Are people with autism borderline sociopaths?
20 Nov 2011, 12:52 pm
Zeraeph wrote:
Verdandi wrote:
Okay, I don't know what you mean by "functionally sociopathic." Yes, I used the wrong word, it happens.
"The Socialized Psychopath is perhaps the most quietly terrifying creature on earth. Often seen as a charming Ted Bundy who aspires, and studies, to sit, ultimately, on the Judicial Bench while conducting a one man holocaust in his leisure time.
The greater reality of the Socialized Psychopath is far subtler than that. Every so often a voice is raised to put forward the hypothesis that most, if not all of our national leaders and captains of industry are, in reality, Socialized Psychopaths. In real terms this is unlikely to be the case.
No matter how cold blooded, ruthless and intelligent, the Socialized Psychopath simply screws up far too often to achieve true greatness. A lack of empathy disables more than kindness, and he has has too many intuitive blind spots. Apart from which the Psychopath lacks "emotional intelligence" he is too easily sidetracked by the pursuit of instant gratification. He lacks the determination and drive that produces sustained effort. He greatest and most pressing need is to avoid boredom, so that perhaps unconsciously he orchestrates his own obstacles and crises.
Regardless, forever handicapped by his blindness to the deeper meanings and motives of others, the Socialized Psychopath is usually driven to seek or create an environment that is under his control. The more totalitarian the control, the more comfortable he is.
Though on a far smaller scale than the nightmare scenario of a world under covert, totalitarian, psychopathic control, the microcosmic controlled environment of the Socialized Psychopath can become a devastating organism with far reaching effects.
In one of it's worst form the Controlled Environment takes on many of the characteristics of a cult.
Generally even a Psychopath of quite average intelligence has the ability to home in on the vulnerabilities of an individual or group that appears almost supernatural. It isn't. It is rather focus without empathetic distraction. Once having established those vulnerabilities he exploits them. At first there is no specific agenda beyond usurping existing control mechanisms, rather as you would rock an heavy object to destabilize it before attempting to push it.
He will spot anxieties and covertly maximize them. For instance if there is a local burglary he might show every sympathy for even the most neurotic fear of recurrence while amplifying it and insuring it becomes contagious. He will pinpoint and utilize the dysfunctional and morally flexible as "adjutants" in his endeavor to impose control, playing their fears and inadequacies towards his own agenda, almost always at one remove.
A Socialized Psychopath is very hard to oppose. Those strong and healthy enough to oppose him for the right reasons, are hopelessly handicapped by their own morality. The Psychopath is completely unconcerned by the damage his actions may do to others even quite incidentally, more than unconcerned, he is oblivious. Healthy people are as concerned with the secondary effects of their actions on others as they are with the primary effects. Healthy people are intrinsically incapable of being sufficiently unscrupulous to "beat him at his own game" which often uses other people as weapons or threats. As Psychopath sees taking an innocent hostage (in whatever sense) as either an expedient move, or not. Other people would find the notion of taking an innocent hostage somewhere between "only in extremis" and abhorrent. Even if they could overcome that the Psychopath would remain unmoved and immune.
On the other hand, there are those who would oppose him for the wrong reasons. Perhaps because he is threatening their own aspirations to abusive control. Those he can often find a way to "buy", not with money, but by furnishing their needs, and ultimately gaining control of them by rendering them dependent upon him.
The reality is that once a Socialized Psychopath builds his Controlled Environment within a community it can become impossible to challenge until the Psychopath either trips himself up or becomes bored and moves on.
As for the ongoing devastation. Imagine real people being used and abused, without conscience, as though they were no more than toy soldiers, to accord with the whims of one person.
On one dramatic occasion 600 or so "toy soldiers" had kool-aid laced with cyanide, instead of lunch, in a remote camp in Guyana. That, of course is extreme. More usually the Controlled Environment of the Psychopath is an hermetically sealed world where the guilty and abusive are supported and upheld, while the innocent and victims are blamed and condemned. Not as a crisis, but as an whole way of life to which the community becomes anaesthetized and inured, regarding it as "normal", even blindly defending it against their own obvious best interests. "
I find your insights here to be quite fascinating, but I'm confused. Couldn't these standards mean that anyone could be labelled a "socialized psychopath?"
I mean, if a socialized psychopath is ALWAYS acting and doesn't actually care about anyone else, but is still governed by an intellectually understood morality, how would anyone ever know they were a psychopath?
This is a bit frightening, because, by this definition, I could call anyone a psychopath, and then just deny the validity of their objections and explanations as parts of their act.
I think psychopathy would be an incredibly difficult and lonely way of living.
_________________
You may know me from my column here on WrongPlanet. I'm also writing a book for AAPC. Visit my Facebook page for links to articles I've written for Autism Speaks and other websites.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/JohnScott ... 8723228267
20 Nov 2011, 12:56 pm
dr01dguy wrote:
From what I read, sociopaths and psychopaths are *extremely* dangerous to aspies, but not necessarily for the reason most NT'ers would suspect.
Psychopaths and sociopaths are finely tuned to emotions. We (aspies) throw off so many conflicting and random signals, we confuse and frustrate the hell out of them, and often cause them to trip up and make mistakes. They interpret this as overt hostility, and put us at the top of their "revenge" list.
