :-(. For me the thing that got my social
development rolling was finding *new* social circles. First a
loose circle of people I met on the net (I was about your age
then), very diverse in age, and everyone was a bit strange and
nerdy, and everyone was accepted as such. Then a few years later
the people in evening school (again, diverse ages) and after that
people in a student organisation (again, the age-span was quite
large as these also included people that had been studying for
years, were graduated etc).
I find that more heterogen groups are *easier* to socialise with,
the pressure to conform isn't there in the same way.
--
Antonia (Tona) Palmén
HTML is great. On the web. Not on usenet. Not in my inbox.
As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error.
Seraph-sama
>Do you mean this litterally, that you feel hurt if they ridicule
>*it*, or did you mean that you feel that *you* are being
>ridiculed?
If an interest of mine is ridiculed, I feel they are ridiculing both the
interest and me.
>How do you come to this conclusion? Is it simple logic ("If they
>were interested they would ask"), or some kind of "intuition"?
It's more of an "intuition". I am interested in a lot of the things other kids
simply don't know about. Kind of like, "How would THEY know about something
like this? And why would they care?" For example, philosophy. It's a broad
interest but I don't talk to anyone about it because I find it extremely
unlikely that they would know what I'm talking about, or care about it.
Alwyn
> On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 01:34:46 +0100, Alwyn wrote:
> >Antonia wrote:
> >> Mmm. You could probably adjust the hard-wrapping line-length when
> >> quoting, you probably have it set to 72, which messes up quoting
> >> when you reply to someone who uses 70+.
> >
> >I've had complaints about this in the past. What do you think I should
> >set it to?
>
> That depends, if it's possible to set a different "hard" wrap or
> "quote-wrap" it is quite ok to have the linelength set at
> something rather small for your own text. I have mine at 65
> charachters, but my newsreader recognizes lines that begins with
> > as quotes and doesn't wrap them at all. Your newsreader seems
> to wrap *all* lines uniformly at 72, which isn't very good. 76
> seems to be a good compromise. If you could lose the blank space
> after the > that might also be a help (sure, it looks nice, but
> not *that* nice).
I've been told by others that my line length was too long and that I
should set it to 72 at most. So I think I'd better leave it at that.
> >> Also Seraph-sama's
> >> line-length was *at least* 78 which is a bit much.
> >> As for doing it by hand, I know it's a drag, but it makes it
> >> easier to read. There *are* some utilities out there that do it
> >> for you (cleans up uneven quoted lines), but I have never gotten
> >> around to using them (much faster to do it by hand :-)).
> >
> >Probably, but I'm still a lazy sod and will only do things like this if
> >I get enough kidks in the backside.
>
> Kick! Kick! (the last own was for checking for typos.)
I've always regretted it when reviewing my own postings and seeing all
the typos and grammar mistakes. Do people really go through their work
and check for these things before sending?
Anyway, I hope the kicks will help. :-)
> >> Also, you could tweak your newsreader to include the
> >> "From:"-header instead of the "Reply-to:"-header in your
> >> attribution line.
> >
> >I don't think my newsreader allows me such flexibility. Perhaps I should
> >write to the author about it.
>
> It ought to. "Reply-to:" -headers are rather off-standard in
> news, and many people set them to things like "don't" or "group",
> indicating that they'd rather see the answers in the NG than in
> their own inbox. It looks rather silly when your quotes begin "in
> article xxxxx, Don't wrote:" (I can't stand to see it, so I
> laboriously change it by hand when I reply to you quoting me).
> Your newsreader seems to let "reply-to:" take precedence over
> "From:", which it shouldn't.
Well, MT-Newswatcher is a pretty basic freeware newsreader, and it
doesn't allow many preferences. Can you recommend something better for
Mac OS?
> I looked up your newsreader via www.newsreaders.com and the
> GNKSA-site (easy to find mirror at
> http://www.newsreaders.com/gnksa/), perhaps a look at this manual
> page would be of some help to you:
> http://www.best.com/~smfr/mtnw/docs/ListsAndText.html#Working_with_Text.
