So I got rid of Facebook...

Post Reply New Topic

...I am always torn between wanting to find some success in the social world and wanting to just isolate completely. Due to the lack of success in the former endeavor, I have decided to isolate myself completely again, except from co-workers (in the context of work), my parents, and my fiance.

Here was at least one of the reasons:

http://www.freejinger.org/forums/viewto ... =8&t=21608

A month after that, another person not related to that bunch actually came onto my wall and told me I was "scary" and kept giving me "tips" on how to sing more songs out loud, how to listen to the Holy Spirit more (which, in his mind, was simply being a confident and excessively extroverted braggart, as far as what I saw most of the time), etc. I am a religious person, but socially, it's amazing how much in common both religious and atheistic neurotypicals can be - sheesh.

I have NO friends I spend time with face-to-face. Even on Facebook, where it was overall easier for me to interact due to writing (instead of initiating conversations, which I'm terrible at doing in public), I had just 169 contacts, and most people told me I thought too much, didn't discuss the things I always hoped to discuss, etc. Even at church, where I want huge theological treatises, people are more preoccupied with the social element than studying the Bible, and the male elders love to point out that women "talk more" and are "more social" (even as those same males talk far more, and engage others far more socially, than I could ever think of doing).

No, I still don't have an official AS diagnosis - no one specializes in that where I live, much less women - but social interaction is as frustrating as ever. I support myself by doing night shift work where detail is the focus, interaction is minimal, and my attention to things that neurotypicals tend to miss make me a valuable employee. At least I have that in the day-to-day world, you know?

Wow. DomWackTroll really is a troll, isn't he? If it's any consolation, at least five people on that thread felt sympathy toward you and thought that Dom was in the wrong. Some people don't feel good unless they're putting other people down.

I certainly don't blame you for wanting to retreat for a while. It can be good to focus on the people who love us when the rest of the world feels harsh.

Have you considered looking for a different church? Maybe the one you're at isn't the right fit. I had to leave the denomination I grew up in because it's hostile towards women, liberal social causes, and intellectualism. I was fortunate to find a new denomination that was a much better fit, and it's much quieter! (Quakers - https://www.fgcquaker.org/) I still mostly do independent study to satisfy my theological curiosity, but that's encouraged among Quakers rather than being viewed with suspicion. I don't know specifically what your religious leanings are. Otherwise, I would suggest something more appropriate than just what worked for me.

Thanks for the kind reply.

In regards to my church, I actually think it's theologically sound when they DO focus on that aspect. Some of their focus on the social element has its benefits, too, such as community outreach and such. They could just be a little more introspective and organized in some areas - they would rather "create" and "do" than reflect deeply, or even start services on time (they can be too casual in efforts to reach out socially). No church is perfect, though, so I try to keep it all in perspective.

I love theological discussions! When my husband was in seminary, it got me into a little bit of trouble since in the area we were in, it was considered a bit uncouth for a woman to participate in such discussions. I could never understand why the other staff wives had no interest whatsoever in these discussions because they excite me. Even if I only get to listen, I love learning at that deep level. Thankfully, my husband was always willing to share with me all kinds of stuff he was learning in class. He is the only one I get to talk to about stuff like that, though. Usually, it is because people in general aren't interested in going that deep.

I could "go deep" on all sorts of issues, though, not just theology. And most people don't want to go deep on anything.

Facebook? I just try to post things that are funny. My absent-minded mishaps sometimes make great stories. There's not place for real discussion on FB.

There are just a few people I know in person that I would really like to sit down with and just talk for hours. But they are too busy to do so. And the people who probably have more time are not the ones I could see myself spending more than 20 minutes at a time with. One on one, slow and deep is how I like my conversations.

I saw the social media film (story about Facebook) and it led me to consider that any enterprise that had as its foundational objective the accumulation of information about single women with the objective of facilitating fornication should remain suspect.

I considered that just as TV acts as an anesthetic to fill the void left by the diminishment of family and community, Facebook seems to provide a pseudo-community where prolific superficial communication masks the growing absence of anything more substantial.

I would anticipate that those for whom deeper and substantive issues are paramount would be among the first to detect this social impoverishment.

In the world of theology as in most academic circles, "discussion" often deteriorates into "I'm right and you're wrong".

The search for truth is often impeded by its encounter with dogma. Often those called theologians are more interested in protecting their franchise brand than in truth. This can lead to a "discussion" that is more and exercise in coercion.

I think there are fascinating questions that can be raised in Christianity such as;

1. Was the "great commission" given to Israel or the church?
2. What precisely is "the church"?
3. Is error to be prevented or corrected?
4. What would be the implication of the correct translation of peithō as "be persuaded" rather than "obey"?