Making matters worse, aspies have a really bad (in the sense of self-preservation) tendency to "out" sociopaths and psychopaths by exposing their lies and logical fallacies to others (possibly, by something as innocent as thinking we were confused about an explanation about their past, and attempting to clarify how they could have done A, B, and C if they also did D and E in a way that would have made B physically impossible). At best, we let on to them that we know they're full of $hit and faking the whole thing. In practical terms, we might as well pull out a fake light saber and shout "En Garde!"
As far as "functionally sociopathic" goes, I have to vehemently disagree. You can quote the textbook definition of 'functionally' and 'sociopathic' until you're blue in the face, and claim that it's purely a neutral clinical term. And you'd be wrong. The fact is, 'sociopathic' is an emotionally loaded term, like 'fascism'. It carries so much baggage above and beyond the dry textbook definition of the words, no qualifying adjective can ever rescue it and make it acceptable. You're free to privately believe it's a nice, scientific term, but you'll find that pretty much everyone is going to take exception, and anybody to whom you try and apply the term is going to get upset and take it badly.
Get this through your head and let it sink in well: a sociopath isn't bothered by the fact that he's a sociopath. A psychopath will think it makes him cool and superior. An aspie will go into emotional meltdown if you call him one, because aspies don't set out to hurt friends and innocent bystanders, or view harm as a morally-acceptable strategy for getting what we want. We might do it by accident, or cause wholesale injury to others by virtue of careless inattentiveness, and might not even realize we've done it, but once it sinks in, we feel bad about it. The "sink in" part is important, because with a sociopath or psycopath, it either can't sink in, or would sink in and fall right through the other side without a second thought.
Lots of aspies trip across threads like this one, then spend a tormented week reassuring themselves that they aren't sociopaths -- agonized every step of the way and tormented with guilt about the mere possibility. A real sociopath, if he cared at all, would eventually say "fsck it, I guess I'm a sociopath. Sux to be U."
Aspies, unlike sociopaths and psychopaths, have a conscience. It might have ADD, get distracted a lot, and fail to notice things that are in retrospect fairly obvious... but it does work, eventually (often, obsessively).
Psychopaths and sociopaths are finely tuned to emotions. We (aspies) throw off so many conflicting and random signals, we confuse and frustrate the hell out of them, and often cause them to trip up and make mistakes. They interpret this as overt hostility, and put us at the top of their "revenge" list.
Making matters worse, aspies have a really bad (in the sense of self-preservation) tendency to "out" sociopaths and psychopaths by exposing their lies and logical fallacies to others (possibly, by something as innocent as thinking we were confused about an explanation about their past, and attempting to clarify how they could have done A, B, and C if they also did D and E in a way that would have made B physically impossible). At best, we let on to them that we know they're full of $hit and faking the whole thing. In practical terms, we might as well pull out a fake light saber and shout "En Garde!"
As far as "functionally sociopathic" goes, I have to vehemently disagree. You can quote the textbook definition of 'functionally' and 'sociopathic' until you're blue in the face, and claim that it's purely a neutral clinical term. And you'd be wrong. The fact is, 'sociopathic' is an emotionally loaded term, like 'fascism'. It carries so much baggage above and beyond the dry textbook definition of the words, no qualifying adjective can ever rescue it and make it acceptable. You're free to privately believe it's a nice, scientific term, but you'll find that pretty much everyone is going to take exception, and anybody to whom you try and apply the term is going to get upset and take it badly.
Get this through your head and let it sink in well: a sociopath isn't bothered by the fact that he's a sociopath. A psychopath will think it makes him cool and superior. An aspie will go into emotional meltdown if you call him one, because aspies don't set out to hurt friends and innocent bystanders, or view harm as a morally-acceptable strategy for getting what we want. We might do it by accident, or cause wholesale injury to others by virtue of careless inattentiveness, and might not even realize we've done it, but once it sinks in, we feel bad about it. The "sink in" part is important, because with a sociopath or psycopath, it either can't sink in, or would sink in and fall right through the other side without a second thought.
Lots of aspies trip across threads like this one, then spend a tormented week reassuring themselves that they aren't sociopaths -- agonized every step of the way and tormented with guilt about the mere possibility. A real sociopath, if he cared at all, would eventually say "fsck it, I guess I'm a sociopath. Sux to be U."
Aspies, unlike sociopaths and psychopaths, have a conscience. It might have ADD, get distracted a lot, and fail to notice things that are in retrospect fairly obvious... but it does work, eventually (often, obsessively).
Thank you for this. Thank you very, very much.
_________________
You may know me from my column here on WrongPlanet. I'm also writing a book for AAPC. Visit my Facebook page for links to articles I've written for Autism Speaks and other websites.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/JohnScott ... 8723228267
20 Nov 2011, 1:21 pm
dr01dguy wrote:
From what I read, sociopaths and psychopaths are *extremely* dangerous to aspies, but not necessarily for the reason most NT'ers would suspect.
Psychopaths and sociopaths are finely tuned to emotions. We (aspies) throw off so many conflicting and random signals, we confuse and frustrate the hell out of them, and often cause them to trip up and make mistakes. They interpret this as overt hostility, and put us at the top of their "revenge" list.
