Being ignored by NTs & different rules applied to AS peo

Post Reply New Topic

Hi there . Newbie, first post - and, as I'm 'different', I've decided to go straight into general autism discussion rather than starting at 'getting to know you', as what I want to say is suitable for the general autism place and I thought post here, "why not?".

So straight off (doubtless around several tangents first ).

I've been occasionally reading parts of this website and (usually in full) some of the threads on this site over the last few months, although never registering or posting. (As regards the registration process itself and the 'rules' of the site, doubtless I'll have my own things to say about those at some point in the future - you can't wait! )

I'd welcome views from "neuro-typicals" about this (who will simply have to bear with me and wade through it, whilst AS readers demonstrate ability to read attentively and make their way through this post with ease). Views sought as to why my NT colleagues apparently didn't hear what I said and/or totally ignored me.
What's brought me here is another occasion at work earlier today (I'm one of the 'lucky' ones to not only have AS - only diagnosed quite recently - but to be in work (and I'll doubtless share my own experiences over various difficulties of securing employment, how (almost certainly) NT recruitment staff make assumptions about people they see and a failure to understand that discriminates and how this is reinforced in the job application process etc.etc., how they treat people with AS whilst being totally unaware and probably unable to be aware that that is how they are treating them )).

Anyway, this probably leads nicely into the reason for(?), or otherwise the issue in, this post. Namely, another instance where three of my colleagues (all of whom happened to be female) happened to go into the kitchen where I happened to go into as well. They started having a conversation (one of those! ) about a matter that was not overtly and completely small talk but one whose topic did interest me somewhat and a topic on which I do have a view and it was one I wished to share.

They were talking (sometimes over each other) but about this issue - what type of food they liked. They were not talking in any depth of course, but I had my own 'throw-away' comment, relevant to the discussion, that I wanted to throw in. I just talked around the same time as one of the others (seemingly) trying to get into the conversation did. And they all ignored me - and all three of them then continued, enthusiastically, chatting among each other, seemingly blissfully unaware that I was there and as if they had not even heard me speak at all. I tried again, again at what seemed a suitable point, as it didn't seem to be disrupting or interrupting the conversation and they still continued enthusiastically talking among each other, the three of them.

I thought (possibly even said under my breath, but, if so, it wasn't heard as there was no reaction to it from the three), "well, if you are not going to listen to me, then I'll just go" and, at that, and my (failed) attempts to enter the conversation, I left the room and rejoined the work room.

Since I have been fully aware that I have AS, I have noticed that this happens and, with one of my current Asperger interests being Asperger Syndrome itself, I am aware of why it happens. I do not see (except only the totally obvious i.e. smiling means happiness, crying means someone is upset) body language. Apparently people are giving 'cues' through that, as to the appropriate time to 'interrupt' (or enter) a conversation, and way more besides. It's all scripted, false and, instead of giving your true opinions, you're (sometimes) expected to say what they want you to say, to make them feel happy and satisfy their own self-egos and self-importance, rather than telling them, honestly, what you think (of their tactless purchase of an expensive designer bag for instance. Not that that precise situation has happened to me, it was just an illustration from somewhere I've read, but I digress).
And they (apparently) think we are egotistic? From our own unwitting behaviour, of talking too much about what interests us (for instance). (And then totally fail to communicate that thought of theirs to us - but anyway...! !... )
I clearly have a lot to get off...

To get to the point, I usually find it difficult, if not nigh-impossible, to enter a conversation between other people. I can't see body language and therefore do not receive any information at the point at which it is appropriate to enter the conversation. As a result, apparently if I speak whilst others are still speaking (and I mean by spoken words as opposed to 'speaking' by body language - that does not 'speak' at all to me), I'm almost certain to have picked the wrong millisecond and they'll think I am rudely interrupting them (and they'll be offended by that, but again totally fail to communicate that fact to me, as their body 'language' 'communication' is totally ineffective). As a result of me not wishing rudely to interrupt, I'd learned, through numerous occasions of being rebuffed, and totally unware that I was learning it, the appropriate point to try to enter a conversation, as to when people would talk to me, for example when everyone had stopped speaking. (I'm aware now that this often leaves me hanging around, and 'hovering', in the background, waiting for everyone to stop talking so that I can enter the conversation).