You've been extremely active on my behalf; thank you. However, it tells
me little i don't know already.
<snip>
> >Attwood has a story about a little girl called Helen, who receives a
> >present she doesn't want and thanks her parents for it. The author says
> >that most Asperger children of Helen's age do not understand why she did
> >this. (Myself, I was never quite as well behaved as Helen was.)
>
> I understand it completely. I was too was never quite as well
> behaved as Helen, but I always felt quite bad about it. Deficient
> somehow for not being able to overcome my own feeling of
> disappointment for the "requiered" feeling of gratitude.
I've always thought that what you feel is your own business. What you
show, however, is a matter of politeness.
<snip>
> >> >I don't think I've ever had much of a temper. What I can recall being
> >> >guilty of is merciless teasing. My father used to refer to it as
> >> >*chwarae'n troi'n chwerw*, 'play turning bitter'.
> >>
> >> How repulsively NT of you! :-)
> >
> >Well, it's not something I'm proud of. My brother and I used to tease
> >each other until things got out of hand. These days, I have to remind
> >myself that aspies can sometimes get offended at even the gentlest of
> >teasing.
>
> Mmm. On the other hand, older aspies that have survived school
> and teasing without the benefit of a diagnosis perhaps develop a
> rather thick skin, and perhaps even a distance to the whole
> phenomena. Of course many don't.
> I think the worst thing about teasing is that it is *very* hard
> to understand that teasing can have very different purposes in
> different circumstances.
> It can be bullying, and serve as a way of turning a group
> *against* someone different, an us vs "that dork" thing. But it
> can also be somekind of "testing", sparring. It can also be a
> kind of "bonding" thing, as in "I wouldn't be able to tease you
> in this way if I didn't know that you you know me this well and
> couldn't possibly mean to hurt you".
> And in all cases it *can* sometimes be just for entertainment,
> some people just can't pass up the opportunity to show their wit
> or memory and ability to combine these things.
I have to say that's a rather good analysis. Motives are mixed in many
cases.
> But for aspies I think it can be especially hard to distinguish
> the sub-text behind teasing. Especially so if we've never heard
> about the concept of subtext in communication at all.
I doubt that most NTs understand what 'subtext' is either.
> >If I'm really annoyed with someone, I 'stare through' him or her, as if
> >they didn't exist. They seem to find this most disconcerting.
>
> But how did you *know* to do this? For me it wouldn't be the
> instinctive thing to do (I think I learnt it from books or
> movies), the instinctive thing would be to hit them or just go
> away.
It seems close to instinctive to me. You're bored with someone and wish
they'd go away, so you blank them out and pretend not to see them. Not
that I do this often, mind you. The last time was when a prostitute
tried to pick me up when I was waiting for a friend. I regret to say
that the technique did not work on this occasion and that the woman
stood next to me in spite of my obvious lack of interest, until my
friend came to collect me. 'Do you realise that was a prostitute? What
was she doing with you?'
> >> Ye-es. But I have found that many NTs have *no* trouble using
> >> figures of speech without having a clue about what the original
> >> or literal meaning might be. I always feel a need to in some way
> >> relate the literal meaning to the figurative meaning.
> >
> >Well, you have expressions like: 'She sent me off with a flea in my
> >ear.' I reaaly haven't a clue what the origin of that is, althoug I
> >suppose it must have had an origin somewhere.
>
> I would suppose "a flea in my ear" means roughly a slap on the
> cheek, as in if you'd just made her an indecent proposal. (In
> Swedish a slap on the cheek is sometimes called an "örfil", and
> also means that it is (or should be) *hard* and not only reaching
> your cheek but also your ear.)
Oh right, øretæve in Danish, Ohrfeige in German. It's nearly the same
thing: you send somebody away with angry words.
> "A flea in the ear" might suggest
> the nasty ringing noise in your ear that result from someone
> hitting you hard on the cheek/ear.