Psychopaths and sociopaths are finely tuned to emotions. We (aspies) throw off so many conflicting and random signals, we confuse and frustrate the hell out of them, and often cause them to trip up and make mistakes. They interpret this as overt hostility, and put us at the top of their "revenge" list.
This is something I have never come across before, not spelled out in words anyway...but it is makes absolute sense of a lot of things I have seen in my life.
And so does this:
dr01dguy wrote:
Making matters worse, aspies have a really bad (in the sense of self-preservation) tendency to "out" sociopaths and psychopaths by exposing their lies and logical fallacies to others (possibly, by something as innocent as thinking we were confused about an explanation about their past, and attempting to clarify how they could have done A, B, and C if they also did D and E in a way that would have made B physically impossible). At best, we let on to them that we know they're full of $hit and faking the whole thing. In practical terms, we might as well pull out a fake light saber and shout "En Garde!"
Even in the more general sense that, as an Aspie, as you get older it is not rocket science to figure out when the truth might not be welcome, but it is a lot harder to figure out what you should say *INSTEAD* and the temptation is always there to say:
"Ah feck you...you aren't worth figuring out social BS for, I am just going to stick with the facts, and you can get used to it"
dr01dguy wrote:
As far as "functionally sociopathic" goes, I have to vehemently disagree. You can quote the textbook definition of 'functionally' and 'sociopathic' until you're blue in the face, and claim that it's purely a neutral clinical term. And you'd be wrong. The fact is, 'sociopathic' is an emotionally loaded term, like 'fascism'. It carries so much baggage above and beyond the dry textbook definition of the words, no qualifying adjective can ever rescue it and make it acceptable. You're free to privately believe it's a nice, scientific term, but you'll find that pretty much everyone is going to take exception, and anybody to whom you try and apply the term is going to get upset and take it badly.
I think, in a sense, and I am speaking largely philosophically here, in the absence of any secondary disorder, psycho/sociopathy could be considered a form of morally bankrupt utilitarian hyperfunctionality in and of it's nature that is usually only tripped up by the attendant impaired sense of consequence?
Besides, "functionally" is a word that is meaningless without context for function...is it social functionality, emotional functionality, other?
dr01dguy wrote:
Get this through your head and let it sink in well: a sociopath isn't bothered by the fact that he's a sociopath. A psychopath will think it makes him cool and superior. An aspie will go into emotional meltdown if you call him one, because aspies don't set out to hurt friends and innocent bystanders, or view harm as a morally-acceptable strategy for getting what we want. We might do it by accident, or cause wholesale injury to others by virtue of careless inattentiveness, and might not even realize we've done it, but once it sinks in, we feel bad about it. The "sink in" part is important, because with a sociopath or psycopath, it either can't sink in, or would sink in and fall right through the other side without a second thought.
Lots of aspies trip across threads like this one, then spend a tormented week reassuring themselves that they aren't sociopaths -- agonized every step of the way and tormented with guilt about the mere possibility. A real sociopath, if he cared at all, would eventually say "fsck it, I guess I'm a sociopath. Sux to be U."
Aspies, unlike sociopaths and psychopaths, have a conscience. It might have ADD, get distracted a lot, and fail to notice things that are in retrospect fairly obvious... but it does work, eventually (often, obsessively).
Lots of aspies trip across threads like this one, then spend a tormented week reassuring themselves that they aren't sociopaths -- agonized every step of the way and tormented with guilt about the mere possibility. A real sociopath, if he cared at all, would eventually say "fsck it, I guess I'm a sociopath. Sux to be U."
Aspies, unlike sociopaths and psychopaths, have a conscience. It might have ADD, get distracted a lot, and fail to notice things that are in retrospect fairly obvious... but it does work, eventually (often, obsessively).
I think that is very true, particularly in that a psycho/sociopath is not bothered by what he is at all...but of course, that will not stop him putting in an oscar winning performance of deep hurt and mortally wounded innocence about it if he feels there is advantage to be had that way.
20 Nov 2011, 1:30 pm
Zeraeph wrote:
fraac wrote:
Psychopaths are completely, 100% insane. They have no connection to the real world, because they can't feel it. They don't have neuroses so they look saner than NTs. It's a messed up place where NTs are mostly so crazy that I prefer the calm emptyness of psychopaths.
You are going to have to provide your definition of "sane", because, in terms of any definition I know a psychopath is most definately not insane...and I have never heard sanity defined as "an emotional connection to the real world" in my life, and doubt such a defintion could be accurate, as reality is such a subjective thing.
Have you known a psychopath who wasn't paranoid? Paranoia is insane. Psychopaths are only sane compared to NTs.
20 Nov 2011, 1:41 pm
Zeraeph wrote:
"The Socialized Psychopath is perhaps the most quietly terrifying creature on earth. Often seen as a charming Ted Bundy who aspires, and studies, to sit, ultimately, on the Judicial Bench while conducting a one man holocaust in his leisure time.
The greater reality of the Socialized Psychopath is far subtler than that. Every so often a voice is raised to put forward the hypothesis that most, if not all of our national leaders and captains of industry are, in reality, Socialized Psychopaths. In real terms this is unlikely to be the case.
