UNDERSTANDING INTIMACY

Post Reply New Topic

Write things in notepad, save regularly to a file and then paste into the comment box and post.

Now, be strictly honest, and tell me if u do that paste, file, post procedure, or are u just bragging about being organized ?

I'll repeat the topics written later. Seems we share some intentions re the pathologising of aspies by badly flawed DSM, and the damage it does--especially to kids.

Too angry at myself to do again today.

I learnt it the hard way. Just like you did.

So, at the moment, if I write "a lot", then I will copy it to notepad before posting, and sometimes even write it in notepad and copy it back. If I was on a portable (I'm rarely), then I would save large posts to files too. Just like when I write a paper.



I'll look forward to that.

Hi rdos; Here's a copy and paste response you suggested. A bit of fussing, but worth the security.

For me, the problem starts with the pathology-driven culture of DSM that shapes the self-concepts of folks on the spectrum. For many it’s a legal/ financial necessity, of course—and some relief from the terrible younger person's confusion about “Who am I”. And then, there’s the aspie’s common accommodation to DSM by focusing on disadvantages and what to do about them.
A holistic psychological characterization describing advantages and problems living among the NT’s is the bias of humanistic psychology scholars. Many clinicians (mostly non-scholar, non-scientist) psychiatrists} make their living and follow their intellectual needs by spotting problems and following an ideology for fixing problems. A minority of clinical and developmental, social scientist type psychologists that play in the big leagues are slowly influencing professional thinking and practice toward a holistic a full view of neurodiverse people---a complete view, a joys-and-sorrows view. A view that helps anyone’s sense-of self reflect the reality of their existence. Living with so much reality supports mental health. A pathology dominated sense-of-self (a self-concept colored as sick) has hurt too many spectrum folks. Yes, I know that much of WP communication aims to repair low self-worth, but it isn’t enough—yet.
In sum, I suspect the necessities of using DSM, is hindering too many from really liking themselves more. Many of us point to the valuable, nifty brains of aspies that have made living better for society, but that bragging-by-identification is, again, not enough.
I do see merit in your 2-step plan. No real argument with that solid thinking, except it’s a bit dreamy—like my dreamy thoughts about: Dilute pathology>enhance risk-taking for connecting with others>increase motivation for learning real conversation skills (beyond memorizing phrases)>use conversation skill to create durable close friendships> watch close connections build mental health> experience more satisfaction from better mental health (living with more reality).
Seriously, I believe your “dreamy”, imaginative plan would make life better for millions, IF u could get the expensive support to make it flourish.
Best to stop here before I bore every reader but you.
Next: Part 2 on a new procedure for enhancing aspie conversations= relationships (platonic or not).

I’d like to try a small beta version on WP.

Exactly. I've been in the autistic community for over 10 years, and this is something I observe all the time.



I think part of the reason for that is that the strengths are too narrowly defined, and also not present in many people. I certainly have many of the strengths, but it is not those that made my life good. They certainly helped my professional computer programming career, but they have no relevance for friendships or relationships. What made me happy in that compartment mostly was that I had absolutely no idea about how it was supposed to work (parents didn't say), so I experimented with my natural preferences rather than getting into dating and trying to fit in at all costs. That meant that already as a teenager I knew how I wanted a relationship to "evolve", and I would take no dating advice whatsoever from anybody after that.



I'd like to see more details in that process. For me, the process of getting acceptance from NTs (and becoming friends with NTs), is completely separate from getting into meaningful relationships with NDs. I cannot see how that could possibly be a single process.

Rdos:

Please expand. Sounds like u have certain strengths in mind. Examples?
When a gifted aspie leaves his/her comfort zone to think into the overwhelming issues of modern social science, like the dynamics of intimacy or the process of big changes in behavior, believing, emotional style, and thinking habits----wonderful ideas emerge. It’s sort of the opposite of typical expectations of aspies specializing in crisp concepts, number work, hard-edged stuff. Oops, I’m moving off topic because of my pet peeve; -the stereotype of aspies being unable to cross over to the “mysterious” world of human attachment. I’m witness to the fact that they bring fresh ideas to the social science of relationships, yes friendships too. . Some of my old influential students are cross-overs from e.g. mathematics to the measurement of interpersonal talent. Sorry, just tell me what u mean by narrowly defined.

