Manipulative aspies.

Post Reply New Topic

Wow, we have suddenly switched into a heated discussion about semantics.

If aspies do anything, we do get our heads a bit in a rut sometimes ;)

Hmm very good. Now, why is a dictionary an authoritative source for convention as opposed to say, the people who are actually using the word?

Is Wikipedia representative of the people who are using the word?

Wikipedia is written by contributors of Wikipedia.

People who use the word includes EVERYONE in the world who speaks English, intelligent, non-intelligent, business, elderly, child, philosophical, 3rd world, and whatever other categories of humanity you can think of.

I definitely do not think Wikipedia is selecting the most representative definition; merely the common consensus of the people who edit Wikipedia.

Well, not quite. We might wish to restrict it to one dialect, or register, for example. If you did no such restriction then you would have some trouble making sense of what the actual meaning was when comparing, say, North American dialects and British dialects which differ quite significantly on some words.


And do you suppose that a dictionary gives a representative definition? Formal grammar is generally proscriptive and has as little as is possible invested in being characteristic of the de facto usage. The problem of definition goes to finding a representative sample of people who use the word; the question would be whether or not Wikipedia editors would be representative, not whether they are just the people editing Wikipedia.

We might wish to precisely define what we mean by some meaning being conventional before we continue.

It's both a motivation and a manipulation. No reason why it cannot be both. People are self centered and "what's-in-it-for-me" driven. Their existence revolves around being manipulated by others. It's how people survive. Sometimes, manipulations can be baneful, other times, beneficial. Regardless of quality, they are still manipulations and everyone is subjected to them on a daily basis. The person doing the manipulating does so because they have a need that is not being met. If someone says to another "You're a real jerk, you know, I would hate being you!" the need is to feel better by putting down someone else, even if the put down is true, they express it to feel better about themselves. It's like saying "I'm better because I'm not a jerk."

Heated?

Did I miss something in the tone of the communication? I just thought it was an intellectually stimulating exchange, but I can be somewhat less than observant of cues that indicate heatedness, especially in a text based exchange.

How can that question be answered when it assumes an untrue premise as being true?
By convention, a dictionary is an authoritative source of information about conventions, not an authoritative source for them, in theory. That particular dictionaries are in many contexts can be determinative, is another issue, but again, although convention remains the primary culprit.

I never stated it wasn't manipulation; I simply said it wasn't any form of deception. I would have to agree with your post. Manipulation stems from individual wants and needs that can be met by other human beings (or even pets, zoo animals, and circus animals).

Last edited by timeisdead on 18 Mar 2009, 8:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

Pet training is almost entirely based on manipulation.

This is so true. For 2 big reasons:

(1) The people who are thinking in terms of "Is this manipulative?" are themselves in a manipulative thought space.
(2) Many people imagine Asperger people are "manipulative" because they don't project a coherent social personaliy and agenda (because AS don't have a coherent social personalities and agendas)... so people interpret AS behavior by filling in the blanks with their imaginations. Manipulative people accuse AS of being manipulative, stupid people accuse AS of being stupid, etc.

So true about training pets and manipulation. Dogs, especially, respond well to positive reinforcement as a training aide. Cats too, but they are pickier about behaviours they choose to do. Cats will hear a can of food being opened and come running and if you hold a treat over their nose, sometimes they will stand on their hind legs to get it, depending on how hungry they are and how badly they want it. Getting a cat to sit when you tell him to is more difficult, even with a treat as a reward.
Dogs, on the other hand are much easier, sitting when they hear "sit" even if they don't get a treat every time.
Another thing about cats, dogs and their differences. A cat will not use the litter box unless it's mother is litter box trained. It's one thing they prefer learning from their parent. If their mother is trained to use the box, the kittens will mimmick her. If the mother doesn't cover the feces with litter, the kittens won't either.
Dogs, on the other hand, can easily be housetrained by a human.

Yes, but you don't have Asperger syndrome.

You do exhibit manipulative behavior here. You have on at least 3 occasions attacked other users, using intentionally psychologically undermining

You are using at least one other sockpuppet -- the member with name "Le Petit Prince" as well as this user "Abangyarudo". Both have "prince"-named hotmail accounts, and both users attack and follow the same members here on WP. While the profiles are slightly different, in your posts you admit to being from Lebanon and other things that are the same as "Le Petit Prince" and vice versa.

You use the "Le Petit Prince" user to make provocative mysogynistic arguments with women. In fact, that user has "female" and "feminist" on the profile, which is untrue as you are male. You use the "Abangyarudo" to hit on AS females on this site, lurking here and flirting with them, inviting them to contact you. In this "Abangyarudo" sockpuppet, you claim that you have a lot of relationships with women and that you dump them while they want to continue to be with you. And in both sockpuppets ("Le Petit Prince" and "Abangyarudo" you have threatened to stalk me here on WP and give me a hard time.

Furthermore, in the "Abangyarudo" user, you admitted to attacking me as "Le Petit Prince" as you admitted to engaging in the conversations "Le Petit Prince" had with me when "Le Petit Prince" attacked me. Here is the post in which you ("Abangyarudo") admit that you were the person arguing with me in an argument that you describe and quote from.. That argument was between you and I when you were logged in as the "Le Petit Prince" sockpuppet, though. In other places on that thread and elsewhere you admit to be connected to the user "Le Petit Prince".

I have found other posts where, when you argue with other AS that you don't like, you use arguments that they have psychological problems and other undermining, manipulative tactics.

