Page 1 of 7 [ 97 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

Iblis
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2009
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 81

17 Mar 2009, 2:10 am

I am not one, but i have seen them...
It's often said that aspies arent manipulative and don't like manipulative people.
But aspies may also manipulate to overcompensate their disabillities. They are transparant as a jelly fish tho.

ANy experience with such people or yourself?



ScottF
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 853

17 Mar 2009, 3:29 am

I have tried with mixed results


_________________
One day you dumb, brainy smarties will look upon us and beg for mercy...and we will consider it. -Peter Griffin


Abangyarudo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 618

17 Mar 2009, 6:31 am

Iblis wrote:
I am not one, but i have seen them...
It's often said that aspies arent manipulative and don't like manipulative people.
But aspies may also manipulate to overcompensate their disabillities. They are transparant as a jelly fish tho.

ANy experience with such people or yourself?


stop using the word disabilities... manipulation is a personal choice for people aspies included. While aspies are more likely not to chose it because of the social backlash they still have a choice and different people wll make that decision differently.

I can in fact manipulate people if I please and theres a certain amount of manipulation inherent in social relationships. My choice is to be as far away from that as possible. I don't know about the transperent line as I'm not really transparent even in times when I want to be.



Liresse
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 14 Oct 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 332
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

17 Mar 2009, 6:42 am

I'm confused about the post above me? But yeah I think I try to manipulate people to make up for my disabilities. I guess it's my emerging attempt at social interaction? heh


_________________
- Liresse


Abangyarudo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 618

17 Mar 2009, 6:47 am

Liresse wrote:
I'm confused about the post above me? But yeah I think I try to manipulate people to make up for my disabilities. I guess it's my emerging attempt at social interaction? heh


In other words don't call it a disability because Aspergers by itself is not a disability. People make the decision to be manipulative even though when you are manipulative theres a social backlash which aspies try to avoid. Socialization has some manipulation inherent to it. The transperent as a fish remark doesn't work for me as I'm not transperent as I'd like to be for instance in my relationships. Did I summarize it clearly enough?



Sora
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,653
Location: Europe

17 Mar 2009, 7:14 am

Sure thing, those with ASDs can be manipulative as every other person. In obvious and in subtle ways. There's no single style of manipulation on and off the spectrum.


_________________
Autism + ADHD
______
The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it. Terry Pratchett


Liresse
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 14 Oct 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 332
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

17 Mar 2009, 7:25 am

Abangyarudo wrote:
In other words don't call it a disability because Aspergers by itself is not a disability. People make the decision to be manipulative even though when you are manipulative theres a social backlash which aspies try to avoid. Socialization has some manipulation inherent to it. The transperent as a fish remark doesn't work for me as I'm not transperent as I'd like to be for instance in my relationships. Did I summarize it clearly enough?


Hmm. I think we are using the term transparent in completely opposite meanings.

Original quote:
Quote:
But aspies may also manipulate to overcompensate their disabillities. They are transparant as a jelly fish tho.
the "tho" indicates it's a downfalling of their attempt to overcompensate, ie the way their manipulation usually fails. (because people can see right through their attempt to manipulate, therefore they aren't fooled)

Perhaps you may have meant "transparency" as honesty and sincerity, rather than failure at social interaction, which is what I think the original person meant. Correct me if I am mistaken?


Also, as an aspie myself, I see no problems with calling myself disabled in a lot of ways. Is there a problem with this that I am missing?


_________________
- Liresse


Last edited by Liresse on 17 Mar 2009, 7:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

MissConstrue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 19,810
Location: Earth

17 Mar 2009, 7:27 am

I think aspies and NTs are both manipulative.

Although it might be true to some degree that aspies are more manipulative than your average person who has no social qualms about taking it up with their opponent. I myself have trouble being upfront with people but only because I have trouble in choosing my words carefully.

LOL, I would generally say women are more maniopulative but that's just because I've had more of them than men in my life known to play head games. Ironically it makes it hard for me since I have trouble reading within those blurry cues and mixed messages. But yeah manipulation does compensate for a lot and I think can do about as much damage as verbal and physical abuse. Some of us also may lack physical strength as opposed to someone who maybe more atheletic but do have other ways to make for that loss.


_________________
I live as I choose or I will not live at all.
~Delores O’Riordan


Abangyarudo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 618

17 Mar 2009, 7:32 am

Liresse wrote:
Abangyarudo wrote:
In other words don't call it a disability because Aspergers by itself is not a disability. People make the decision to be manipulative even though when you are manipulative theres a social backlash which aspies try to avoid. Socialization has some manipulation inherent to it. The transperent as a fish remark doesn't work for me as I'm not transperent as I'd like to be for instance in my relationships. Did I summarize it clearly enough?


Hmm. I think we are using the term transparent in completely opposite meanings.

Original quote:
Quote:
But aspies may also manipulate to overcompensate their disabillities. They are transparant as a jelly fish tho.
the "tho" indicates it's a downfalling of their attempt to overcompensate, ie the way their manipulation usually fails. (because people can see right through their attempt to manipulate, therefore they aren't fooled)

Perhaps you may have meant "transparency" as honesty and sincerity, rather than failure at social interaction, which is what I think the original person meant. Correct me if I am mistaken?