No matter how cold blooded, ruthless and intelligent, the Socialized Psychopath simply screws up far too often to achieve true greatness. A lack of empathy disables more than kindness, and he has has too many intuitive blind spots. Apart from which the Psychopath lacks "emotional intelligence" he is too easily sidetracked by the pursuit of instant gratification. He lacks the determination and drive that produces sustained effort. He greatest and most pressing need is to avoid boredom, so that perhaps unconsciously he orchestrates his own obstacles and crises.
Regardless, forever handicapped by his blindness to the deeper meanings and motives of others, the Socialized Psychopath is usually driven to seek or create an environment that is under his control. The more totalitarian the control, the more comfortable he is.
Though on a far smaller scale than the nightmare scenario of a world under covert, totalitarian, psychopathic control, the microcosmic controlled environment of the Socialized Psychopath can become a devastating organism with far reaching effects.
In one of it's worst form the Controlled Environment takes on many of the characteristics of a cult.
Generally even a Psychopath of quite average intelligence has the ability to home in on the vulnerabilities of an individual or group that appears almost supernatural. It isn't. It is rather focus without empathetic distraction. Once having established those vulnerabilities he exploits them. At first there is no specific agenda beyond usurping existing control mechanisms, rather as you would rock an heavy object to destabilize it before attempting to push it.
He will spot anxieties and covertly maximize them. For instance if there is a local burglary he might show every sympathy for even the most neurotic fear of recurrence while amplifying it and insuring it becomes contagious. He will pinpoint and utilize the dysfunctional and morally flexible as "adjutants" in his endeavor to impose control, playing their fears and inadequacies towards his own agenda, almost always at one remove.
A Socialized Psychopath is very hard to oppose. Those strong and healthy enough to oppose him for the right reasons, are hopelessly handicapped by their own morality. The Psychopath is completely unconcerned by the damage his actions may do to others even quite incidentally, more than unconcerned, he is oblivious. Healthy people are as concerned with the secondary effects of their actions on others as they are with the primary effects. Healthy people are intrinsically incapable of being sufficiently unscrupulous to "beat him at his own game" which often uses other people as weapons or threats. As Psychopath sees taking an innocent hostage (in whatever sense) as either an expedient move, or not. Other people would find the notion of taking an innocent hostage somewhere between "only in extremis" and abhorrent. Even if they could overcome that the Psychopath would remain unmoved and immune.
On the other hand, there are those who would oppose him for the wrong reasons. Perhaps because he is threatening their own aspirations to abusive control. Those he can often find a way to "buy", not with money, but by furnishing their needs, and ultimately gaining control of them by rendering them dependent upon him.
The reality is that once a Socialized Psychopath builds his Controlled Environment within a community it can become impossible to challenge until the Psychopath either trips himself up or becomes bored and moves on.
As for the ongoing devastation. Imagine real people being used and abused, without conscience, as though they were no more than toy soldiers, to accord with the whims of one person.
On one dramatic occasion 600 or so "toy soldiers" had kool-aid laced with cyanide, instead of lunch, in a remote camp in Guyana. That, of course is extreme. More usually the Controlled Environment of the Psychopath is an hermetically sealed world where the guilty and abusive are supported and upheld, while the innocent and victims are blamed and condemned. Not as a crisis, but as an whole way of life to which the community becomes anaesthetized and inured, regarding it as "normal", even blindly defending it against their own obvious best interests. "
First, do not really like stringing double quotes, but I am sure you can see why I must here? Not least because you seem to be referring to a totally different post to the one you quoted which, as far as I can see, makes no mention of this at all:
Tambourine-Man wrote:
I find your insights here to be quite fascinating, but I'm confused. Couldn't these standards mean that anyone could be labelled a "socialized psychopath?"
I mean, if a socialized psychopath is ALWAYS acting and doesn't actually care about anyone else, but is still governed by an intellectually understood morality, how would anyone ever know they were a psychopath?
I mean, if a socialized psychopath is ALWAYS acting and doesn't actually care about anyone else, but is still governed by an intellectually understood morality, how would anyone ever know they were a psychopath?
Even so, that is a facinating and pertinent point where moral philosophy and clinical psychology part company.
Philosophically adherance to an intellectually defined and determined morality surely has equal weight with adherence to a conscientious one?
But, socio/psychopathy is not a philosophical disorder, but rather a psychological one (if of probably genetic rather than traumatic orgin).
In and of itself socio/psychopathy is a neutral concept...it is not an "obligation to evil" of any kind, in practice, however it means that the individual usually has no conscientious incentive to refrain from evil if it represents the line of least resistance.
Edited to add:
I have never come across a psychopath who succeeded in abiding by an intellectually determined conscience, but I may have once come across one who sincerely tried - on the other hand, that may have just been a mind game...either way he failed abysmally.
Tambourine-Man wrote:
This is a bit frightening, because, by this definition, I could call anyone a psychopath, and then just deny the validity of their objections and explanations as parts of their act.
But couldn't you say that about anything?
You could call anyone a murderer and dismiss anything they say to the contrary as parts of their murderous act. You could accuse anyone of have an affair with your wife and dismiss any defence they make as part nof their adulterous act too.
