Friend gets mad that I "overcomplicate" conversation

Post Reply New Topic

Recently, my friend has gotten mad at me a few times for the way I respond in conversation.

Tonight, I asked him if he'd seen Disney's old "Sleepy Hollow" film, because I'd just watched a video about it. He said he thought he had and then mentioned that there'd also been a TV series of "Sleepy Hollow." Then he asked me if the Headless Horseman was Ichabod Crane. I answered that in Disney's version, the Headless Horseman is implied to be Ichabod's rival, Brom Bones, but it's deliberately left ambiguous whether it was him or the actual Headless Horseman. There are also many adaptations of the story I haven't seen, including the TV show he'd just mentioned, so it's possible that there's a version where the Headless Horseman turns out to be Ichabod. Then I mentioned the Tim Burton film, in which the Horseman is neither Brom nor Ichabod and the scenario is entirely different.

He got mad and said that he was only looking for a "yes" or "no" answer.

Another example: The other day, he was telling me about a video he'd watched about "Star Trek" (his area of expertise) and he said that the current shows had "returned to canon" for the series and then they'd "gone beyond canon." I said I wasn't sure what he meant, because "beyond" can be used to mean "very" as in "beyond cool," or it can be used to mean "to move outside of something" as in "going beyond the border." So I didn't know if he meant they had gone very in canon or outside of canon. He seemed insulted and said I was "overcomplicating things." I really didn't know what he meant and was just trying to find out. (It turned out that he meant they had moved the canon of the show further down the timeline into the future.)

It seems like the more time I spend with a person and the better they get to know me, the more comfortable they are getting angry at me over things like this all the time. It doesn't seem to be a lasting anger, but I do have to just kind of sit there and grin and bear it because I don't think it's worth having an actual argument over.

That's a plight that we Spectrumites go through all the time (I was going to say "Aspie"---but I'm really not an Aspie because I had very delayed speech).

We have to discern whether a person only wants a "yes or no" answer, or if the person wants a vast amount of information. It's difficult sometimes to be able to discern the desires of a questioner. The other person could have been nicer about it, though, instead of getting angry.

I tend to "overcomplicate" things, too.

Sorry about this.

NTs often like 'comic book conversation' when they're tired. This is what mum calls it. Rather disparaging to graphic novels, actually, so I'll say 'children's picture book level'.

They don't like it when you over complicate things when they're tired for eg. Or when you're having a friendly conversation with them rather than a seminar.

I find it annoying. People should express opinions to the best of their ability rather than dumbing everything down.

However I would sympathise with him in that if a situation is ambiguous, it's ok to take a punt at guessing! What is your fan theory of the situation? Outside of the text itself? 'Open to interpretation' ought to then go on to being interpreted by the audience - that's what the artist wants.

I have had similar experiences, as people with ASD like us track verbal questions quite well, and can give articulate answers to them, but sometimes miss the nonverbal cues. Your friend might have given cues that he wasn’t looking for a deep or thorough conversation at the moment, and was just looking to chat briefly and not go too in-depth. Which would be why he might have been frustrated.

Also, I’ve noticed people with ASD such as myself sometimes have a compulsion to only give long thorough answers and ask questions about every little detail with can rub NT’s the wrong way. Sometimes NT’s ask questions or start conversations looking for something shallow or short and can get frustrated by ASD thoroughness and attention to every little detail which can make a conversation feel drawn out. I might be completely misreading the situation, but these are my experiences at least.

Last thing I’ll say is don’t be too hard on yourself! Just because someone is frustrated by you being wired differently doesn’t mean you’ve done something rude or wrong. Being an AS in an NT world can be quite the challenge, but with patience and effort, it can be a wonderful journey.

The instances you mentioned are pretty small and it looks like you're discovering some of your friend's inconsistencies.

The trick is to not always shoot for perfect accuracy when talking to people, also to know the inconsistencies of the people around you and figure out when you want to side step those inconsistencies, when you should actually poke at those inconsistencies to deliberately annoy them (ie. when it's ridiculous), it's finding the right balance between both.

Overall though yes, if people don't know someone yet they dial themselves back, if they need a friend they'll do that for the sake of getting someone in their orbit. As they get more comfortable around a person they start being themselves more and that includes the quirks they were hiding up front (same thing goes if you're in a long-term relationship).

Watch Big Bang Theory. Watch Sheldon give a dissertation when only a one-word answer would do. Watch the reactions of the other characters when Sheldon does this.