The reason is this: It's because people subconsciously perceive the body language of others. Apparently AS people are even worse off than blind people in all this, as even blind people (some source online that I could doubtless find again and point you to, once I get round to doing so), apparently even blind people perceive other's body language. (Of course, all NT people perceive other NT people's body language, whilst they struggle to interpret the body language of AS people (perhaps because we are unable to communicate any).)
On this occasion, I was talking (at what seemed appropriate occasions), in a way relevant to the subject (what food they liked) - of course no NTs even think about this or write about it like I'm now doing in this way! - and giving a throw-away and brief opinion of my own.
Yet they still totally ignored me and appeared to fail to hear what I had said. My tone of voice was fine, I spoke neither more loudly nor quietly than the rest of them, it was a throw-away and light remark, not in any way 'academic' or professor-talk, it seemed to be timed right and the same as someone else trying to gain entry to the conversation but apparently they heard them and never me and then all three of them enthusiastically talked among themselves and as if I did not exist.

My question - particularly interested to hear from NT people about this - is what was I doing wrong?

Was it still the timing? Did I fail to raise my left eyebrow, or whatever, I have no clue, at the right second in order to indicate I wanted to enter the chat? I tried looking at them (without staring), looking towards them, smiling without being overly doing it, not smiling, widening my eyes there, putting them back to normal, nothing, nothing seems to be recognised by them as to "I am wanting to talk. Please listen to me." They don't turn in my direction; only towards each other, yet they and the other (NT) person entering appears to be doing the same as me. But, still, no response! (And they (NTs in general, not these particular ones) accuse us of not listening, failing to respond and being aloof. In fact, it simply takes my brain a second or so longer to react and more difficult for me to divert my attention off the task I am doing and onto them.)

Was it me? Do I smell or something? Was it the subject matter of what I was saying, namely "I like pasta and noodles too" (in response when one had said they did and one said they didn't like that)? Was it that they think I am boring? And that, because they have occasionally listened to monologues from me on other occasions, they therefore now subconsciously subscribe that to me and therefore unwittingly fail to hear anything when I speak. Is it because they don't consider me "popular"? Research shows that even if people are talking about the same thing, they'll automatically acknowledge the person whom they think is interesting and 'popular' and not the one who isn't. (Or something of that nature.)They automatically turn in the other person's direction. (Reinforced by body language signals connecting between each of them.) Or was it the fact they were all women and thus talking about 'women's things' (such as favourite foods???) and didn't want a man to 'interrupt'. Was it 'girl's group' time and I was totally unaware of that fact and that unwritten social rule (that I still, today, have no awareness that it even exists)? Was I missing that 'context' (the fact the conversation was being conducted in the context of it being 'girl's group time', and that I am totally unaware of it being that context) and, because I have AS, I am context-blind about that. Or was it something else, of which I may be unaware and, if so, what?

Views/answers/guidance/assistance as to the above will be appreciated.

This also leads me onto the situation of the rules apparently been applied in a different way to NT people and to AS people. It seems, in all of this, NT people can do no wrong. After recently trying to enter one conversation and doing so, unbeknown to me, at the wrong moment (another social faux pas), only to receive an indignant reaction, I apologised and then (perhaps this was wrong! I should have left it at the apology) explained that I couldn't see body language so that was why I entered inappropriately: I had Asperger's. Instead of reacting with understanding or apologising for their own reaction as to something that I could not perceive, the reply was that Asperger's is "no excuse".

Of course, I meekly agreed that it wasn't any excuse and retreated.