The difference is not in the superficial appearance, and reactions of the psychopath, often almost identical to those of one thus wrongly accused, but in the relationship that appearance and those reactions bear to the reality behind them...
Tambourine-Man wrote:
I think psychopathy would be an incredibly difficult and lonely way of living.
I am quite certain that it is. When they are not doing any actual harm I tend to pity them.
Last edited by Zeraeph on 20 Nov 2011, 1:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
20 Nov 2011, 1:46 pm
Ok, it is like this...
My ex-girlfriend and I used to get into arguments because she was always perceiving criticism in things that I would say that had nothing to do with her. She was very insecure.
For instance, she fell asleep in one of my favorite movies because she hadn't slept well the night before. She didn't see what all the fuss was about, or why I loved the movie so much. I told her she should watch it again, because me and my family loved it so much and I really wanted to share my enthusiasm with her. She responded by saying, "I'm not intellectually inferior just because I didn't like it. Your family isn't better than me just because I didn't like it. I have a right to my own opinions. I'm so tired of this!"
Nearly ALL of our conversations went this way. When I said I wasn't surprised to discover that someone we knew was a pothead, she said, "Oh, so I'm stupid because I didn't pick up on it?"
When I would try to explain that she was making inferences, she would only get more angry. I would tell her that she was not making sense, that I was completely confused, and wasn't the slightest bit emotionally invested in a meaningless argument.
She was so sensitive to perceived criticism that I just kind of gave up and played along as best as I could. However, she could tell when I was placating her, and would accuse me of being heartless and cold.
I got to the point that I was feeling so guilty and confused all the time that I just couldn't be in the relationship anymore. I broke up with her on a plane (I left this a bit unclear in my article) after she had really hurt and embarrassed me. We said some mean things to each other. I regret some of them, but I was very angry and frustrated at the time. Then she left me at the airport, I had a meltdown, and I ended up in the emergency room.
She ended up very upset with the way she was portrayed in the article, but she had specifically asked me to leave out the mean things we said. She said it made her look like she broke up with me because I was autistic.
In reality, I had begged her to learn more about autism because she was always getting angry with me when I wasn't disguising all of my autistic behavior. When she met Alex, she realized that I was, well, an Aspie. I think she thought it was a very minor diagnosis. Anyway, it didn't click with her until she met someone else with AS.
From that point on it was very evident that she was completely disgusted with me and she made a big, public show of it. I was ashamed, and embarrassed and very, very angry.
I told her I hated her. In the moment, I did.
After the article was published, she told me that I was a sociopath and would probably go on a murder spree one day. I had told her many, many times that I there was nothing that caused me more emotional and psychological grief than being called a sociopath.
I then had another meltdown. Ugh, I really don't like that word.
Does that sound like sociopathy?
_________________
You may know me from my column here on WrongPlanet. I'm also writing a book for AAPC. Visit my Facebook page for links to articles I've written for Autism Speaks and other websites.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/JohnScott ... 8723228267
Last edited by Tambourine-Man on 20 Nov 2011, 1:57 pm, edited 3 times in total.
20 Nov 2011, 1:47 pm
dr01dguy wrote:
Get this through your head and let it sink in well: a sociopath isn't bothered by the fact that he's a sociopath. A psychopath will think it makes him cool and superior. An aspie will go into emotional meltdown if you call him one
Why will an aspie go into meltdown upon being told things? A thing is either true or it's not. You can't say anything to change that. Aspies are rational so they can see that the world is as it is, regardless of how it's said to be. Of course 'sociopath' is a loaded term, that's why I was using it. I found TM's reaction to it - which is at least partly acting - to be fascinating and worthy of further study.
Straw poll: who prefers the company of sociopaths to NTs (say, the NTs you've known, as they're quite diverse)? The lesson here is surely not to judge.
20 Nov 2011, 1:50 pm
fraac wrote:
dr01dguy wrote:
Get this through your head and let it sink in well: a sociopath isn't bothered by the fact that he's a sociopath. A psychopath will think it makes him cool and superior. An aspie will go into emotional meltdown if you call him one
Why will an aspie go into meltdown upon being told things? A thing is either true or it's not. You can't say anything to change that. Aspies are rational so they can see that the world is as it is, regardless of how it's said to be. Of course 'sociopath' is a loaded term, that's why I was using it. I found TM's reaction to it - which is at least partly acting - to be fascinating and worthy of further study.
Straw poll: who prefers the company of sociopaths to NTs (say, the NTs you've known, as they're quite diverse)? The lesson here is surely not to judge.
Yes, it was partly acting; I was underplaying how pissed I was that you said that.
_________________
You may know me from my column here on WrongPlanet. I'm also writing a book for AAPC. Visit my Facebook page for links to articles I've written for Autism Speaks and other websites.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/JohnScott ... 8723228267
20 Nov 2011, 2:00 pm
Tambourine-Man wrote:
Ok, it is like this...
My ex-girlfriend and I used to get into arguments because she was always perceiving criticism in things that I would say that had nothing to do with her. She was very insecure.