Rdos:
Incidentally, dating advice is a nasty joke to me. A bad habit responsible for superficial thinking that has damage millions over the past 80 years. Most folks know more about how their smartphones work than how their relationships work (including friendships). I’ve got a chapter on the urge to give advice—especially advising someone how to feel. Absurd practice. Let me know if u r curious.
I assume “evolve” is similar to “develop or” “process”—wrong? Are the variables something like the process of taking bigger risks with honest self-disclosure? …accepting differences...the ”evolving” understanding of each other’s’ inner life? Wondering if you mean something more about cognitive stuff.
Rdos; I cannot see how that could possibly be a single process.
I like that u leave the door open “I cannot see” rather than saying that its impossible to place your ND and NT connections under one abstract process. Open mind. Thanks. I’m afraid of certainty.
Well, when you move up to larger concepts on close connections it may be possible to observe both with a single process. I’ve been touching on that thinking device in this thread, and will try to describe better after u respond to this post. Unfortunately, the details you ask about are in a couple books on the moment-to-moment connections and disconnections between humans—and a few mammals. Is it against WP rules to post book segments? Can PM handle 20 pp.?

Wish there was a way to do public voice mail on this topic. It appears that some find our discourse here useful.
My copy and paste is clumsy. Wish u could show me an easy way. I’m a forum novice.

The typical talents are finding patterns, being rational and logical, modeling complex things in the brain, like software. A lot of these are probably byproducts of having to analyze social rules and communication with logic rather than innate processing and "emotional intelligence". So, many people, including many aspies too, believe that aspies are highly logical creatures that use logic for everything. Which would predict emotions and supernatural stuff would not interest aspies, which, of course, is not true.



Agree to that. Although, dating is probably more useful for NTs, because if it wasn't, why create it?



Yes, develop probably is a better word than evolve.



Sure, if you can prove that it is a single process, I'll accept that. I'm fine with everything that is valid and true, but I will need real proof for it, based on real ND traits, most which are currently unknown to science and psychiatry.

colina wrote:

Please expand. Sounds like u have certain strengths in mind. Examples?
When a gifted aspie leaves his/her comfort zone to think into the overwhelming issues of modern social science, like the dynamics of intimacy or the process of big changes in behavior, believing, emotional style, and thinking habits----wonderful ideas emerge. It’s sort of the opposite of typical expectations of aspies specializing in crisp concepts, number work, and hard-edged stuff. Oops, I’m moving off topic because of my pet peeve; -the stereotype of aspies being unable to cross over to the “mysterious” world of human attachment. I’m witness to the fact that they bring fresh ideas to the social science of relationships, yes that includes friendships. . Some of my old influential students are cross-overs from e.g. mathematics to the measurement of interpersonal talent. Sorry, just tell me what u mean by narrowly defined.


The typical talents are finding patterns, being rational and logical, modeling complex things in the brain, like software. A lot of these are probably byproducts of having to analyze social rules and communication with logic rather than innate processing and "emotional intelligence". So, many people, including many aspies too, believe that aspies are highly logical creatures that use logic for everything. Which would predict emotions and supernatural stuff would not interest aspies, which, of course, is not true.

Colina>
Incidentally “emotional intelligence” is not a legitimate construct for people like me. It’s more like a pop book hook that struggles to be science, but fails. My colleagues agree that it’s catchy, but fails to represent reality. My suspicion is that understanding intentions emotionally (“innate” is not my thought”) is possible for some/?many ND folks. And I’m not alone in believing it’s worth the work to pilot interventions for acquiring a sense for perceiving the conversational intentions of others; What does he want from me right now? Is she interested? Am I seen as clumsy—not worth talking to? Does he wanna know more?...believe that I'm weird?,…want to know what I feel? …want to get away?.....curious about how I think? Etc. There are about 2 dozen basic intentions possible in a close conversation----never just one.

It may take months of practice, but it appears to be a big tool for enhancing closer connections.

