Would it matter if someone had no friends?

Page 4 of 6 [ 76 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

KT67
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 730

11 Jul 2019, 4:05 am

cyberdad wrote:
KT67 wrote:
Do NTs really think in those short sentences, quickly flitting from topic to topic? I'm trying hard not to be an aspie supremacist but...


NT here...I also notice the opposite...I try and engage Aspies in deep conversation and they run away...


Maybe it's a nerd/non-nerd distinction or educated/non-educated distinction then?

Although my (undiagnosed but thinks he is autistic, MA educated) stepdad told me off for calling people who left school at 15 uneducated, apparently if you've been to school at all then you're educated...

So it's most polite to say a nerd/non-nerd thing.

I wonder if non-nerds think things deeply then just don't express it?



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,532

11 Jul 2019, 4:35 am

I think the "nerd" label is a stereotype.

Intellectual people don't necessarily have to be educated. For example people in the late 1800s early 20th century were probably more well read than people today, probably because they didn't sit on front of a TV or spend countless hours staring at their phones.



KT67
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 730

11 Jul 2019, 5:07 am

I used to say nerd then found out it was an aspie thing. I didn't know what Asperger's was but I knew that people who were called nerds thought the way I do a lot.

I think some people hide things which could be called 'nerdy'.

My cousin was an avid reader as a child and I only found out when she was 21.

I find that sad, we could have had a lot of conversations about books. Instead, I was treated by adults as the 'golden child who reads' as if she didn't read too.



QFT
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

Joined: 27 Jun 2019
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 318

11 Jul 2019, 5:22 am

Mona Pereth wrote:
QFT wrote:
People prefer to go from subject to subject real quick and they are put off when one topic is being discussed for a long time.

The kind of unfocused conversation many people seem to prefer drives me nuts, especially when I'm talking to more than one person at a time. In conversation, I need focus. Either I can be focused on a topic, or I can be focused on the other person if it's a one-to-one conversation. Conversation without some ongoing focus is very hard for me, as it apparently is for many autistic people.


I agree with you here

Mona Pereth wrote:
There has always been a streak of anti-intellectualism in American culture. I don't know whether, among mainstream folks in most places, it has gotten worse over the past few decades. I do know that it varies quite a bit from locale to locale.

Also, based on the reading I've done about religious trends, it would seem likely that the evangelical Christian subculture, in particular, has gotten to be more and more anti-intellectual, or at least more and more un-intellectual. A longterm trend over the past 50 years or so has been the growth of the Pentecostal/charismatic wing of Christianity, including charismatic groups within otherwise more mainstream churches, at the expense of older forms of evangelical Christianity that emphasized Bible study more and hence were at least a little bit nerdier. Assuming that the "social acceptance" you've been seeking has been primarily within Christian groups, this might be one of the reasons for your experience of diminishing social acceptance. (I wouldn't know for sure, since I left Christianity in my teens.)


I don't limit myself on religious people. For example, I go to university, and most people there aren't religious. But I feel ostracized at University too. In fact I would say in church it's "slightly" better since a couple of people made some superficial attempts to talk to me. But maybe it's because they were older.but in University everyone is younger. I noticed younger people tend to avoid me more. But in any case, the conversations at church don't count for much either since they only talk to be polite and the conversation doesn't last more than a couple of minutes (if that). Besides, I only go to church once a week at the most (usually much less since I need to do homework and all that).



QFT
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

Joined: 27 Jun 2019
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 318

11 Jul 2019, 5:31 am

KT67 wrote:
shortfatbalduglyman wrote:
KT67 wrote:
Like to what extent would that matter?

Functionally inconvenient to have no friends

Socially awkward




Would it inherently make them either a meaningless or a bad person?



Plenty of "meaningless" and "bad" people have a lot of friends



I know I have casual friends who like me irl. I know my stepdad gets by without anyone who isn't either an acquaintance or a relative (he managed to marry three women though whereas I can't get a gf or bf but that's me being picky). But I don't really have deep friendships or people who are 'into' me.

