Eye contact evolution

Post Reply New Topic

I play around with why Aspies/Auties cant do 'normal social' things. Call it an obsession.

Eye contact. It triggers an aggressive state, defensive, submissive. Some people walk by me and stare at me and it pisses me off. Others don't, they look at the ground or stare straight ahead.

Now, eye contact attracts girls and girls use it to gauge guys, who they deem as confident and those they don't. Problem is, staring at people is a form of establishing dominance over another person - its submissive. This is why it will make you seem confident or not. Of course, we lose.

In a logical world of equality, you cannot have people running around trying to establish dominance over others. I believe it would make it difficult to establish dominance if people didnt look each other in the eye everytime they walked by someone.

The challenge comes from the eyes - Look into a wild animals eyes and he will start to get upset. Remove the challenge, introduce a better equality (or something)

Thoughts, opinions, opposition, add ons, take offs?

The reason why people with AS are not able to do normal things may have nothing to do with evolution in the sense that people evolve traits in order to survive, but in that evolution, by definition creates deviations of the norm in order for things to evolve. If each new member of the species was born exactly the same as the previous member, nothing could ever evolve. Every new organism would be a clone of itself. Hence, evolution must create mutations and deviations in order for evolution to exist at all.

Hence, we see people born with deformities, and disadvantages as well as advantages. Its all evolution, tinkering with different genes, mutations, and diversity in order to get out different forms of organisms "out there" in order to play a game of "chance" with the results. Now, whether something is an advantage or disadvantage depends solely on the environment.

An evolved bird with waterproof feathers emerging in the desert probably won't gain any advantage, but a waterproof bird evolving in a swamp may have a better chance of passing on their genes. Is one better than the other? Its neither, it just so happened that the mutation "fit" the environment. It's all a game of chance, with the organism and the environment both playing a role in who gets to "win" the evolutionary lottery.

So, the genius with extraordinary social skills is just as much a mutation as the genius with no social skills. Its just that the environment determines who will thrive and who will not. A person may be the most talented football player ever, but if he was born before the game of football existed, he's out of luck. In fact, the best baseball player walking the planet right now may be living in an amazonian tribe, who will never get to utilize his talent because he was born in the "wrong" environment.

People with AS may wither in a society which is socially bustling (modern America), but thrive in a society in which people keep to themselves (think old Germany, or something like that, where socializing was frowned upon in most instances, people kept to themselves, and if you didn't, you were a jerk), in fact in societies who do not pride themselves on socializing, a person with AS would be more likely to thrive because they wouldn't be bogged down with the weight of knowing they were extremely different from everyone else.

So, our deviations may be just a case of evolution creating diversity in the wrong environment. Which doesn't make us "mistakes" in the ordinary sense, for a mistake implies something wrong on the way to getting something right. In evolution there is no right or wrong, only survival. Which is neither right nor wrong, but a matter of chance.

Yeah, maybe I should look into womens eyes more. You have a point. I often look at the ground, etc... Have as long as I can remember.

Steve

"Look into a wild animals eyes and he will start to get upset"

Are you sure?
I'm no expert on wild animal behaviour ( no doubt different species react differently).
In any case, i guess some wild animals are going to get upset with or without the eye-contact.

In my experience domestic animals (in particular, various breeds of dogs- some not so domesticated), remain very placid whilst maintaining eye-contact for some length of time.

It seems to be only humans which put so much stock into eye-contact.
Like you said, in terms of courtship it is used as a guage of compatability. This is understandable, there is some underlying logic.

However, in terms of establishing dominance i fail to see the logic.
You walk past someone on the street or look at someone seated nearby. A flash of eye-contact is made and they look down and then away. You have established dominance. Really? How so?

Wear dark glasses.

Seriously, this is great advice - lol.

They say the eyes are the windows to the soul.
Have you ever wondered why a lot of poker players wear dark glasses?
In the best cases it's not for defensive reasons. Do you really think the top guys are going to let their eyes betray them?
No: it's so they can stare without giving away where they are staring. ( The hands?!)

But i digress.
Anyway, if it pisses you off to be stared at by 'passerbys', then you will find dark glasses a great help.

I think brief eye contact is meant as a sign of acknowledgement of another person.It indicates you are giving them your attention and find them "worth" looking at.The non-verbal or verbal communication that follows the eye contact with someone you dont know or dont know well,lets them know that you see them and are of no threat...smile,wave.It is a form of intamacy .Which is why some aspies may have difficulty with it.It is an incouragement or invitation to move to the next step of intimacy.Something I dont want to incourage,most of the time.

I know when I am out in public and no one seems to look at me,I feel....insignificant.Yet am terrified of the next step,possibe conversation.

The only time I think it is "domineering" is when the glance becomes a stare....that shows "to much" interest...and may mean sexual interest or possible threat.

Growing up, I man brought a 'wolf' to school. We were cautioned not to look into its eyes for long (maintain eye contact) because it would get defensive.

When humans screw off in a heated verbal discussion, squaring each other up, they are eye to eye.

hm.. Maybe eye contact is based out of passion. Its funny, now that I think of it, that I can look people in the eye when I love them or hate them but only during the passion of it. Any other time it bothers me.

Maybe thats why I dislike it? Because, sometimes, I've stared back at people and I can actually do that only when mad... like a month ago, some kid walked by and I could tell he was looking at me. So I looked at him and he was, and he didnt look away. I was angry, during this time, so I kept staring thinking 'wtf is your problem' and finally, he looked away has he would have had to had his head cranked.

The last girl I... loved, I guess, I could look into her eyes no problem. There's only been a very few.

I'm just rambling, if you read any of this I apologize, I'm typing my thoughts out apparently.

The only reason I don't look people in the eye is because I don't like embarrasment.
What I mean is that if I look them in the eye and they look back at me: I think about
if they would laugh at me and say "stop staring at, what are you gay?" or "You creap
me out!" probably what girls would say.

I don't look random people in the eye...because I don't want to be engaged with them. at all. I don't want to smile or say hello or anything else...and eye contact invites them in.

I *do* like to look into the eyes of a person I am in a relationship with....because I can see how they feel. though I can't look for very long...it is just too much.

I guess its just the strangers then - I dont understand why some maintain it when there is no point or what makes them want to fight

I don't understand it, either.

I could guess that the maintainers (I made that word up, thanks) want to force a "hello" or something. which, in my opinion, negates whatever good they felt they were doing, since they are forcing it.

i think it's sorta what Jonathon was saying with the wrong environment.....most of the humans out there are patriarchal...like much of the animal kingdom(ur wolf).....so in this system....males battle to become alpha-male etc to win the hearts of the women of the species... therefore u have humans running around trying to stare each other out n s**t....to fulfill the ancient instincts while wearing modern business suits eheh!

this idealised would lead to an economic system somewhat similar to umm capitalism

ala...in this system....the person who ruthlessy dominates his rivals...gets to the top/gets the girls/gets teh fancy toys!

woo....tends to take the divinity out of the human species...but what the hell right?

for reference...not everywhere is patriarchal....infact the yunnan province in southern china is matriarchal ..so if u went there....prolly not too many stares would be happening..if u were a male anyways eheh...who knows?

(not for a second saying something is better than something else or someone is evil for beating his brothers down to enhance his personal status/ego. just that we tend to be at the mercy of our genetics...tis like a battle between them and our free will to behave differently etc)