I think it is true that you are, as you admit, "manipulative", to say the least. You admit that and your behavior is consistent with that. Obviously you are able to lie and do it regularly and are good at it, given your sockpuppets and behavior on this forum toward females. Not only are you using at least two sockpuppets on this website, one to attack feminists and other females who annoy you as being to dominating, but another to hit on AS women. And you have attacked me personally using both sockpuppets, to increase the harassment effect from your misogynistic focus on me.

So for your post above, while it is true that you are manipulative, as you say, you don't have Asperger syndrome and your socially aggressive behavior is inconsistent with other AS. This is true for both your sockpuppets, "Le Petit Prince" and "Abangyarudo".

But you don't have Asperger syndrome. And given your behavior here, I question whether you are even AS or some kind of online game player/sexual predator.

(By the way, isn't it against the rules of WP to have multiple user names? I think that it's very confident of you that they won't enforce that rule, to use different sockpuppets to engage with the same female.)

AS people are not supposed to be able to lie and manipulate. While you say you manipulate, I don't think that your example is relevant to this question, since you are capable of being manipulative and lying but you are not Asperger, all things that you admit to.

:: claps:: good show I am so another person who lives in Lebanon. Emprella I thought you were told to stop or you'd be banned. So I'm not falling into your bait to start a fight so I get banned have fun keep going try to keep making points that make no sense. It's cool if you want to argue with me I have given all my messenger names on here so feel free to argue with me there. Should I point you to the post of LPP's picture and my picture? oh wait no that would take you out of your fantasy world.

Also if you have a problem with my diagnosis you can contact the Cody Center which specializes in it and tell them they were wrong but please cc me the email it'll be a good laugh.

"Dear Whom It May Concern;

I have contacted a former patient of yours who had an Asperger's evaluation and was subsequently diagnosed with it on the internet. I find this man to be thoroughly infuriating because he shows that I have no real point when I use big words to obfuscate the real point. I think his diagnosis should be revoked so I can claim moral and intellectual superiority over the realm of all those claimed with Asperger's. If I do not have this done I will be shown that there is someone who is smarter then me and will fail to make up for the times I feel insecure and worthless.

Sincerely
Ephmella

PS: I have written articles for all the major newspapers but I primarily frequent AS forums to find inspiration, check them out sometime."

I don't have to look at pictures. You already admitted to these things in another thread. And you already volunteered in another thread that you are Lebanese, so I don't know why you keep bringing up Lebanon.

You are the one who informed me that you are going to be on me. I don't mind you being on me or watching me if it's just real discussion, not bad personal feelings.

I've told you before, I don't want to fight with you.

Attacking me in another thread when the last one is locked doesn't really match up with what your saying here. Hey go ahead go for it Quartermass gave us both a warning I'm not particularly concerned about it if I get banned for speaking my mind then I'll get banned. Similarly I will not allow you to harass people because you claim some moral or intellectual high ground. So keep attacking me I can give you ammo if you like... all I'm saying is that I'm not ruining more threads you want to fight with me all my messenger names are on here you can attack me there and I'll respond and we both don't run the risk of getting banned.

I look at it like this Quartermass wanted something I have no issue with him so if he wants me to stop I'll stop. I have respect for him unless he shows me that I cannot respect him and he hasn't so he asked me to stop so if you want to continue my messenger names are there I will argue to both of our heart's content there. Out of respect for Quartermass this is the last post that I will address this in.

I have no interest in your doctors or your mental problems. This thread was about manipulation. You state that you are manipulative and that you choose or choose to not act manipulative when you want. That was the topic of discussion on this thread and the topic of my post. I illustrated your behavior toward me and your use of multiple user names ("sockpuppets") on this website to show that your complex manipulative behavior is quite sophisticated and pervasive.

Your social behavior toward me is totally inconsistent with Asperger sydrome, BUT it's not my interest to focus on that question unless you want to start a thread on that particular topic.

If you want to discuss manipulation some more, or follow up on the your post about your manipulative behavior, we can do so. Anything else would be off topic on this thread, including extended personal exchanges.

I'm actually not attacking. Here's another way in which you don't appear to be Asperger. If you were, you'd realize that I'm interested in this question of manipulation, and your manipulative behavior. Really. The fact that you don't see that is something that I run into a lot with NTs. You don't see that there is real interest in the question, when someone follows up on something annoying. (This is another example of why you don't seem AS). After your jumping on me last night, I found this manipulative Aspie thread interesting. Then I saw your post admitting to be manipulative, which I totally agreed with. My posts are an examination of your behavior in response to your post stating that you can be manipulative.

As far as your remark "Similarly I will not allow you to harass people because you claim some moral or intellectual high ground." I think that you were right that I've been too blunt and frank in stating opinions to the girl who was being a screw up in classes, and that I should have been more tactful. But you're the only one who thinks that was "harassing" and again, that's a typical NT response to AS honesty that is socially uncomfortable. The fact that you think my blunt replies to "diehard" was "harassment" and you think you should be a self-appointed vigilante is a personal problem of yours. I would prefer you not carry out your threat to engage in some dominating behavior toward me, but that's your thing and your choice. That has nothing to do with the posts on this thread, which are about my interest in the question of manipulativeness.



So if you are promising that you're not going to carry out your promise to dog me on this site, out of respect for Quartermass, I appreciate that.

I think that my interest in this question of manipulativeness and my responding to your post on manipulation has made you uncomfortable to the point where you don't want to discuss the topic but talk about other interpersonal things. That's off-topic, and so it's not constructive for me to continue this.