Does that make me a bad person either in a defective way or in a morally bad way?


I keep hearing things about 'if nobody is their friend, that's a sign they're a wrong 'un'.


Often not always



Thing is I don't want friendship for its own sake. I want it as 'proof' of my worth.

You can't "prove" or measure your retail value

Even the exchange rate of monetary currency fluctuates daily

Having friends does not change your retail value either


As a sort of a validation that I'm not entirely weird or out there on my own.

I'm looking at the autistic average age of death and it's 5 years older than me.

Your profile does not specify age

But based on your statement, if you are already that old and no friends, what is the problem?






Because of suicides. I'm not suicidal but if I continue along this path of casual friendships, will I become that way?

Hard to imagine

But I am not precognitive




And I know I'm using a lot of me and I and my own life in this but - if someone really didn't have friends, if none of their acquaintances liked them, etc (not my situation), would that person necessarily be immoral/useless?

Also yes, online, nobody watches me. Nobody follows me if I do twitter. Nobody friends me if I do facebook. People occasionally like my stuff and occasionally dislike it. Only a select few people on here like me. But I get the sense it wouldn't matter as much if people I wasn't related to irl would actually tell me they liked me.


I feel bad for telling you this but average age of death for autistic people is 36 because of suicide.

I had friends til I was 22. Online friends til I was 25 and I quit Twitter because I was scared of being googled and I had severe social anxiety.

I joined a library at 22. I started working there. The volunteers there were very right wing. They talked all the time about it. They were also all over 60. Some of the stuff they came out with was very rude and offensive and I don't like it. But it still matters to me that I 'failed' socially in that situation. I wonder if I should stop worrying about it and try to just get on with 'my own' instead?

Yeah, at football there isn't much conversation, but there is far left politics. Slogans and songs and things. Everyone there is a Republican, the Irish kind. But nobody debates it in depth. Nobody talks about anything in depth. People just shout in short sentences, quickly changing topic.

And, unlike in the library, people are pro immigration because most of us there are 1st-3rd generation immigrant, all Irish.

I broadly agree with them but there's no room for nuance. And no room for making proper friends. Because proper friendship happens through long conversation or through time. Maybe I'll get to be proper friends with time. Esp if I sit with Liam and that lot. Because people are ageist and old guys are sexist in their choice of friends. I find young guys aren't like that.

Bear in mind these people buy me birthday presents and young people want to dance with me so... it's probably all in my head this rejection thing, based on an idea of friendship meaning conversation.

Do NTs really think in those short sentences, quickly flitting from topic to topic? I'm trying hard not to be an aspie supremacist but...


Maybe the reason you have a hard time is that you mainly focus on football as a resource to socialize -- and socialization there is very superficial. It might be nice to go to sports events from time to time, but it shouldn't be the main thing you are doing. If you are looking for meaningful conversations probably things like book clubs are much better options.

As far as politics, you can't judge their views based on the slogans they shout. Yes, people who shout those slogans probably agree with them. But the people that disagree won't shout they disagree since it's not part of a "routine". So what if only 10% of people are shouting? That would produce lots of noise, yes, but you won't know the view of the other 90% That's why it's important to go to other places to really get to know people.

And here is another food for thought. In Mississippi a lot of slogans they shout are right wing, at your place they are left wing. So maybe it's not true that sports people are either right or left, maybe they are just agreeing with the views of the locals?



QFT
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

Joined: 27 Jun 2019
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 318

11 Jul 2019, 5:47 am

cyberdad wrote:
KT67 wrote:
Do NTs really think in those short sentences, quickly flitting from topic to topic? I'm trying hard not to be an aspie supremacist but...


NT here...I also notice the opposite...I try and engage Aspies in deep conversation and they run away...