Colina-The cognitive capacities of many aspies are now part of our cultural knowledge—and that fact seems to be spreading. Poor Albert Einstein’s legacy might become his aspie qualities. Great.
Your lightly held “byproduct of social learning” hypothesis probably soaks up some variance. I guess you are not disregarding genetics as the big contributor---wrong?

Learning to converse across planets by picking up standard social talk rules works to make life easier in the larger society, but it’s not enough for me. Don’t believe I’m insensitive to the necessary burden of learning how to talk/connect like the majority. Learning to use typical “social rules” can limit the capacity to connect closely across the divide because bright people constantly break social rules—conversation rules to express themselves better. Aspies have more comfort with bright NTs –it seems. And bright NTs read the intentions used by others. They go beyond the standard talk rules.

So my point is that ND folks can live better when going beyond the rules of conversation –beyond the mechanics of talk –which are learned by their superior cognitive brains. I imagine you thinking “Is that true?” Or “If so how the hell do you learn to read others’ intentions?” (I’m not refering to Baron-Cohen’s “mind reading”). And here I offer an observation that my aspie grad students who knew the social rules and then went further to study a couple dozen basic talk intentions. They developed a second sense for what others really meant in close conversations. They “evolved” from fearing to talk genuinely to someone new to launching careers where they conversed with new people daily.

I admit these observations are insufficient for serious development of a program—unsystematic, only 35-40 students biased by their motivation to overcome social discomfort for a psychology career. So the odds for replication aren’t great, but the prospects for making conversation easier for ND’s is so appealing….
colina wrote:
Incidentally, dating advice is a nasty joke to me. A bad habit responsible for superficial thinking that has damage millions over the past 80 years. Most folks know more about how their smartphones work than how their relationships work (including friendships). I’ve got a chapter on the urge to give advice—especially advising someone how to feel.


rdos=Agree to that. Although, dating is probably more useful for NTs, because if it wasn't, why create it?

Colina=
No issue with dating. It’s the abundance of cheap advice, quick tricks initiated by journalists in the 1930s and perpetuated by too many since then trying easy dumb tactics for connecting. I’m angry at the damage from the advice industry. The UCLA Psychology Clinic has seen that damage over the decades.



Rdos; I cannot see how that could possibly be a single process.
colina wrote:
I like that u leave the door open “I cannot see” rather than saying that its impossible to place your ND and NT connections under one abstract process. Open mind. Thanks. I’m afraid of certainty.
Well, when you move up to larger concepts on close connections it may be possible to observe both with a single process. I’ve been touching on that thinking device in this thread, and will try to describe better after u respond to this post. Unfortunately, the details you ask about are in a couple books on the moment-to-moment connections and disconnections between adult humans. [See e.g. The Talk Book}


rdos
Sure, if you can prove that it is a single process, I'll accept that. I'm fine with everything that is valid and true, but I will need real proof for it, based on real ND traits, most which are currently unknown to science and psychiatry.

Colina=
Oh, I’m not talking about physics research! Social science work is more difficult than that. That’s why our knowledge of human behavior, believing, emotions, and thinking is less developed than chemistry etc. So no “proof” will be offered. No “truth” either. My kind of science does not “prove”. It simply tries to create better hypotheses. (The theoretical physicists at U Chicago that I studied years ago say the same for themselves).

Let me try to show some over-arching variables that apply to—almost---any close human connection—next time. Deceptively simple stuff. And, of course, I do not assume there is a rational corpus of findings to reveal that “real ND traits” exist. The category may be too wide to comprehend! Is that one of your academic challenges?

Thanks for your open mind in this thread--- it’s my first extended forum conversation. My career experiences having careful, respectful, discussions about real issues with someone holding different hunches than mine has been rewarding. Your interest in psych. taxonomies re ND differs from my interest in close conversations>close connections, but we haven’t called each other nasty names.

Notice that I haven’t said a word about your difficult-to-eat Swedish food.

I think you are right about that. "Emotional intelligence" only means you function like the majority. Because what they measure is not "intelligence", but the ability to share emotions with other's that have the same neurotype.



I think having hidden agendas is mostly an NT thing, which probably is why many NDs don't have a good mechanism to expose fake people. Which, again, means that this "ability" in only relevant with NTs. Still, it is important to acquire this, but it shouldn't be used in the dating context since a partner even having such motives should be a huge red flag.



