02 Jan 2020, 9:39 pm
Has anyone here heard of the "double bind"? You may have to wiki that one if not... it's basically a psychologist term that typically applies to people who are disadvantaged in someway, and in particular those with mental disorders.
Basically, it's a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" conundrum presented to the sufferer... or also described as a paradox of choice towards supposed betterment.
One classic example is when a child or teen is told to "be more spontaneous", but if he/she acts on that advice, they're not longer being spontaneous (technically).
Some more examples that came to mind from my own ASD/HFA experiences in life:
1. Being given the advice, on starting a new school in a new city in grade 10 (after going thru horrible bullying in the past year that left me with mild-moderate PTSD) to "keep a low profile".
The paradox here is, if you keep a low profile, you will stand out b/c all your peers are more chatty and interactive so you're still going to look like "the odd duck". Asperger activist Rudy Simone wrote about this dilemma in her book about Aspergers on the job.
2. When told not to let anyone disrespect you:
The trouble here, unlike it is with (most) NTs, is that your own bizarre behaviour was regarded as a lack of self-respect b/c your peers don't understand HFA - so even if you assert yourself or stand up for yourself, people will think "well he doesn't respect himself, so why should I" so they continue to abuse you.
3. The unfortunate irony that the people most likely to get unspoken messages are the ones least likely to understand them. For instance:
Let's say that you're at a job interview, and after a few minutes (shorter than you might reasonably expect) the interviewer says "OK, umm, well...we have your resume and your contact information, we'll let you know if anything comes up". Then you reply, confounded (after shaking hands) "OK...well I'm confused, you said if something "comes up" but I thought this interview was for a vacancy" or you say "OK...umm...is there anything else you'd like to know?" (since you're a bit weirded out that it was so short, not suspecting the real reason) - then meanwhile the interviewer is thinking "wow, is this guy for real, I mean any 'normal' person would know he/she is being rejected..." - well, BINGO, a "normal" person would be unlikely to get this unspoken cue in the first place...
Or in another situation, you as a guy are on a date with a young woman, and she gives you a non-verbal clue by looking around the room while you're talking, as if (unbeknownst to you) wanting to end the date...then you reply with "you're looking around, are you expecting to see somebody you know maybe?" and she replies "ummm...yes I might see someone I know, sorry I got distracted" but seems distant...and you don't take the clue. At that point, she's even more weirded out - but once again it proves the ironic point that those who least pick up on those nonverbals are those most likely to receive them. 
4. "If you're not sure, then ASK."
Usually a harsh response perhaps from an employer or colleague in the workplace, when the fallacy is you didn't detect any ambiguity in the first place, so there was no basis for you to ask for clarification. Theirs is just a frustrated lashing-out, they're probably wishing you didn't have to ask for obvious underlying expectation and "just be normal already". So then you're in a dilemma where you could second-guess yourself and ask more than you needed to, or be wary about asking in the risk of upsetting them with asking about "obvious" unspoken expectations.
5. Being advised to tell people you meet or that you might get closer to (friend, girlfriend or boyfriend) about your condition upfront so that they won't misunderstand, but that could actually cause you more harm then good b/c they think "mental illness, weirdo, nutcase" on a visceral level, and that may cause them to flee sooner than if you hadn't revealed it upfront. As a follow-up advice to this quandary, they may say "if they don't accept you, they're not worth it" but that could mean that 95% of people aren't worth it but for an NT maybe it's like 20% of people aren't worth it. So then we can get stuck with the "disgruntled loner" or "incel" or "weirdo" labels or other pejoratives.
The corollary to all these double bind scenarios is when one poster once said something like "advice from NTs is largely intended for other NTs, and therefore won't (always) work for those of us on the spectrum."
Very astute...
02 Jan 2020, 10:02 pm