> So the phrase is a way of expressing that someone emphatically
> said NO to some suggestion.
> Am I right?
Yes.
> >> But for an Aspie it is very hard to grasp the concept that
> >> "sweat" is somehow easier or more basic than "perspiration",
> >> especially if s/he wants to use a word that is closer connected
> >> to the process than to the actual product.
> >
> >Why should this be? i would have thought it was obvious to everyone,
> >including aspies, that short words are easier than long ones.
>
> Why would shorter words be easier? Except for the fact that they
> have fewer syllables and are often easier to pronounce?
> Shorter words are often more difficult in the fact that they are
> often more general, with less strict definitions.
Well, in English, at least, there is a general rule that shorter words
are more common than longer ones. However, you are also right that these
words are often precisely those with the widest range of meaning.
But look at that last word. I could also have used 'significance'. Using
that unfamiliar word in this context might well make the sentence more
difficult to understand, at least for some.
Alwyn
Kathleen Belmont
Kalen wrote:
>
> "Alwyn" <al...@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:alwyn-4DB2F4....@news.clara.net...
> > I've always regretted it when reviewing my own postings and seeing
> all
> > the typos and grammar mistakes. Do people really go through their
> work
> > and check for these things before sending?
>
> I do, obsessively. But that's just me. :)
>
> --
> Kalen
I do too. Some people take the easy way out and rely on spell
check...with rather amusing results :-)
Kat
Fargo
> I do too. Some people take the easy way out and rely on spell
> check...with rather amusing results :-)
>
> Kat
I resemble that remark. :o)
Fargo
Kalen
all
> the typos and grammar mistakes. Do people really go through their
work
> and check for these things before sending?
I do, obsessively. But that's just me. :)
--
Kalen
** End of message. Randomly selected tagline follows **
Behind every good computer - is a jumble of wire...
Kathleen Belmont
heh heh heh!!!
Kat
Mlle Hulot
>I'm curious - is it an Aspie trait (particularly adult Aspie)
to enjoy
>the use of a wide vocabulary? Does the precision appeal in
comparison
>to the ambiguity of shorter words?
>
>Vivienne Smythe
>--
Well, I used to read the dictionary (and encyclopaedias) for
pleasure when I was a kid...and I'm not the only AS person who
has
that experience.
Viv
:> >Why should this be? i would have thought it was obvious to everyone,
:> >including aspies, that short words are easier than long ones.
:>
:> Why would shorter words be easier? Except for the fact that they
:> have fewer syllables and are often easier to pronounce?
:> Shorter words are often more difficult in the fact that they are
:> often more general, with less strict definitions.
:
:Well, in English, at least, there is a general rule that shorter words
:are more common than longer ones. However, you are also right that these
:words are often precisely those with the widest range of meaning.
:
:But look at that last word. I could also have used 'significance'. Using
:that unfamiliar word in this context might well make the sentence more
:difficult to understand, at least for some.
There's some interesting thoughts on this in some anthropological
circles.
They point out that gang behaviour almost always disapproves of
members using any long words, and that the gang vocabulary almost
always limits itself to short words so that a gang member can use
almost exactly the same words with tone, volume and pitch variations
to taunt an opponent, swear eternal brotherhood, seduce a woman or
soothe a child. This ambiguity in conveying words is actually prized
amongst gangs - it's an essential tool to play the dominance games
that are part of gang life.
Short words are elastic and imprecise - but often useful for all their
limitations. The casual quality of short words often sets the tone
for an occasion to be fun and lighthearted.
Long words are precise - they pin you down and make it more difficult
to be ambiguous. This is probably why NTs often view long word use as
'dorky'.
I'm curious - is it an Aspie trait (particularly adult Aspie) to enjoy
the use of a wide vocabulary? Does the precision appeal in comparison
to the ambiguity of shorter words?
Vivienne Smythe
--
_.~:*'*:~Sydney, Australia - Olympics 2000 Construction site.~:*'*:~._
Fight gullibility now: see www.urbanlegends.com