However, having thought about this and considered it, I have wondered about why it isn't an excuse. (Having heard "it's no excuse", I should have replied (in a normal, non-threatening way, "Why isn't it?" (A) It's still never been explained to me why, in this circumstance (namely one where I interrupted wrongly through no fault of my own, namely my inability to pick up body language cues, which is my disability and therefore isn't my fault), why was it no excuse? (And if it wasn't an "excuse", was it a "defence" instead though?!?? Or was it "justified", even if not providing an "excuse" (whatever that word might mean)?) and (B) If I had asked them why (surely the reasonable question of a person who honestly does not know - I'm not being thick, I honestly and realistically do not know), if I had asked why, doubtless that would have inflamed the situation even more so, quite rightly, I just left and didn't even ask. As it would only be wrong to do so. Thus, I am left in my unsatisfactory situation of still lacking the knowledge as to why and unable, because of social conventions, is even ask the question in that social group - or else it's me 'talking about Asperger's' yet again and boring and irritating them. Then they wonder why we sit in the corner of the classroom at school saying nothing, or not staying anything in a meeting or otherwise lest it be the 'wrong' thing to say.

Hopefully this post might even increase awareness of the situation and thus create understanding - we can live in hope!

So, well if Asperger's isn't an excuse, what, I wonder, of the opposite situation? Does that fail to provide any "excuse" either?
As far as I'm concerned the three NT people all ignored me and acted as if I wasn't there. I could well have been offended by that - although actually I just found it quite amusing, being aware of my condition and the reasons for their ignoring - I must admit I quite like watching NT people nowadays (not in the sense of staring at them) and watching the bizarre ways in which they behave. (I do also rather enjoy being a little mischievous at times nowadays - me never doing anything illegal or anything that would cause serious indignant reaction - but just watching how NTs react to certain things.)

I'm sure that, if we apply the unwritten 'rules' - or perhaps there is even an unwritten rule to the unwritten rule and this provides an exemption for it than exempts NTs - surely the majority of people would accept that ignoring someone and treating them as if they weren't there might amount to a lack of respect and therefore be unacceptable? They certainly weren't interested in my views!
Why is that not 'inappropriate'? If Asperger's provides no excuse to me to fail to see body language (and thus interrupt wrongly) why does the lack of Asperger's not provide no excuse for NTs? "We ignored you because we failed to notice that you wanted to enter the conversation." In effect, "the reason we failed to notice was because we don't have Asperger's syndrome and therefore because of our lack of Asperger's syndrome did not notice your indications that you wanted to input into the chat." They don't have Asperger's. Well, the fact that you don't have Asperger's - that's no excuse!!

(Perhaps that's 'acceptable', somehow, though - because, unbeknown to me, there is an unwritten rule which exempts NTs from the 'requirement' of having to comply with the 'no excuse' rule - and the 'rules' thus made up on the spur of the moment and when it suits. Such a hypocritical, double-standard, inconsistent and, above all, dishonest society that purports to claim certain things apply when they don't and immediately a similar situation arises but the boot is on the other foot, a rule is then found to override and provide an exemption from the previous apparent rule.)

I also muse about how this sits in conjunction with discrimination legislation. I am sure that the thought about this, and well as my musings in relation to it, would never even be thought of, let alone considered, by any NT person. In my country, it is now the Equality Act. And, broadly, my thought was (although I have not gone into it to the extent of looking it all up in detail and updating myself as to what it actually and exactly says - yet of course, more fool me, this is written rules, i.e. it is not how society operates) it applies to less favourable treatment of someone because of their (actual or perceived?!) disability. Surely, applying a certain "rule" to me - Asperger's that's no excuse - but failing to apply the same strict standard to those who lack that disability amounts to less favourable treatment of me? Or maybe there's some unwritten convention that just exempts NTs from all of this. Anyway... that was another aside!

Sorry if, in my first post, I come across to anyone as creating a divide between AS people and NTs (not my own terminology). (And who would want to be "typical"? I wouldn't!) It's not intended to create such a divide, but merely to cause debate around the issues and I've gone for my truthful, completely honest, straight-up approach again! Very admirable and, yes, egotistic and arrogant if you wish! Arrogant = superior. Quite rightly so!

I'm sure you'll hear from me more - sometimes long posts, of serious detailed discussion, and sometimes an insightful one-liner post. Perhaps as part of my current Asperger interest in autism and Asperger's syndrome. Or perhaps on (one of) my other special interests about the special interests of Asperger's. I quite like discussing others' special interests (as long as they'll legal) and doubtless I will be happy to sit here and listen with interest and attention to anyone talking about theirs, never getting bored, annoyed or irritated as the deficiencies of NTs cause them to do. Ooh... that was a pointed barb! Sorry if that truth is too harsh to bear.