If you have an interest in these or other questions, please feel free to PM me.

In a random display of synergy... I quit Facebook a few months ago too.

Wasn't like I was being trolled or anything. It just felt too artificial. Like everyone was just going through the motions day after day and nothing ever came of it. It wasn't what having friends was about... but just paying token homage to the idea.
So I up and left... isolated myself...
Not all that different to what it sounds like you did, except much more thorough in my case.

Magnanimous,

Here is something about friendship I posted on another forum. I think it describes some of the problems in finding real friendships regardless of being an Aspie or not;

How to make friends?

The first thing to decide is what kind of friends do you want.

1. Fair weather friends. These are people you are attracted to you because you have money, are famous, or are entertaining or for some, offer sexual gratification.

2. Proximity friends. These are people you work with, sit next to in church, or live across the street from. This is what describes most friendships.

3. Adversity friendships. Men who have been in combat together can have a friendship that is closer than most people can imagine. However, once adversity is past, even these people tend to drift in their own directions.

4. Deeper friendship. This is a relationship that most marriages do not achieve. It is the selfless investment in the life of another.

Proximity friendships in school are a little difficult. Like any institution (prison, nursing home, the army, etc.) large groups of people necessitate smaller groups. Proximity is defined more by what smaller group you are in than a particular class. This can be observed in the movie "The Breakfast Club".

In the movie people from different small groups came together in an adversary situation that almost resulted in friendship.

School causes a type of isolation in that inclusion in a group is never certain or defined. As a result, one may never feel comfortable enough in ones position to cultivate a friendship.

In addition, the heavy emphasis on sexual pairing often directs what social time there is towards this objective over the cultivation of friendships.

Most proximity friendships are based on a commonality of interests. For example if several women work together and two of them collect antiques, they will probably become friends and explore some shops together. However, there may be a work environment were one man like to go fishing and no one else does so he may not be able to make a work place friendship connection.

In a school environment you may not get an opportunity to talk with anyone long enough to learn if there is a commonality of interests. In addition, some small groups exact a heavy penalty on their members for being observed talking with anyone who is not cool. If you have been targeted as "not cool" you may face hostility should you attempt to converse with others.

Not being in a small group is a little like not being in a gang in prison. Most are not and you are free to make whatever connections you can. One useful tool in seeking friendships is a genuine interest in someone else. This helps you ask questions such as "What video games do you like"? The answers to such questions can help you determine if there is sufficiently common interests to suggest some mutual activity. To do this in a non-creepy way you might want to float a suggestion like, "I like that too, maybe we can get together sometime". An abstract speculation removes any immediacy and the other person can respond without the pressure of anything definitive. This inquiry / response method allows you to search out those of similar interests without risking too much.

Well timf ... I'm not sure if I'd call the first three "friendships" at all (though the 3rd has some appeal)... and the 4th is just superstition. It obviously isn't real.

So... isn't there a 5th type?

What do you think makes your decision "more thorough" than mine?

You still keep contact with parents and have a fiancé... apparently.

The only crossover is the co-workers part... and frankly, I'd be ditching those too if it wasn't for the whole need for money thing. It isn't like I have anything to do with them in a non-professional capacity.
Outside of going to work, I never see anyone. And I only ever speak to complete strangers online for that matter.

... Wouldn't you call that a more thorough isolation?

OK, thanks for clarifying the context - I thought you were referring to the process or level of thought put into the result rather than the result itself. In the context you were using, yes, your isolation is more thorough.

I wouldn't exactly say I'm proud of it.
I'm just taking the path of least resistance.

Whatever desires I might have for some sort of company or somesuch... it would just be a whole lot of hassle, and have basically no chance of success. Sometimes you just gotta fold and know things aren't going to work out.

Magnanimous,

I can understand why you might feel that a deeper friendship is mythological or superstitious.

Facebook is rather emblematic of the modern superficial relationships from which people often strive in vain to get the deeper relational connections they feel they need.

We live in a society today which is in itself is an artifical environment. 100 years ago most people were buried within five miles of where they were born. The social environment people were most familiar with was their family and their village.

Having so much time with so few people meant that you knew others and were known by them to a deep level. Relational connections did not have to be sought, they existed for most everyone.
With societal mobility and the hectic pace of modern life came a disconnection from those older types of relationships to ones made by choice.

Relationships made by choice are consumer oriented and tend towards the superficial and engaging. The "fair weather" sort of friends are ones that most people will "choose" because like most consumer products, they provide for the optimum consumer experience.

Relationships that are difficult, consume time, require us to forebear, and even cause frustration are not going to be sought in the consumer marketplace.