For instance, she fell asleep in one of my favorite movies because she hadn't slept well the night before. She didn't see what all the fuss was about, or why I loved the movie so much. I told her she should watch it again, because me and my family loved it so much and I really wanted to share my enthusiasm with her. She responded by saying, "I'm not intellectually inferior just because I didn't like it. Your family isn't better than me just because I didn't like it. I have a right to my own opinions. I'm so tired of this!"
Nearly ALL of our conversations went this way. When I said I wasn't surprised to discover that someone we knew was a pothead, she said, "Oh, so I'm stupid because I didn't pick up on it?"
When I would try to explain that she was making inferences, she would only get more angry. I would tell her that she was not making sense, that I was completely confused, and wasn't the slightest bit emotionally invested in a meaningless argument.
She was so sensitive to perceived criticism that I just kind of gave up and played along as best as I could. However, she could tell when I was placating her, and would accuse me of being heartless and cold.
I got to the point that I was feeling so guilty and confused all the time that I just couldn't be in the relationship anymore. I broke up with her on a plane (I left this a bit unclear in my article) after she had really hurt and embarrassed me. We said some mean things to each other. I regret some of them, but I was very angry and frustrated at the time. Then she left me at the airport, I had a meltdown, and I ended up in the emergency room.
She ended up very upset with the way she was portrayed in the article, but she had specifically asked me to leave out the mean things we said. She said it made her look like she broke up with me because I was autistic.
In reality, I had begged her to learn more about autism because she was always getting angry with me when I wasn't disguising all of my autistic behavior. When she met Alex, she realized that I was, well, an Aspie. I think she thought it was a very minor diagnosis. Anyway, it didn't click with her until she met someone else with AS.
From that point on it was very evident that she was completely disgusted with me and she made a big, public show of it. I was ashamed, and embarrassed and very, very angry.
I told her I hated her. In the moment, I did.
After the article was published, she told me that I was a sociopath and would probably go on a murder spree one day. I had told her many, many times that I there was nothing that caused me more emotional and psychological grief than being called a sociopath.
I then had another meltdown. Ugh, I really don't like that word.
Does that sound like sociopathy?
My ex-girlfriend and I used to get into arguments because she was always perceiving criticism in things that I would say that had nothing to do with her. She was very insecure.
For instance, she fell asleep in one of my favorite movies because she hadn't slept well the night before. She didn't see what all the fuss was about, or why I loved the movie so much. I told her she should watch it again, because me and my family loved it so much and I really wanted to share my enthusiasm with her. She responded by saying, "I'm not intellectually inferior just because I didn't like it. Your family isn't better than me just because I didn't like it. I have a right to my own opinions. I'm so tired of this!"
Nearly ALL of our conversations went this way. When I said I wasn't surprised to discover that someone we knew was a pothead, she said, "Oh, so I'm stupid because I didn't pick up on it?"
When I would try to explain that she was making inferences, she would only get more angry. I would tell her that she was not making sense, that I was completely confused, and wasn't the slightest bit emotionally invested in a meaningless argument.
She was so sensitive to perceived criticism that I just kind of gave up and played along as best as I could. However, she could tell when I was placating her, and would accuse me of being heartless and cold.
I got to the point that I was feeling so guilty and confused all the time that I just couldn't be in the relationship anymore. I broke up with her on a plane (I left this a bit unclear in my article) after she had really hurt and embarrassed me. We said some mean things to each other. I regret some of them, but I was very angry and frustrated at the time. Then she left me at the airport, I had a meltdown, and I ended up in the emergency room.
She ended up very upset with the way she was portrayed in the article, but she had specifically asked me to leave out the mean things we said. She said it made her look like she broke up with me because I was autistic.
In reality, I had begged her to learn more about autism because she was always getting angry with me when I wasn't disguising all of my autistic behavior. When she met Alex, she realized that I was, well, an Aspie. I think she thought it was a very minor diagnosis. Anyway, it didn't click with her until she met someone else with AS.
From that point on it was very evident that she was completely disgusted with me and she made a big, public show of it. I was ashamed, and embarrassed and very, very angry.
I told her I hated her. In the moment, I did.
After the article was published, she told me that I was a sociopath and would probably go on a murder spree one day. I had told her many, many times that I there was nothing that caused me more emotional and psychological grief than being called a sociopath.
I then had another meltdown. Ugh, I really don't like that word.
Does that sound like sociopathy?
I would really appreciate some advice and insight into this situation, as I'm still struggling with it. Thanks.
_________________
You may know me from my column here on WrongPlanet. I'm also writing a book for AAPC. Visit my Facebook page for links to articles I've written for Autism Speaks and other websites.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/JohnScott ... 8723228267
20 Nov 2011, 2:05 pm
fraac wrote:
Why were you upset? You say it bothered you even before your girlfriend called you that. Do you recall the first time it bothered you?
Asperger Syndrome has features of social and emotional dysfunction at it's core.
"Sociopath" is a word that plays on my deepest autistic insecurity, namely that I am emotionally inferior and incapable of having a successful loving relationship.
I don't know about other Aspies, but there is no more hurtful thing a person could say to me than to suggest that I am incapable of love and compassion.
I fail to see how that isn't offensive, and I fail to see how you can believe it to be a neutral label.