Of course, I've spent all night (not literally "all" , but much of the evening) on this post - typical Aspie!

Sorry I forgot - and apologies for my first post being really really long - longer than most - I hope to keep it shorter in future - one thing about the Equality Act is that "discrimination" can sometimes be legal if it can be "objectively justified".

I'm sure that could be used to provide a useful exemption for NT people, based on the "objective" views of most people (namely happening to be NT people).

NT here who made it to the end

Reading the first part of your post I had come up with a number of reasons why your colleagues may not have responded to you. Then I got to the part where one of them said 'it's no excuse' and it became apparent that they are just rude and ignorant (or at least that individual is).
I think you should report them to your boss. They are making you feel uncomfortable and they aren't being understanding of your disability.

It's fun to jump right in. I did too. So....hello.

I'll take that as an invitation (since I am NT)


uh oh. That headed south pretty quickly



I will try. This attempt will be compromised by not having been there.



.....



An here's where my attempt is compromised by not having been there. Only by being there would I be able to tell if they were oblivious to your interjection because it just didn't register or if they were ignoring you on purpose because of negative feelings towards you.

......

It's a telling digression. They may be aware of your low opinion of them and therefore not inclined to include you.

...

That is a problem.



There have been several threads on this topic. It does seem that the communication issues are between neurologies more than anything else and that AS people have a much easier time interpreting other AS people just as NT people have a much easier time interpreting NT people.


There are two main possibilities of what went wrong here. I have no way of knowing which it was:

1)You didn't register with them because they were so engrossed with their own conversations in their small group. Sometimes small groups can be impenetrable by all by the most loudly extroverted. If this was the problem, talking to individuals rather than trying to penetrate a group can work better.

2)They were ignoring you on purpose because they didn't want to include you.



I don't know. But the best way to penetrate a small group is to already have befriended the members as individuals. That way you are considered a member of their group (cue gawer ). If you don't usually make an attempt to talk to them but made an exception this one time, they are unlikely to let you in to the conversation.


unless you actually do smell, it wasn't that. And the comment of also liking pasta and noodles fits perfectly. It wasn't that.

That's possible. Without being there in person and seeing your interactive history with them, there's no way to know.

It could be a variation on that, meaning that you had made no prior attempt to befriend them and so weren't percieved as being in their group.



That's possible, although food tends to be a popular discussion topic for men and women where I am. But then again, that's pretty culture-specific. Where you are there may be stricter gender rules. I just don't know.

.....

There is definately hostility among some NTs about the idea of bringing up Aspergers as a reason or excuse for a social gaffe. This will unfortunately increase as awareness of Aspergers increases. WrongPlanet will be a friendlier place for you in that regard.


It's all down to whether they like you or not. If they like you, it will be accepted. If they don't, it won't. I realize that this is an emotional and inconsistent reaction and you can and should rail against it here. But cutting people slack or not is generally done based on feelings.

...


The unwritten rule is that people will accomodate you if they like you and they won't if they don't.



Discrimination legislation covers official acts. But interpersonal actions (outside of actual crimes) aren't covered by legislation. You can legislate that everybody be treated equally by the law but you can't legislate that everybody be friendly uniformly to everybody else.




yea....about that..... if your co-workers have perceived that you harbor "stupid NT" feelings about them (not that they would use the term 'NT'), then they will refuse to include you in conversations purely out of spite. A lot of those feelings came through in this post and it is unlikely you have managed to hide them entirely at work. But maybe you have,



yea...about that....your coworkers won't want to include you if they think you are deigning to bless them with your conversation because they are suddenly not talking about something you deem stupid.

I sincerely hope that your coworkers were just oblivious or closed off and you could penetrate the group by talking to them first as individuals.

Sorry, I've confused matters. (Again! )

The "no excuse" thing related to a totally separate incident, that happened much earlier.