It reminds me of my mom who is an NT but when we are in a museum she would spend hours there and it would drive me crazy. But then there was a time she took me to a movie "war and peace" so after the movie I was asking her questions about Napoleon which h she couldn't answer: she simply admitted she doesn't know history and suggested I ask a historian. So then I asked her "how come you spend so much time studying art but not history? I personally find history more interesting than art" She couldn't answer that either. And by the way I am not that much into history either (I am a physicist) but I find history interesting "when I run into it" -- unlike art. My mom is the opposite.

So maybe its not whether you are nerdier or aspies are nerdier. Maybe it's just your interests mismatch so you can both drive each other crazy, depending on who is speaking.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,532

11 Jul 2019, 6:30 am

QFT wrote:
[ But then there was a time she took me to a movie "war and peace" so after the movie I was asking her questions about Napoleon which h she couldn't answer: she simply admitted she doesn't know history and suggested I ask a historian. So then I asked her "how come you spend so much time studying art but not history? I personally find history more interesting than art" She couldn't answer that either.


Yeah this sounds like my daughter talking about cars or aeroplanes, she asks me questions and I ask her to google it. She then proceeds to tell me she already knows. So I ask her why she asked me and the reason is she was just curious if I knew.



QFT
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

Joined: 27 Jun 2019
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 318

11 Jul 2019, 6:43 am

cyberdad wrote:
QFT wrote:
[ But then there was a time she took me to a movie "war and peace" so after the movie I was asking her questions about Napoleon which h she couldn't answer: she simply admitted she doesn't know history and suggested I ask a historian. So then I asked her "how come you spend so much time studying art but not history? I personally find history more interesting than art" She couldn't answer that either.


Yeah this sounds like my daughter talking about cars or aeroplanes, she asks me questions and I ask her to google it. She then proceeds to tell me she already knows. So I ask her why she asked me and the reason is she was just curious if I knew.


Well in my case I asked my mom cause I genually didn't know. Still don't know by the way -- didn't have time to do the research.

Incidentally, a couple of days after that movie my mom's friend invited us over for a tea. She happened to be a historian specializing in French history. So my mom said why don't I ask her that question. So I did. She gave me some superficial answers that didn't satisfy me. But when I pointed out the gaps she said why don't you Google it. So I said I already spent like an hour googling it and didn't find anything and she said well Google some more and I was like I don't have time and she was like well then its not that important to you.

In any case she acted like she didn't know but I am not sure if she actually didn't know or just didn't want to talk about it. Which I guess I kinda understand. I tend to dislike it when people who aren't physicists ask me about the physics I do since it makes me feel like I have to teach them several years worth of background material before I ever get to my work.

PS The question I was asking was the following. Who exactly excited Napoleon on the island during his first exile? Her answer was French did. So I asked: why would the French exile their own leader? She said: because he lost the war. So I said: it makes no sense. If it's because he lost, then the people that won should be exiling him, not his fellow citizens that lost together with him. And then she told me to Google it.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,532

11 Jul 2019, 7:06 am

QFT wrote:
She gave me some superficial answers that didn't satisfy me. But when I pointed out the gaps she said why don't you Google it. So I said I already spent like an hour googling it and didn't find anything and she said well Google some more and I was like I don't have time and she was like well then its not that important to you.
In any case she acted like she didn't know but I am not sure if she actually didn't know or just didn't want to talk about it.


This is an NT thing, she didn't want to draw attention to the fact she didn't know so was trying to deflect your attention by asking you to google the answer

QFT wrote:
I tend to dislike it when people who aren't physicists ask me about the physics I do since it makes me feel like I have to teach them several years worth of background material before I ever get to my work.

I get this, whenever I meet somebody who is a professional on a social level I never try and "talk shop" or ask basic questions about their profession as I anticipate they will find it laborious to furnish me with answers

QFT wrote:
The question I was asking was the following. Who exactly excited Napoleon on the island during his first exile? Her answer was French did. So I asked: why would the French exile their own leader? She said: because he lost the war. So I said: it makes no sense. If it's because he lost, then the people that won should be exiling him, not his fellow citizens that lost together with him. And then she told me to Google it.

