Sadism - How far does our lack of empathy go?

Post Reply New Topic

i have empathy

What I mean is a lot of NTs can't put themselves in my shoes. Like I get stared at and even laughed at and just intimidated just because I look a bit shy or a bit nervous, and I thought NTs knew better that the last thing a shy/nervous person wants is to feel intimidated. How would they like it if they were feeling shy or nervous or were having a bad day and they got someone singling them out and making them feel intimidated? I thought they'd think of that first.

I wish people would stop shouting about how lack of empathy "isn't an Asperger's trait" just because it's not a trait they're affected by. It's a spectrum, just because you don't have a certain symptom it doesn't mean the symptom doesn't exist. Don't be so arrogant.

I agree. I wonder if the degree of empathy is related to how aspie someone is.

Another question relating to the sadism thing. A lot of doctors will ask if you've ever tortured any animals as a kid. Do insects, reptiles, and birds count?

Asperger's was discovered by NT's and the diagnostic criteria were probably written by NT's. They don't have the same viewpoint as us. Therefore, I find it likely that our supposed lack of empathy is due to our reduced ability to express it normally, not necessarily a lack of empathy itself. Aspies may have difficulty recognizing emotions in others, but when we do, I think many or even most of us have no trouble "putting ourselves in their shoes".

Read this quote from Wikipedia's article on empathy(not that this is hard proof of anything. Obviously, Autism can effect people in drastically different ways and our understanding is too limited to know this for sure. This is just one opinion).

Rogers et al. suggest that one must differentiate between cognitive empathy and affective empathy when regarding people with Asperger syndrome. They suggest that autistic individuals have less ability to ascertain others' feelings, but demonstrate equal empathy when they are aware of others' states of mind. Autistic and AS people actually have a greater response to stress that they witness others experiencing than neurotypical people do.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression that narrow interests, slight language difficulties and lack of empathy are more common in Aspies who do not meet the requirements for NVLD as a comorbid diagnosis.

So tell me, if NTs had empathy, then how come Autistics (and other individuals with other conditions) get teased and bullied and why are we so misunderstood? If they had empathy, then why can't they use it to imagine what it must be like to be Autistic and put themselves in our shoes then?

Or is it ''OK'' for NTs to pick on those differet from them? In that case, NTs are different from Autistics, so that is why Autistics ''lack empathy'' for NTs? That means it is a common human trait to lack empathy for those different/live with different circumstances. Or is it just OK for NTs to bigot Autistics but Autistics cannot bigot NTs?

NTs take social skills for granted.

Yes, they do. Though do tell them that it was "insects, reptiles and birds", because I'm assuming the qualifier here is "but not mammals," and the distinction is probably important to make.

It is never okay.

And remember, you are generalising. Bullying is not common to all NTs. Thing is, a lot of people (NT or otherwise) lack respect for those different, and use bullying to boost their own egos. It is a human trait -- often people feel empathy for those similar to them, and distrust for those they perceive to be foreign. Racism, sexism, homophobia etcetera are examples of this. Bullying and discrimination are wrong, here, both when aspies do it and NTs do it.

The human mind is complex, and our actions cannot be explained solely by whether or not we lack empathy.

EDIT: my gosh, I hope no-one saw my many post screw-ups!

I've seen Aspies being prejudiced against NTs. We're not immune to it just because we're a minority. Watch yourself: Remember that you don't have to declare yourself superior as a defense to their insistence that you're inferior. You can instead proclaim your equality. Sometimes we forget that third option.

Don't look down on NTs when you see an NT bullying someone or being generally nasty. That's too broad. You should be looking at that specific person, and their specific behavior, and rejecting that--not their whole neurotype. When you see an NT being mean, you should be saying, "That neurotypical person is being a dick," not, "Wow, NTs are dicks." Judge only the specific behavior you see--not the entire category of people. That way lies prejudice. If you don't watch out, you'll bias yourself against a group with many wonderful people in it, and bar yourself from potentially valuable friendships.

A raven is a highly intelligent creature, so birds do count. Reptiles are capable of free will and thinking, so they count as well.

Of course, yes. The distinction is important not because of any difference in intelligence or capacity to feel pain between the species, because mammals are, evolutionarily speaking, closer to us.

It's still wrong and anyone who finds pleassure in torturing birds has a sick mind.

I'm not arguing with you. It is very wrong, no matter which species of animal is victimised.

From a psychological perspective, however, the distinction is important because clearly Shadewraith drew a line between the category of "birds, insects and reptiles" and the category of "mammals". This indicates that he felt more for mammals (which we are more like) than other creatures — and this is something which should be made clear to his doctors in order that they have an understanding of his childhood experiences.

The distinction is whether the animal is capable of suffering. An insect is probably not. A fish, possibly. A bird or a mammal, definitely. I don't know if you've ever studied the ethics of animal research, but that's how researchers determine which animals to use and how to prevent suffering. A researcher using worms doesn't have to supply anesthesia; a researcher using mice does. And if work done on mice can be done on worms, then he isn't allowed to use mice. Etc.