Things you didn't comprehend as a child because of autism?

Post Reply New Topic

I had many problems understanding jokes. I always took sarcasm/playground jokes seriously and often made myself look stupid when everyone else was laughing and I was upset.

Yeah, I now remember mom being annoyed at me for some reason. She said 'a couple' and I took it to mean three. Over what? That I dont remember. She made a big deal of it though.

I only realized recently that when most people say "a couple", they mean "two". I usually take it to mean "three or four".

Difficulties accepting that pain EXSIST'S in this world and men are concidered 'domanete' over Woman. Still kinda feel this way today (though not soo much about the men/woman thing anymore. and no i'm NOT a feminest. plus, feminests tend to HATE cute things, anyways...well not all but i'm still not one).

I also never understood how people would call others 'guys', even when there are girls in there. Or (worse) when it's ONLY girls their saying it to! -_-;; It really upsets me, even today.





...And I never really understood 'cuteness' as a kid, either (though i supposly was found of cute things, from what my mom say's she remember's about my childhood anyways).

There was A LOT of things I didn't really comprehend as a kid....
~cmastler

I didn't know that until I was 15 when my mother told me but I also have learned since then, people can mean more than two when they say it.

I have to say that I am guilty of the "guys" thing. I would LOVE to say gals, but am uncomfortable, as it might sound demeaning or like I am trying to pick them up. If I were female, I would definitely have said gals just yesterday when I addressed two women. You can never tell how women would react. Blacks(colloquial american term used today), for example, ARE negros(accepted name for race classification). Just like Whites are caucasion. But you probably want to stay away from calling blacks negro. Then again, I am not crazy about the term caucasion either.

BTW when I say demeaning, I mean that some women feel that men have NO respect for women. I once met a woman that RAILED against men for such things. Heck, she spoke of how males will insult other males by saying things like "you throw like a girl". Don't females do the same sort of thing? Males LIKE breasts, ON FEMALES! But they don't want to have them, or be accused of having them. So it isn't an insult to females, etc... It is simply that males should want to be like males, just like females should want to be like females.

As for the idea of pain, I WISH there was a good way to encourage people to do things. Our current system STINKS! AND, because the idea of barter can get complicated, most people work for, and accept, currency that creates even MORE problems! Taxes, credit cons/needs, theft, conjobs, etc.... ALL are greatly facilitated by currency. Frankly, a TRUE communist system, with ALL working for the COMMON good, would be best, but it has never succeeded. And does anyone even know if it has ever been attempted? Russia, China, and Cuba are dictatorships and oligarchies, and not really communist.

As for men being dominant over women, any DECENT man would just want to be in his rightful place, and no better or worse. The Bible(old and new testament) often implies that and sometimes states it. Feminists HATE the idea that men should be the protectors and work while the women should be more the caregivers, etc.... Men DO tend to be bigger and stronger.(So better able to protect and do manual labor) Is that to say that either is better overall? NOPE! Society couldn't exist without either sex. Just look at china that is now trying to find OTHER women because they have killed so many female babies. And when women went out to work while the men did, the need for various things went up, and prices went up, so the idea of a nice family with the mother being able to care for the kids is FAR more unlikely. And that means they must hire others to help more often which also reduces the ability to have/find decent people to do so. SURE, single women fared better. MAYBE married women felt more assured, and needed. In the long run though, it was like the average family was making LESS! Do you remember that au pair(Louise Woodward) that actually SHOOK the baby to death!?!?!? MAYBE if SHE was in a better family, she would have been more reasonable. Maybe if Deborah Eappen hadn't considered a job SO important, she would have had less need for an au pair. Maybe if fewer married women worked, there would be better au pairs willing to work for less.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9710/30/au.pair.v ... index.html

Just think! If the married women generally worked for the family, and the men worked for society and protected the family, things would run smooth, and everyone could be happy! You wouldn't need loans, credit, jail, money, etc.... The kids could be cared for and wouldn't have to study propaganda, etc... The only problem is that people would have to be honest and altruistic, and those people are RARE! Some say NON EXISTANT. I USED to be like that though.

BTW I SHOULD say that there was almost always a need for SOME women in the work force. When operators were first used, it was found that men were RUDE, CRUDE, etc.... They switched to women that handled it well. THAT is why it is so popular. Women DO tend to do better with little kids, so a lot of teachers were women. In times of extreme war, like WWII, women filled in the gap that was created by all the men that had to go to war. Male nurses were all but unheard of when I was a kid. Of course, women are generally more comfortable with female doctors. And females would make better au pairs also, and I'm sure most au pairs are.

And if you think I am railing against women too much here, please realize that I am REALLY railing against the degradation of society and the family.

In SOME languages, supposedly the word that seems like pair actually means few. but...

couple=2
few=generally 3, but at LEAST 3
some=more than 1 and probably more than 3
several=more than 2 and probably more than 3

I HATE it when people don't understand couple or few, as they really ARE pretty precise terms.

As for the word soon, it has pretty much lost ALL meaning. so many LIE!