The 'ignoring' today (technically yesterday as just gone past midnight here), which I think is due to my colleagues' subconsious perception of other's body language (i.e. I don't have any), was different people to the one who commented "no excuse". I sort of mused on about that afterwards on my post!
(In the context of: well, why does it provide an excuse to my colleagues' behaviour of (completely unaware that they were doing it) ignoring me?)

I'm essentially seeking an answer to the part of around two paragraphs in the about middle of my post, as to what I did wrong (that resulted in my failure to successfully enter the conversation) or whether it was 'girl's talk time' (and what occasions in my society are ones where it is girl's together time and those where it is not - this follows me recently going to a party and, thanks to someone who only recently knew of my condition, getting to know, for the first time ever in my life (I'm in my 30s) that, apparently, if you are at a party, you are not supposed to hang round in the same area or a similar one - and stay with the same people (this happened to be a woman) for longer than 10 minutes - apparently half way though this - and 'they're not being rude' - the woman needs, at a totally random moment and previously without any indication beforehand (I only knew this time as she explained it to me), it becomes girl's time and she goes off and dances with a group of ladies. And leaves me all alone for an eternity - although not being rude to me or disrespectful , leaving me hanging there (waiting for her to return three songs later). Of course not!

Having ran off around the houses again - let me get you back to the point of what I did wrong in trying to enter the (impromptu) conversation this afternoon?

The best way to enter a group conversation is to be perceived as a member of the group. You can accomplish this by talking to the women as individuals at other times. If you usually don't talk to them at all but tried to interject this one time, that's why it failed.

If you usually do talk to them at other times and generally have a friendly rapport with them, then it was 'girl time'.

hmm, NT women are strange creatures. I would probably consider their behaviour as quite rude if confronted with a similar situation. I wonder if the hierarchy rules which apply to teenage girls also applies to women. I haven't really investigated it, but it is quite logical to think so. Basically if the same rules apply, these women have formed a social group and you're trying to invite yourself into it - which is a no-no. The only way to enter such a group is if you develop rapport with someone who is near the top of the hierarchy. They will invite you into the circle. Another way is to develop rapport with each of these women individually. However, they may not accept you even after all that effort. If NTs see no value in you as a person (you don't contribute anything of value to their egos) they will ignore you. And yes gender can have an impact on interactions. In the workplace I have noticed that NTs do not really interact with the opposite gender. For instance, at my first place of work it was very much a boys club and more recently at a Christmas party I attended the guys removed themselves from the women.

Firstly, I want to say that I have been in many situations where I have found it hard to interrupt (and have hovered), so I can understand your frustrations. Some women love the sound of their own voice and will dominate conversations (it sounds like a boring social-chit-chat self-monologue). It seems to me that you're too focused on doing things right. Over-thinking things makes one exhausted - And at the end of the day does it truly matter what they think? What's the value? How does it improve the quality of your life?

I am sure NTs do not give as much thought as we do to upsetting others. We also have a tendency to over-apologise and appease others (even in instances where the other person is clearly in the wrong). This doesn't serve us because it tells the other person that they do not have to take you seriously. They also do not have to take responsibility for their actions when you apologise to them - you're the one who has openly admitted to being in the 'wrong'. If you look at NTs, they often do not voice that they're wrong nor do they want to acknowledge that they can do no wrong. Double-standards. Also, you can't assume that NTs will know what it means to have Asperger's, so to them it probably is just a word (with no meaning to them) and is 'no excuse'. You also can't make them understand or empathise. You're right to say that ignorance is no excuse, so they shouldn't be let off the hook either. NTs are only let off the hook because nothing is done to correct them - whose fault is that? If people are, for whatever reason, displeased with me they'll let me know (even when it's for a stupid reason). They're assertive. Fear (the belief that we must do 'good') is the only thing that seems to hold us back.

Of course NTs are going to say we're egoistical (they say stupid things to anyone they don't agree with). Again, they just don't want to look at their own ugly reflection (avoidance) and find it easier to point out the fault others (to feel better about their insecure selves). It's best to learn not to take it personally. I would really be tempted to play with these women and turn their own words back on them, and poke at their insecurities a bit (note: I have found that some of my unresolved bitterness (pain) has been coming up to surface lately, so I am in the process of working through that. Some of that bitterness probably comes out in my writing, so feel free to ignore some of what I say in terms of being vindictive).