The actual reasons for his exile is quite complex but I think your mom's friend is correct. The allies declared he would be an obstruction to rehabilitating France and so accordingly Napoleon himself agreed to be exiled. But infact the benefactors of his exile were the House of Bourbon who were the French royal family who were restored following their own exile after the French revolution. I think that's what she meant.



KT67
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 730

11 Jul 2019, 7:29 am

QFT wrote:
KT67 wrote:
shortfatbalduglyman wrote:
KT67 wrote:
Like to what extent would that matter?

Functionally inconvenient to have no friends

Socially awkward




Would it inherently make them either a meaningless or a bad person?



Plenty of "meaningless" and "bad" people have a lot of friends



I know I have casual friends who like me irl. I know my stepdad gets by without anyone who isn't either an acquaintance or a relative (he managed to marry three women though whereas I can't get a gf or bf but that's me being picky). But I don't really have deep friendships or people who are 'into' me.

Does that make me a bad person either in a defective way or in a morally bad way?


I keep hearing things about 'if nobody is their friend, that's a sign they're a wrong 'un'.


Often not always



Thing is I don't want friendship for its own sake. I want it as 'proof' of my worth.

You can't "prove" or measure your retail value

Even the exchange rate of monetary currency fluctuates daily

Having friends does not change your retail value either


As a sort of a validation that I'm not entirely weird or out there on my own.

I'm looking at the autistic average age of death and it's 5 years older than me.

Your profile does not specify age

But based on your statement, if you are already that old and no friends, what is the problem?






Because of suicides. I'm not suicidal but if I continue along this path of casual friendships, will I become that way?

Hard to imagine

But I am not precognitive




And I know I'm using a lot of me and I and my own life in this but - if someone really didn't have friends, if none of their acquaintances liked them, etc (not my situation), would that person necessarily be immoral/useless?

Also yes, online, nobody watches me. Nobody follows me if I do twitter. Nobody friends me if I do facebook. People occasionally like my stuff and occasionally dislike it. Only a select few people on here like me. But I get the sense it wouldn't matter as much if people I wasn't related to irl would actually tell me they liked me.


I feel bad for telling you this but average age of death for autistic people is 36 because of suicide.

I had friends til I was 22. Online friends til I was 25 and I quit Twitter because I was scared of being googled and I had severe social anxiety.

I joined a library at 22. I started working there. The volunteers there were very right wing. They talked all the time about it. They were also all over 60. Some of the stuff they came out with was very rude and offensive and I don't like it. But it still matters to me that I 'failed' socially in that situation. I wonder if I should stop worrying about it and try to just get on with 'my own' instead?

Yeah, at football there isn't much conversation, but there is far left politics. Slogans and songs and things. Everyone there is a Republican, the Irish kind. But nobody debates it in depth. Nobody talks about anything in depth. People just shout in short sentences, quickly changing topic.

And, unlike in the library, people are pro immigration because most of us there are 1st-3rd generation immigrant, all Irish.

I broadly agree with them but there's no room for nuance. And no room for making proper friends. Because proper friendship happens through long conversation or through time. Maybe I'll get to be proper friends with time. Esp if I sit with Liam and that lot. Because people are ageist and old guys are sexist in their choice of friends. I find young guys aren't like that.

Bear in mind these people buy me birthday presents and young people want to dance with me so... it's probably all in my head this rejection thing, based on an idea of friendship meaning conversation.

Do NTs really think in those short sentences, quickly flitting from topic to topic? I'm trying hard not to be an aspie supremacist but...


Maybe the reason you have a hard time is that you mainly focus on football as a resource to socialize -- and socialization there is very superficial. It might be nice to go to sports events from time to time, but it shouldn't be the main thing you are doing. If you are looking for meaningful conversations probably things like book clubs are much better options.