I'm not saying you are wrong, only that this is only relevant with NTs. Besides, a problem with this is that many NDs need to hyperfocus on the conversation in itself not to appear strange, and adding detecting motives might be pretty hard to do on top of that. The work-load in conversations would increase, which causes longer periods of recovery. Unless you can automate it all, which takes a lot of training.



I would not want to use any of this with ND friends, and absolutely not with a potential partner. Once you agree to enter this "game" with an ND friend or potential partner, you agree to uphold it indefinitely. I think a better way to form friendships and relationship is without any conversation at all. After all, conversation has no role whatsoever in ND courtship, so there is no reason to use it to get to know somebody for a close friendship or a relationship.



I think I will disagree with that. IMO, it's far better to form close connections with people that have no selfish or ulterior motives. That only requires learning how to detect people that lack that, which I think is easier than learning all the deceptive tricks.



I think you are right, but the next step in this "evolution" is to stop using standard conversation altogether, going on to the next level and use spiritual connections.

Which also makes sense in regards to hidden agendas, because it simply is impossible to even have those when you can "mind read" each other.



Personally, I think the "sexual revolution" is the culprit. Without the ability to have regular sex without producing children, much of today's strange things would not exist.



Sure, social science is more difficult than physics, but that doesn't mean we have to accept poor research methods and poor hypothesis formation methods. Simply put, the scientific method works in social science too, and so should be used.



Actually, I don't think that is the reason. We have much better knowledge about primate courtship than human courtship, and the reason for this is our poor hypotheses and our inability to observe and understand our own hidden motivations. Something some NDs actually can do much better from a perspective of not working the same way as the majority.

Hi Rdos,
Your last mail contained many of the ways u see ND life, which looks different than my experience with aspie grad students over the years. Left me with questions.
Because you’ve spent so much time taking responses from ND’s I want to understand your thinking. Your views of that population seem more certain in contrast to prior messages. Yet interesting. I don’t want us talking past each other.
My way of making sense of people starts with a weird brain that has classic sensory, and OC traits and some detachment characteristics, but the interpersonal perception part is almost the obverse of the stereotype of aspie as needing to work hard to maintain conversations with NT friends. Professionals couldn’t make sense of me as a boy and figured the person perception characteristic was hard-wired. It makes problems for me, but helps in my academic work.
I’m telling u this stuff because I’m curious about understanding how our common interests differ. I’m really not a NT. I’m a different kind of geek with techy interests in human and mammalian connection. So, maybe we can teach each other some useful stuff----exchange info from our specialties.
I f this doesn't sound interesting, let me know, so I won’t waste our time responding to your last bunch of assertions about close connections.

I'm mostly focused on how ND relationships work naturally, but I also know that this is extremely hard to achieve in practice, so people might do better with "cheating" on their preferences, when possible. Still, even when somebody wants to make some kind of "working compromise" (like I think you do), I think it is useful, even required, to know how things work naturally. That's where I think our common interests are. You actually need to know how ND relationship preferences work and how they can clash and mesh with our culture and NTs. You probably already know some of this intuitively, because otherwise, you would have little success with your aspie students.

So while I'm not personally interested in adopting any compromise for my natural preferences (I don't need to either), I have an interest in other aspies having more success in the relationship area, with whatever compromises are reasonable and that they want to do to achieve that goal.

In the end though, it is my experience that love interests that follow natural preferences are much more enjoyable and last longer, which is my primary motivation for refusing to use anything else. So while I might have been able to get a girl through dating, it wouldn't be enjoyable, and probably wouldn't last long. The only positive aspect of it would be that I had a partner which I could boast about socially. OTOH, distance flirting and game playing with a girl for a long time are extremely enjoyable for me, so even if it leads nowhere, I still prefer that to dating or arranged stuff. Partly because I can thrive on my own just as well as in a relationship.

Hi rdos, Sorry for disappearing. Some urgencies on a project and housebuilding have taken my attention.
Before responding to your June post, I'd like to know if you're still around. Let me know.

I'm around.