Last edited by Sare on 15 Jan 2014, 8:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Ahhh sorry that was my incorrect assumption that you were speaking about the same incident.
OK my best guesses are a) they were being deliberately rude b) they genuinely didn't hear you either time amongst their chatter c) they weren't expecting what you said and didn't quite know how to respond.
If I'm completely honest making a single statement about what food you like isn't a typical entry point into a group conversation (even though it was on topic). HOWEVER a slight (or even major) lack of social fluency would not usually cause someone to completely ignore someone else so I doubt that was much of a contributing factor.

Just read your post regarding parties. I found it really helpful to read books on 'small-talk/chit-chat' because it does cover how to converse with others at parties and gatherings, and what the social expectations are. Yea, you generally converse with people for 10-20 minutes and then make some form of excuse (toilet, drink, I need to see this person before they leave and other such stuff) and move on to another group. Those books also cover what topics you CAN talk about with people and what topics to avoid.

[quote="Janissy"][/quote]

I've just given a long reply to nearly each point in your response... and then my finger slipped on backspace key and I lost all of it!
However, perhaps it will force me to give just the gist here. I get on with my colleagues and don't have any problems with any of them as people. Your post contained interesting points, but I'll have to reply at some later point (if I get round to it!). Suffice to say, it's a simplification to say people are "stupid NTs" - while the more I look at it the more convinced I am that the autistic approach is, in many (not all) ways, a better approach, it's, as ever, more complicated than that (and, like AS people, different NT people are different from each other).

Laters!

Yes I'm probably going through a bitterness approach (of how much I am 'rejected' by 'everyone else' (who is NT) in my society, in social situations - though it is inadvertent and unintended 'rejection') - and this website is the outlet for it at the current time. As regards turning their words back on them, as I already said, I sometimes like to be a little bit mischievous (on the right side of the line though!) as to watching how NTs react - or how they react when other NTs say certain things, which is always illogical (! !). Although: I think turning words back on them would be (without me intending any offence to yourself and I am sure none taken) possibly the worst thing to do - it always, in my experience, causes rupture and people don't like it*! (Although, yes you can poke fun in a humorous light-hearted way, and I always try to do anything (when appropriate of course!) in a friendly, joking way and it almost always seems to go down the right way.)

I think I'm probably reading too much into the 'being ignored' situation, just I am prone to do on other things! You can guarantee no NT would ever consider it in the depth I do! I think - relax, chill and hold back! Don't analyse it (or don't try to, at least), although trying to find an explanation for or way around the 'problem' I've given.

At least I'm learning now about how to edit posts and where the 'quote' button is! I'll no doubt come back here later, as it's getting into overnight now in my area. See you!

*That said, other people are more than willing to turn words back on me sometimes! I just stay low and try constantly to avoid any criticism or gaining anyone's wrath.

(I have ADHD, reading all that was torture and pretty much literally hurt... And the laughing emoticons and all the parentheses kept distracting me "ooooh, parenthesis, nobody seems to get that it's 'parenthesis, not parenthese' one of my friends told me I use emoticons a lot gee whiz do I use them that much?")

I have ADHD, and basically while almost any neuro-disability makes a little wiggle room for odd behavior, apparently all of us are supposed to have an end goal of fitting in completely. It doesn't matter that standing still without my hands in my pockets to fidget with the seams and stuff is uncomfortable, I still have to do it. It doesn't matter how badly I want to talk when someone else is already talking, I have to wait. Unfortunately, we don't get free passes on odd behavior, but a little wiggle room at best.

I don't think you did anything wrong, but I wasnt there. It's easier to tell firsthand.