As far as politics, you can't judge their views based on the slogans they shout. Yes, people who shout those slogans probably agree with them. But the people that disagree won't shout they disagree since it's not part of a "routine". So what if only 10% of people are shouting? That would produce lots of noise, yes, but you won't know the view of the other 90% That's why it's important to go to other places to really get to know people.

And here is another food for thought. In Mississippi a lot of slogans they shout are right wing, at your place they are left wing. So maybe it's not true that sports people are either right or left, maybe they are just agreeing with the views of the locals?


Nah, Celtic fans are generally left wing on the Irish border, Rangers fans are generally right wing on the Irish border.

That's just a fact.

Celtic fans are also socialist and more pro immigration.

I'm glad that I live nowadays cos when the collection plates and things come round, it's for raising money for the disabled. In the 80s, it would be raising money for the IRA.

People who break that are treated like weirdos. I know of a few who do and it boils down to 'I care more about Scotland than about Britain, Rangers are just my team'. I don't know any unionist Celtic fans.

Doesn't mean the Rangers fans are right wing about everything, lots of them were anti-Thatcher actually because of what she did to Scotland in general. Some of them are union men in both senses of the word.

When I go to the pub, it's the entire crowd singing and shouting the same things.

I tried to join a book club but they kept testing me on my comprehension skills and expecting me to tell them the whole story. Writing groups are good but there aren't any around here.

I'm just going to assume these people are my friends but just they don't want in depth conversation but they do accept me.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,736
Location: Queens, NYC

11 Jul 2019, 8:03 am

Pubs are just not conducive to “in depth” conversations.

People are in pubs to feed off the energy of others. To enjoy the dynamism of winning and camaraderie.

It’s a group dynamic not conducive to individualism.



KT67
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 730

11 Jul 2019, 8:10 am

So they are my friends then?

It's funny cos going to the CSC isn't, you're right. Esp cos most people are drunk.

But my last writing group was in a pub and that was.

I found myself hating most of them though. Cos too much self promotion. Has to be a middle ground.



QFT
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

Joined: 27 Jun 2019
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 318

11 Jul 2019, 8:22 am

KT67 wrote:
So they are my friends then?

It's funny cos going to the CSC isn't, you're right. Esp cos most people are drunk.

But my last writing group was in a pub and that was.

I found myself hating most of them though. Cos too much self promotion. Has to be a middle ground.


I would say you got everything pubs can offer -- but pubs don't offer that much. That's why I suggested looking at other places too.

It sounds like you are making a lot of generalizations from anecdotal evidence. The fact that they were far right in one library doesn't mean they will be in other libraries. The fact that they over-tested you in one book club doesn't mean they will do that in all of them. And if they had intellectual event in a pub that is more of an exception than a rule.

The general rule is that libraries/book clubs are better places for meaningful interaction than pubs. If your experience says the opposite it just means you had bad luck in the couple of places you been to. Try exploring other places.



KT67
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 730

11 Jul 2019, 10:23 am

Good idea.

And yeah, but what I was wanting out of library work was actual paid employment.

The government's decided that's not good for me because of my mental illness. There are hardly any jobs available, too.

Doesn't mean it's a bad idea to go to a book club or writing group there though. Doesn't even mean that volunteering is bad if it's with the right bunch of people and taken in just because of that.

Would be a good idea to go to a book club which attracts younger people but not kids/teens. And this city is a better place than that village to do it as most people aren't (I'll be aspie and blunt) bigots here.



QFT
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

Joined: 27 Jun 2019
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 318

11 Jul 2019, 10:36 am

KT67 wrote:
The government's decided that's not good for me because of my mental illness.


So are you saying in Ireland people with mental illness aren't allowed to work? In the US this would be considered a discrimination.

From what I heard, in the US, having a disability would give you a "priviledge" in that, if you don't want to work, you can apply for government help. But that's only if you yourself don't want to work. If you want to work the government can't stop you.

It's true that some employers might not want to hire people with disabilities (althouh that's a discrimination too) but I never heard of a government deciding people with disabilities shouldn't get hired.