I didn't understand until I was about 5 what "yet" meant. I could se no difference between "It hasn't happened" and "It hasn't happened yet". Actually, I still don't. Either it hasn't happened, or it didn't happen. What purpose does "yet" serve to clarify things?

"Has he done it?"
"Not yet."

Never made much sense. It apparently implies that he will do it, but up until now, hasn't. I think I can use the term correctly now, although it still confounds me.

With plural forms, I as well until I was around 12 thought that "a couple" meant more than one, but not too many - not specifically two. Since "several" sounds so much like "seven", I thought that it meant "approximately seven", and that therefore, "a few" was somewhere between "more than one, but not too many", and "approximately seven". Quite confusing. We have numbers for a reason!

I couldn't make out "some", either. I could understand "eat some cake", but not "get some forks", or the difference between "some cake" and "some cakes". These days, I just use a specific number, and add "approximately", "about", or "ish" to the sentence. It's much easier than the ambiguity introduced by the many plural pronouns and adjectives in the English language, especially when sometimes, "a couple" means more than two. When did that happen?

Telling time, I learned early. It took me forever how to learn to tie my shoes. I didn't learn that feat until I was 10. I didn't learn how to tie a tie until I was 39.

i think yours may be a TOM problem. i have that same problem but it never manifeted in not comprehending other cars being "driven".
i sort of thought (and somethimes still do) that all other people are just like robots and have programmed thought patterns. that they never experience original thought. it seems i always had a different take ont he world and so i figured no one else was able to use their brains to see things my way. i figured i always had a logical thought process to understanding different things in the world and since so many of those things failed to fit into my logic i thought everyone to be stupid.

"It hasn't happened" means "It hasn't happened, and may not".
"It hasn't happened yet" means "It hasn't happened, but is expected to, will later, or likely will".

So YET makes the idea that it's temporary far more clear.

IF, however, you express doubt at the beginning, or a certain pitch, like "Well...It hasn't happened YET", the meaning is "After all this time, it STILL hasn't happened(or it has yet to happen), and is therefore NOT likely to happen".

some is an indistinct value.

Oh well, English HAS to have SOME complexity, because so many complex ideas AREN'T there.

Shorter 2ukenkerl: Everything wrong with society can be traced back to feminism and women having the gall to...GASP...do something other than housework and childrearing. Women shouldn't work, except if they're going to be teachers, nannies, or telephone operators. But nannies are evil, anyway.

But really, he isn't railing against women!

These are some things that just popped into my mind &, seeing as how I don't have a diagnosis, I have no idea whether their Asperger's related or not, but:

When I was really little, there was this show on PBS where people dressed as cats & pretended to be cats. (Kind-of like in the Broadway play "Cats".) Well, I thought they actually were cats.

Also on PBS, there was this show with this guy who wore a full body suit that showed the entire internal system.. organs, nerves, etc... & I thought the guy actually had his organs on the outside of his body lol, & it just fascinated me.

When I was a little older.. in my pre-teens through early teens is when it started.. there was this bar/club/lodge thing where all these rich guys would get together & do whatever. Well, the place was called "Emerald Valley" & was set pretty far back from the road. In front of it, there was basically a field of grass. A lot of times, the grass would get pretty high. I thought for years that "Emerald Valley" was the grass, not realizing that "Emerald valley" was the place. I thought emeralds grew out of the grass & always wanted someone to stop so I could go see & pick some . I don't think I actually realized that "Emerald Valley" was the building & that emeralds did not grow in the grass until I was like 19 or 20 lol, & when I did I was totally disappointed.

I misunderstand some jokes, but I mainly misinterpret songs. There's a Christmas song which is actually pretty perverted, but I didn't realize it til like two years ago. there's also another song, which I just realized the full meaning of not too long ago. I learn new things everyday lol.

I was sitting in a wendy's restaurant the other day. waiting for my mom to arrive, and I was watching the staff. Now I've understood this cognitively for a long time, but suddenly thought

"Those people are feeling things. They are thinking about what they wish they were doing right now." And it feels strange to me to think that. At 36.

I didn't blame it for EVERYTHING, only a little for TWO things. HECK, I blame ALAN greenspan, and BILL clinton for the trouble we are in now! It only affected social and economic things directly, but indirectly affected EVERYTHING. Those guys, BOTH MALE, were IDIOTS! You could see a DEFINITE decline, WORLDWIDE, starting just before the 1999 crash. There has never, in all of recorded history of the various markets, been such a whiplash of so many things. It is amazing that some of the companies that started on the way up still exist. MOST women could have done FAR better, but I doubt ANYONE could have done much worse.

As for evil nannies? Some ARE evil! I simply said that if the family unit were stronger, that there would be more GOOD nannies, and most of the bad ones would have to look elsewhere to work. And HECK, I DID say women could be doctors, nurses, etc... I just think that with nearly 100% of all adults either working, or taking from the public dole, that families suffer and it strains the economy.

Oh well, some LOOK for the bad, and feminists are especially likely to overlook the good. It is amazing that some women seem to want to fly in war, and perhaps even handle garbage.