NT women are hard. Really hard. I'm a 15-year-old teen, and I hang out with guys just as much as girls, but I prefer the company of NT guys to NT girls (ADHD guys are the best, IMO.) NT girls are hard to hang out with because they require soooo muuuuuch. Affirmation of this, negation of that, tell me I'm pretty. Etc. body language is everything. "Oooooh, you breathed when that guy entered the room, someone's got a cruuuuuush!" Subtle body language is even more than normal body language.

Overall, women are hard for a lot of people. Including women. Pick yourself up, and try again if you want to get better at gauging when to enter a conversation.

I have developed good enough skills to interpret body language, but not many NT's are masters of body language either and have a 50/50 chance of getting it right as well. People typically learn the other's body language as they get to know them.

Some rules that could be followed:

1. Social or conversational narcissism: Google it if you have to.
2. NT/Aspie doesn't matter. Perception is always going to matter.
3. Forget bringing up Aspergers at work unless you know someone well enough.
4. Intentions usually never matter either. The only thing that a person is going to care about is their perception or feelings.

Yup, I have a mischievous streak too. And yea, I do understand that the aggressive approach I suggested can intimidate the other person and create a bad response (it does create ruptures). I usually am not harsh with others, but I have had experiences where I have had to be that way. In those particular instances I have not cared about creating a rupture because the consequences/repercussions were not that great (e.g. it was not work-related or relationship related). The best way to get over emotional issues, in my experience, is to allow yourself to feel it through to completion. It is, after all, unprocessed stuff stuck in your system.

Hi there. I'm back. Firstly I apologise for the torture. I've been on forums on other websites before - obviously ones that, almost certainly, have mainly NT users - and when I first started on the forums there, I never used any 'emoticons' at all. That was simply because it never occurred to me that that was how people write on forums more generally. More fool me for assuming it was like writing a formal essay at college and not putting emoticons in my posts. After a while though, I took the plunge and put an emoticon in there - on the other websites - and now using emoticons regularly on other sites simply because, to the largely NT readers, it makes sense and tells everyone what emotion you are feeling in saying something - or whether you are posting it not seriously intending it but instead as a jokey comment or whether you are thanking someone and meaning it - for example using a smile after the "thank you".

Having explained all that reason for why my post was written in the way it was, I must admit you've made me re-think about it and many thanks for doing so. On the one hand the emoticons are useful - in the way I described. On the other though, I think of the Equality law in my area, the United Kingdom, and websites, as public fora, are supposed to be accessible to all and make reasonable adjustments or offer alternative formats to some who may not be able to read their content, for example, otherwise. You've made me think about this in the context of the way I posted, and making me think about that is a good thing. I had honestly never realised that someone might have trouble reading all my post in that way. But, now you've told me about it, I can see that, as sometimes I myself have problems continuing to read material for similar reasons. For example, I sometimes, as part of Asperger's special interests, find a certain topic - or certain word related to that topic or certain reference to the topic - to distract my attention away from what I read and back into my special topic again. So, I could be reading an article or post of interest and then someone happens to mention a certain word and I'm off onto thinking about my topic rather than concentrating on what they are writing after that. I have to re-read their writing - and invariably get stuck again at the point where they write that word!

As rather the parentheses, I think this is just the way I write and, I suspect, is related to my Asperger's too. It's my attention to detail and not wanting to miss something out, giving the entire picture, or going off on tangents and round the houses, almost never to reach a final conclusion, or - I think it's just the way my brain works, I have to go logically - according to my logic! - through everything, in order, rather than reaching a final point and just giving the conclusion or gist. It's my 'context blindness' I suspect. And that's why those parentheses were there all the time. So now we both make reasonable adjustments for each other, and my parentheses are a symptom of my Asperger's whilst, at the same time, I ought to be making adjustments and not using them as much in order to assist your own condition! I may have laughed a little at this moment. Many thanks - you've certainly made me think!

Btw, the comments elsewhere in your post, about your ADHD, and about subtle body language, I saw them and read them and they are interesting too.

I don't think I'm now ever going to get to my long reply (referred to above on 16 January at 1.21am). I think we'll be satisfied at the 'gist' I gave, even though it doesn't reflect the complexity of my views and neither of us will ever fully understand. But then again we don't need to and we may get to talking about some of it at some point in the future elsewhere!