Simple people do not need to regulate their conversation as they do not have any options.

More complex people need to consider to whom they are talking as people who are more simple find no pleasure in complex ideas. It can be both taxing and somewhat insulting to them.

Aspies tend to be oblivious to others and caught up in the excitement of their own ideas. This often leads us to fail to make an assessment of our audience and frequently leads to people being upset with us.

In addition to limiting what one says because the other is more simple, one has to also consider those with whom one interacts where time does not allow for deeper conversation even if the other person was capable and interested. For example, convenience store clerks, security guards, etc.

Just as one would not tell an off-color joke to a priest, one should consider how others will react to complexity.

I'm a simple person who sometimes gives unneeded complex answers.

When I ask a question, I expect an answer to the question I asked.  For example, if I ask someone how many people were at a meeting, and that person starts rattling off a list of names instead of stating a number, then that person is not answering my question; they are evading it, in fact.  Even worse is when they start talking about what one person was wearing, how often they have worn it, what time they arrived, what they said, how they said it, et cetera.  It gets very frustrating.

I want to scream, "Just answer the effing question!"

Some people just don't do analytical. Personally I find it difficult not to be detailed when I communicate. My brain wiring is (presumably) responsible for my thinking style which tends to govern my conversational style. With effort it's possible for me to dummy it down for the benefit of people who don't like to think very hard, and I quite like developing the art of expressing my ideas in simple and concise terms, but I guess I'll always prefer my conversational partners to be happy with my "native tongue" which tends to be precise, nuanced and extensive. Anything else tends to end up feeling unsatisfying, like riding the wrong horse. I know people that I like well enough but wouldn't want to spend a lot of time with because of this mismatch between the way we communicate. Many times when I think of something to say, I have to stop myself and try to reduce it to something simpler, and often I have to give up.

There's also this problem with understanding people who don't express themselves clearly. Even the BBC seems to garble things these days. People who are the most suitable for me don't mind if I ask them for clarification. They'll appreciate that I'm at least interested enough in what they're saying to try to make sense of it. Others don't have enough patience to rephrase their stuff clearly. I guess they think I can get it all from the context. Again, I like messing with the art of making sense out of what looks at first glance like nonsense, but it takes time and it doesn't always work, and it's unsatisfying to just let it go. And if I pretend I've understood, the lie can backfire later, as lies sometimes do, especially if what they told me was important. And if it wasn't important, I have to wonder why they bothered telling me, though I allow that trivial conversation can be fun - just that my brain tends to drag me back to serious matters, even though I have a strong sense of humour.

I suppose the dilemma is how much time to spend with people who "speak a different language." Spend less (and therefore hopefully more time with analytical types), and there'll be less annoyance both ways, but you'll also be missing out on a worthy challenge and limiting the development of your conversational repertoire. Spend more, and it's the converse - more frustration for everybody but more opportunity to extend the social skills in that particular way. I guess it has to be decided on a case-by-case basis - it depends on who you are and who they are. I suppose for myself, I'm not much of a "fitter-inner" so I tend to solve it by being bone idle and mostly keeping away from non-analytical people. I probably escaped a lot of trouble by choosing jobs in science.

I hope I haven't overcomplicated the matter. As far as I'm concerned I've just written a reasonably intelligent (and hopefully wise and useful) appraisal of the subject the OP raised.

Not everyone counts the chairs/humans though. I have a bad head for figures which are above around 7 esp once you get past about 20.

I do this a lot - give long complicated answers to questions my husband poses, when he really just wants a yes or no answer. We laugh about it and he helps me to see when questions can really be answered by yes or no. Or what time. etc. I find it a relief not to have to go through the whole song and dance, if a yes or no fits the need. I have to say that WP has contributed a lot to us understanding each other.

Fnord, unless I had some specific reason to count, I would have no idea how many people were in a room for a meeting. Unless it was very small, like say, four. I could remember four. If you were my supervisor, I would count the people in every meeting to be prepared for your question. But if the real purpose was to find out how much coffee and how many donuts you need for the next meeting, why not ask just that? After all, some attendees might be diabetic, or on a diet, or greedy or only drink tea, etc., etc.

Happens to me too, though sometimes I also get frustrated when someone else complicates things too much, especially if it's a simple yes or no -question.

If this is always a problem with the same people, then you could maybe only give those specific people short, superficial answers unless they themselves clearly want to talk in more detail. It might be less entertaining for you, but it might also save you from some trouble.