_________________
You may know me from my column here on WrongPlanet. I'm also writing a book for AAPC. Visit my Facebook page for links to articles I've written for Autism Speaks and other websites.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/JohnScott ... 8723228267
20 Nov 2011, 2:06 pm
Tambourine-Man wrote:
Ok, it is like this...
My ex-girlfriend and I used to get into arguments because she was always perceiving criticism in things that I would say that had nothing to do with her. She was very insecure.
For instance, she fell asleep in one of my favorite movies because she hadn't slept well the night before. She didn't see what all the fuss was about, or why I loved the movie so much. I told her she should watch it again, because me and my family loved it so much and I really wanted to share my enthusiasm with her. She responded by saying, "I'm not intellectually inferior just because I didn't like it. Your family isn't better than me just because I didn't like it. I have a right to my own opinions. I'm so tired of this!"
Nearly ALL of our conversations went this way. When I said I wasn't surprised to discover that someone we knew was a pothead, she said, "Oh, so I'm stupid because I didn't pick up on it?"
When I would try to explain that she was making inferences, she would only get more angry. I would tell her that she was not making sense, that I was completely confused, and wasn't the slightest bit emotionally invested in a meaningless argument.
She was so sensitive to perceived criticism that I just kind of gave up and played along as best as I could. However, she could tell when I was placating her, and. Would accuse me of being heartless and cold.
I got to the point that I was feeling so guilty and confused all the time that I just couldn't be in the relationship anymore. I broke up with her on a plane (I left this a bit unclear in my article) after she had really hurt and embarrassed me. We said some mean things to each other. I regret some of them, but I was very angry and frustrated at the time. Then she left me at the airport, I had a meltdown, and I ended up in the emergency room.
She ended up very upset with the way she was portrayed in the article, but she had specifically asked me to leave out the mean things we said.
After the article was published, she told me that I was a sociopath and would probably go on a murder spree one day. I had told her many, many times that I there was nothing that caused me more emotional and psychological grief than being called a sociopath.
I then had another meltdown. Ugh, I really don't like that word.
Does that sound like sociopathy?
My ex-girlfriend and I used to get into arguments because she was always perceiving criticism in things that I would say that had nothing to do with her. She was very insecure.
For instance, she fell asleep in one of my favorite movies because she hadn't slept well the night before. She didn't see what all the fuss was about, or why I loved the movie so much. I told her she should watch it again, because me and my family loved it so much and I really wanted to share my enthusiasm with her. She responded by saying, "I'm not intellectually inferior just because I didn't like it. Your family isn't better than me just because I didn't like it. I have a right to my own opinions. I'm so tired of this!"
Nearly ALL of our conversations went this way. When I said I wasn't surprised to discover that someone we knew was a pothead, she said, "Oh, so I'm stupid because I didn't pick up on it?"
When I would try to explain that she was making inferences, she would only get more angry. I would tell her that she was not making sense, that I was completely confused, and wasn't the slightest bit emotionally invested in a meaningless argument.
She was so sensitive to perceived criticism that I just kind of gave up and played along as best as I could. However, she could tell when I was placating her, and. Would accuse me of being heartless and cold.
I got to the point that I was feeling so guilty and confused all the time that I just couldn't be in the relationship anymore. I broke up with her on a plane (I left this a bit unclear in my article) after she had really hurt and embarrassed me. We said some mean things to each other. I regret some of them, but I was very angry and frustrated at the time. Then she left me at the airport, I had a meltdown, and I ended up in the emergency room.
She ended up very upset with the way she was portrayed in the article, but she had specifically asked me to leave out the mean things we said.
After the article was published, she told me that I was a sociopath and would probably go on a murder spree one day. I had told her many, many times that I there was nothing that caused me more emotional and psychological grief than being called a sociopath.
I then had another meltdown. Ugh, I really don't like that word.
Does that sound like sociopathy?
Firstly, something that strikes me is that Kat must be very hard on herself as a rule...why else would she expect herself to have a special radar to pick up on every deceit (like the pothead) that trots across her path?
She is also (from personal experience) very free with the word "sociopath" used as a pejorative - something I just do not like, there are plenty of rich, colourful cathartic words for labelling objectionable behaviours, there is no need to start co-opting psych diagnoses instead. Besides, the "folk terms" (if you like) tend to communicate more in practical terms.
Personally I can assure you that it has never even occurred to me that you might go on any kind of "murder spree" or adopt serial killing as a hobby at some point, and I have seen both of those possibilities in other people.
As a matter of fact the majority of psycho/sociopaths never directly kill anyone anyway, so it's all an invalid argument.
I cannot judge an argument I did not witness between people I do not know, but I suspect you would BOTH feel a lot better, and learn a lot more, if she had opted for telling you that you were (for example only, I can't guess the context) a "spoiled, selfish, insensitive b*stard".
On the other hand I do not think you should have put any mention of your break up in the article, and I can see why she would want to wring your neck for it. For future reference, unless in collaboration, with the consent of the other party, that stuff is best kept private.
20 Nov 2011, 2:09 pm
Tambourine-Man wrote:
Asperger Syndrome has features of social and emotional dysfunction at it's core.
"Sociopath" is a word that plays on my deepest autistic insecurity, namely that I am emotionally inferior and incapable of having a successful loving relationship.
I don't know about other Aspies, but there is no more hurtful thing a person could say to me than to suggest that I am incapable of love and compassion.
