4 ms·

Source: have worked with many smart and not so smart autistic people over the years. Have many friends “neuro atypical” and think I’m probably somewhere on the

Source: have worked with many smart and not so smart autistic people over the years. Have many friends “neuro atypical” and think I’m probably somewhere on the spectrum (aren’t we all?). Autistic people have what seems like a much higher tolerance for bullshit both in the context of wanting to argue a point to finality or to obsess over a particularly detail until they’ve reached a shared plateau of understanding. Many times this is actually a very satisfying method of conversation, at least for me. Other times it can feel like talking to a wall. Your mileage may vary.

shakna 4y ago
> think I’m probably somewhere on the spectrum (aren’t we all?). That, right there, is one of the least helpful things that can ever be said in these kinds of circumstances. It's understandable, and it's common, so this doesn't lay blame on you, but on the underlying cultural assumption. "Aren't we all?" Those who have truly neuro-atypical behaviours, to where it can be assessed as placing them somewhere else on the spectrum, will receive less helpful responses when people think along those lines. Their concerns are more easily pushed aside, and the things that can help bridge the gap are less easily implemented. It may sound accepting, but it's a trivialising statement. It makes things harder, for everyone.
- survirtual 4y ago
  That poster was just trying to be inclusive, not trivialize. You are still part of a society composed of other humans. I think less division and more inclusivity in spite of differences is a good place to be, while still acknowledging the struggles / addressing problems of minorities without making them “special” aka outcasts. Ultimately, you choose how you react to something. You can choose to be offended and look at the surface level of what a person is saying, or you can dig into the essence of the essence and determine the nature, intention, and purpose of a statement. Most people barely have their own lives in order, and I mean that in a neurological sense. Expecting others to also simultaneously keep track of nuanced triggers which are also not universally applicable, more individual situations, when they are operating in good faith is more counterproductive for everyone.
  - shakna 4y ago
    Would you tell a war veteran you understand them because you don't like loud noises? An amputee that you comprehend their pain because your knees feel old? Those are obviously not acceptable, and incredibly insensitive things to state. That is what this attempt at inclusivity does.
    - josh2600 4y ago
      Everyone on this thread is making a lot of assumptions about my mental state. None of you know whether I am or am not autistic. It's called a spectrum because there's a range. Some people are further out on the spectrum than others. Some people are autistic in one way but not another. One form of autism might be absolute pitch (distinct from perfect pitch in that you can hear semi-tones; Jacob Collier has this but might not choose to describe it as autism). It is a spectrum. My point was that we are all somewhere on the spectrum. I don't pretend to be able to identify with anyone else's mental state, all I can narrate are my projections and the projections I receive back from others.
      - shakna 4y ago
        > Everyone on this thread is making a lot of assumptions about my mental state. None of you know whether I am or am not autistic. I'm sorry that you feel that I have done so, that wasn't my intention. I haven't commented directly on you, but on a common statement that is used in many places around the world. It's something said by the many, which is why I have commented on it within that context - as a cultural norm. That common statement produces harm, by trivialising the experiences of some, which makes it harder for them to seek or gain accommodations. It produces an assumption of comprehension in some, where they realistically have none. People like those in HR, or team managers, can surreptitiously begin to believe that they fully understand, and so feel justified in denying more things. That is all that I have sought to point out. Everyone may be on the spectrum, in the same manner that everyone is human, but that's not a helpful distinction.
yieldcrv 4y ago
> I’m probably somewhere on the spectrum (aren’t we all?) there are useful distinctions, and this is not one of them. there are socially inept people that miss a requisite threshold of social cues.

shakna 4y ago

> think I’m probably somewhere on the spectrum (aren’t we all?). That, right there, is one of the least helpful things that can ever be said in these kinds of circumstances. It's understandable, and it's common, so this doesn't lay blame on you, but on the underlying cultural assumption. "Aren't we all?" Those who have truly neuro-atypical behaviours, to where it can be assessed as placing them somewhere else on the spectrum, will receive less helpful responses when people think along those lines. Their concerns are more easily pushed aside, and the things that can help bridge the gap are less easily implemented. It may sound accepting, but it's a trivialising statement. It makes things harder, for everyone.

survirtual 4y ago
That poster was just trying to be inclusive, not trivialize. You are still part of a society composed of other humans. I think less division and more inclusivity in spite of differences is a good place to be, while still acknowledging the struggles / addressing problems of minorities without making them “special” aka outcasts. Ultimately, you choose how you react to something. You can choose to be offended and look at the surface level of what a person is saying, or you can dig into the essence of the essence and determine the nature, intention, and purpose of a statement. Most people barely have their own lives in order, and I mean that in a neurological sense. Expecting others to also simultaneously keep track of nuanced triggers which are also not universally applicable, more individual situations, when they are operating in good faith is more counterproductive for everyone.
- shakna 4y ago
  Would you tell a war veteran you understand them because you don't like loud noises? An amputee that you comprehend their pain because your knees feel old? Those are obviously not acceptable, and incredibly insensitive things to state. That is what this attempt at inclusivity does.
  - josh2600 4y ago
    Everyone on this thread is making a lot of assumptions about my mental state. None of you know whether I am or am not autistic. It's called a spectrum because there's a range. Some people are further out on the spectrum than others. Some people are autistic in one way but not another. One form of autism might be absolute pitch (distinct from perfect pitch in that you can hear semi-tones; Jacob Collier has this but might not choose to describe it as autism). It is a spectrum. My point was that we are all somewhere on the spectrum. I don't pretend to be able to identify with anyone else's mental state, all I can narrate are my projections and the projections I receive back from others.
    - shakna 4y ago
      > Everyone on this thread is making a lot of assumptions about my mental state. None of you know whether I am or am not autistic. I'm sorry that you feel that I have done so, that wasn't my intention. I haven't commented directly on you, but on a common statement that is used in many places around the world. It's something said by the many, which is why I have commented on it within that context - as a cultural norm. That common statement produces harm, by trivialising the experiences of some, which makes it harder for them to seek or gain accommodations. It produces an assumption of comprehension in some, where they realistically have none. People like those in HR, or team managers, can surreptitiously begin to believe that they fully understand, and so feel justified in denying more things. That is all that I have sought to point out. Everyone may be on the spectrum, in the same manner that everyone is human, but that's not a helpful distinction.

yieldcrv 4y ago

> I’m probably somewhere on the spectrum (aren’t we all?) there are useful distinctions, and this is not one of them. there are socially inept people that miss a requisite threshold of social cues.