Aspies tend towards a more intentional life and feel less comfortable on "automatic pilot". As a result there will generally be less satisfaction with superficial relationships.

Easy (superficial) relationships are those in which you consume things like mutual banter. Difficult relationships are those in which you consume less and give more. Most people can see no good reason to give as opposed to the comfort they get from receiving.

There can be a richness found in difficult relationships that is a mystery to those who seek only the comforts of easy relationships. There can be a satisfaction from helping someone through difficult times. Being there for someone else can help you develop your own character.

This deeper level of relationship / friendship is defined by love. The definition of the word has become so distorted that it can help to look at the biblical definition;

Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. - 1 Corinthians 13:4-7

Using this definition, we might be able to say that love is selflessness. In contrast, superficial relationships might be seen as mutual selfishness.

I can see some ancestor religions like Confucianism might point people in the direction of selflessness, but it seems to me that it would carry a huge "duty" component that might darken the relationships. Buddhism sees selfishness in the form of desires as harmful and limiting but I see as falling a little short of cultivating useful selflessness presently. Christianity is almost always presented as system of rules and ritual that do little helpful. Buried in Christianity is the transformed heart that is demonstrated by walking in the Spirit and in truth and frees a person from the bondage of selfishness.

If you can make connection with someone who is seeking the path of enlightenment, you may find someone who can set aside their selfishness a little and take on a deeper relationship with you.

I can appreciate how rare this is and how difficult. It is a good start to turn away from things like Facebook. However, the next step is the tricky one. If you wanted to find people who liked to play darts, you might look in various pubs. If you want to find people who are growing in selflessness, you will want to look in places where they might be.

If you are uncomfortable around churches, you might want to consider getting involved with volunteer activities where you could meet people interested in helping others.

Many Aspies might feel just disentangling themselves from superficial relationships to be sufficient. However, it is possible to explore relationships after one has secured a bastion of solitude. Like a prospector searching for a rare mineral, you may engage in social forays seeking those rare people who are capable of developing deeper relationships.

Not technically what I was referring to. What makes it mythological is the notion of it being in any way altruistic.
No matter how invested a friendship might be, it is still done for purposes of net personal gain. Always. No exceptions. And neither is there anything inherently undesirable about that.



I suppose that is a classic example of the word being thoroughly distorted... yes.
But then pretty much everything in the bible is distortion... and the source data wasn't up to much either.
Frankly, I'd advise actually scrutinising reality to find a more effective definition.



Sounds like a classic case of brainwashing to me.
The propaganda that selfishness is somehow undesirable ironically stems from selfishness itself.
All action is taken with self-serving motives... but simultaneously, it does not serve one's own purposes for OTHERS to be serving THEIR own purposes. You benefit more if you can convince others to serve YOU instead.
And that is why most of everyone is genuinely selfish on the inside, but spends much of their time preaching about how people shouldn't be selfish. And everyone agrees... because everyone wants a piece of what everyone ELSE has. And despite their completely buying into it... they will never change their own behaviour.

This is a fundamental dishonesty of the human condition.

I prefer things far simpler :
Just be selfish and let others be selfish in turn. It just makes more sense.



Volunteer activities. In other words gullible idiots who bought into the anti-selfishness propaganda a bit too hard and whose beliefs of their own gain from the process are decidedly out of touch with the reality of the situation..... which is that a select few individuals are getting fat off their labour.

Honestly, I'm far better off without those sorts of idiots anywhere near me.

Not surprised by Mag's reply. It was plain to me early that neither of you agree much in your worldviews/philosophies.

Oh well. At least this beats another witty one-liner image meme from Facebook.

I got rid of my facebook page last night, deleted the whole thing. I understand it is a social site for people to stay in touch with each other but that doesn't seem to be the case when it comes to me. No one wants to be social with me. I had 27 friend's all of whom were either relatives or friends in real life. This younger generation does not like to actually print out pictures and send them via US postal service so I felt I had no choice but to make my own page in order to see any of the newer pictures.

It seems like the thing to do on facebook is "like" other people's posts and or make a comment about the post. In my case it does not matter what I post, good or bad, no one pays attention to anything I do. Also I am completely fed up with other people shoving their beliefs about three taboo subjects down my throat. I do not talk to anyone about those three subjects because it doesn't matter what I do or don't do there is always someone who will vehemently oppose what I have to say, yet somehow I am supposed to totally agree with whatever they say.

I have come to the conclusion that if any of those people really want to say anything to me they can call me on the phone or come over to my house and see me in person. I have much nicer and more fulfilling social interaction with the people here on WP.