I fail to see how that isn't offensive, and I fail to see how you can believe it to be a neutral label.
"Sociopath" is a word that plays on my deepest autistic insecurity, namely that I am emotionally inferior and incapable of having a successful loving relationship.
I don't know about other Aspies, but there is no more hurtful thing a person could say to me than to suggest that I am incapable of love and compassion.
I fail to see how that isn't offensive, and I fail to see how you can believe it to be a neutral label.
It is offensive, as above, I do not like the co-opting of psych terms as pejoratives...but propriety begins at home...if you hate the term so much you should not throw it around at others every time you are not best pleased...
20 Nov 2011, 2:11 pm
Your insecurity isn't autistic, it's comorbid. That's why I find it interesting.
Your girlfriend had issues. Lots of NTs have triggers for totally random stuff from their childhoods. They're like unexploded ordnance. You're young, you'll do better next time.
edit: not just NTs, evidently. So you can relate to her.
20 Nov 2011, 2:13 pm
Zeraeph wrote:
Firstly, something that strikes me is that Kat must be very hard on herself as a rule...why else would she expect herself to have a special radar to pick up on every deceit (like the pothead) that trots across her path?
She is also (from personal experience) very free with the word "sociopath" used as a pejorative - something I just do not like, there are plenty of rich, colourful cathartic words for labelling objectionable behaviours, there is no need to start co-opting psych diagnoses instead. Besides, the "folk terms" (if you like) tend to communicate more in practical terms.
Personally I can assure you that it has never even occurred to me that you might go on any kind of "murder spree" or adopt serial killing as a hobby at some point, and I have seen both of those possibilities in other people.
As a matter of fact the majority of psycho/sociopaths never directly kill anyone anyway, so it's all an invalid argument.
I cannot judge an argument I did not witness between people I do not know, but I suspect you would BOTH feel a lot better, and learn a lot more, if she had opted for telling you that you were (for example only, I can't guess the context) a "spoiled, selfish, insensitive b*stard".
On the other hand I do not think you should have put any mention of your break up in the article, and I can see why she would want to wring your neck for it. For future reference, unless in collaboration, with the consent of the other party, that stuff is best kept private.
Actually, that is very helpful. I'd much rather be spoiled and selfish than a sociopath. Spoiled and selfish I can deal with.
I have often put my public life on display. We were still talking to each other and trying to work things out when Part I was published. She told me that she didn't like where I was going with the article, and didn't want me to give it a happy ending when it clearly did not have one. She wanted me to include the breakup, but exclude all the mean things we said. I did.
She was upset, and never would have been happy with the article. I had several people, including my therapist, approve the article and say it was very balanced.
I'm proud of the article, but I was so upset that Kat didn't like it, because I tried really hard to make the best out of the situation. I wanted to include all the horrible details, but I didn't.
I couldn't even enjoy the article's success because I was so upset that Kat didn't like it.
_________________
You may know me from my column here on WrongPlanet. I'm also writing a book for AAPC. Visit my Facebook page for links to articles I've written for Autism Speaks and other websites.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/JohnScott ... 8723228267
20 Nov 2011, 2:17 pm
> Why will an aspie go into meltdown upon being told things?
> A thing is either true or it's not. You can't say anything to change that.
> Aspies are rational so they can see that the world is as it is, regardless of how it's said to be.
OK, here's the deal. I'm overwhelmingly aspie. I also have ADD(-PI). I'm still trying to figure out where the boundary lies, if there's even a meaningful boundary at all. Maybe that makes a difference compared to "pure" autism, maybe it doesn't, maybe it's just a difference of magnitude. But I (and I strongly suspect, Tambourine Man) get really upset by some things, regardless of how objectively irrational the reaction might be.
I might come across like Spock to someone who's NT, but it's mostly because I've been so egregiously wrong interpreting the emotions of others and trying to think of the right thing to say on so many occasions, I've learned to just dig a moat, pull up the drawbridge, and try to avoid doing it at all because it's a safer strategy from the goal of not leaving a trail of angry, insulted people in my wake who can't understand how I could just get bored of them, or be too stressed out by life in general to even contemplate anything that looks like a "real" relationship.
I like Tambourine Man's way of qualifying "acting" and can totally relate to it -- when I'm upset, I'm acting, but I'm not acting upset... I'm pretending to not be livid, and actively biting my tongue because I have enough methylphenidate or amphetamine in my bloodstream to keep me aware that I'm likely to regret totally letting go and unleashing whatever I really want to say to them. So I go to the bathroom and throw a silent tantrum, or get mad and just leave (and throw a loud, vocal tantrum at nobody in particular once I'm safely anonymous on the freeway and nobody can hear me).
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
|
borderline personality disorder
in Bipolar, Tourettes, Schizophrenia, and other Psychological Conditions |
12 Jul 2025, 5:58 pm |
|
People who get mad about psychosis around autism are annoyin
in Bipolar, Tourettes, Schizophrenia, and other Psychological Conditions |
18 May 2025, 3:05 am |
| Platform for Smart People - autism research project |
23 Jul 2025, 10:32 am |
| How old do people think I am? |
07 Jul 2025, 1:27 am |