Also, as an aspie myself, I see no problems with calling myself disabled in a lot of ways. Is there a problem with this that I am missing?


a disability would imply impeding progress. We can all make progress I can socialize pretty normally with people I had to work harder on it granted but it didn't stop me from progressing in that area. A person who has a disability in their legs cannot walk or has very limited usage and no matter what they do they are impeded by their own physical restrictions. I have to work harder at certain things but nothing stops my progress.

EDIT: My problem is that it takes away accountability. If you chose to not work on socialization that is your choice as I find socializing sometimes tiresome and not really rewarding. That is by my own personality traits, which finds small talk boring and traps me in my own head alot of the time. The thing is in the end your progress in life is due to individual sovereignty we have imperitives, obligations, and etc but we are all just potentials where that potential takes us is up to us.

My intrepretation was then even when manipulating aspies are transperent which is simply not the case. NTs find me hard to read while other aspies tend to be too transparent. So it may just be my misunderstanding of the statement.



Liresse
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 14 Oct 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 332
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

17 Mar 2009, 7:47 am

Not to get too sidetracked but I seem to recall that disability, under the triad of impairment-->disability-->handicap (under the ICIDH model), merely represents lack of a specific skill rather than impediment to progress. Impairment being the underlying difficulty (in AS this might be inability to read faces), disability being lack of skill (such as communication), and handicap meaning the effect it has on that person's functioning (such as social integration).

The ICIDH model has been superceded by the ICF model (which I prefer, but is far harder to describe in such obvious labels), which describes 4-5 stages of functioning: Body structure, body function, Activity & Participation, Personal Factors, and Environmental Factors. They are more thorough and less biased than impairment-disability-handicap I feel but this is not what you were raising (oops, got sidetracked anyway).

Where was I...

I suspect the term "disability" may not represent merely "impediment to progress."

For example I know of one lady with severe aphasia, whose impairment includes that she can only speak in one word utterances when she tries her utmost, so in that sense she has a huge, neurological impairment (ie, to talking). However she has made a great deal of progress in terms of her disability (ie, to communication) by using nonverbal cues and emotions, therefore this means her actual handicap (eg, social integration) is far more productive and functional than if you just said "she can only speak in one word utterances" and in fact she is a contributive member of society and holds a range of positions.

So while I see what you mean in terms of improvement, I would still have no hesitation in saying the word "disability" - for me it is just the truth. Sometimes you have to recognise the truth to be able to make progress.

Sorry this got so off topic, I wasn't actually trying to be manipulative this time.


_________________
- Liresse


Abangyarudo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 618

17 Mar 2009, 7:58 am

Liresse wrote:
Not to get too sidetracked but I seem to recall that disability, under the triad of impairment-->disability-->handicap (under the ICIDH model), merely represents lack of a specific skill rather than impediment to progress. Impairment being the underlying difficulty (in AS this might be inability to read faces), disability being lack of skill (such as communication), and handicap meaning the effect it has on that person's functioning (such as social integration).

The ICIDH model has been superceded by the ICF model (which I prefer, but is far harder to describe in such obvious labels), which describes 4-5 stages of functioning: Body structure, body function, Activity & Participation, Personal Factors, and Environmental Factors. They are more thorough and less biased than impairment-disability-handicap I feel but this is not what you were raising (oops, got sidetracked anyway).

Where was I...

I suspect the term "disability" may not represent merely "impediment to progress."

For example I know of one lady who has severe aphasia, whose impairment includes that she can only speak in one word utterances when she tries her utmost, so in that sense she has a huge, neurological impairment to talking. However she has made a great deal of progress in terms of her disability by using nonverbal cues and emotions, therefore this means her actual handicap is far more productive and functional than if you just said "she can only speak in one word utterances" and in fact she is a contributive member of society and holds a range of positions.

So while I see what you mean in terms of improvement, I would still have no hesitation in saying the word "disability" - for me it is just the truth. Sometimes you have to recognise the truth to be able to make progress.

Sorry this got so off topic, I wasn't actually trying to be manipulative this time.


my problem is disability lumps us with the group I mentioned. By nature disability has an implied meaning to people and a scientific meaning they usually do not match. The problem is with Asperger's most people who indentified it as a disability used it to excuse accountability for their actions which causes a negative perception as Aspies as a group implied further by Aspies asking for "acceptance". People can accept that people have lackings in certain areas but they cannot understand when people do nothing about it.

People who find it as a nuerological differrence seem to make great strides in understanding that they can change what they don't like. Those individuals have single handly changed the negative perception of Asperger's. They like me find the lumping together of people that cannot make strides in their deficit areas unwarranted at best harmful at worst. When I say they I'm only included those that I have met with that outlook.



Liresse
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 14 Oct 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 332
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

17 Mar 2009, 8:26 am

"by nature"

mmm I guess since we are on that topic I'll delve a little further, thanks for raising the issue!

dis⋅a⋅bil⋅i⋅ty
   /ˌdɪsəˈbɪlɪti/ [dis-uh-bil-i-tee]
–noun, plural -ties for 2.
1. lack of adequate power, strength, or physical or mental ability; incapacity.
2. a physical or mental handicap, esp. one that prevents a person from living a full, normal life or from holding a gainful job.
3. anything that disables or puts one at a disadvantage: His mere six-foot height will be a disability in professional basketball.
4. the state or condition of being disabled.
5. legal incapacity; legal disqualification.

I look at that definition and think it just says what it is.

Are you talking about stigma? The nature of human language means that we will always be trying to avoid some sort of stigma. That's why they found the words "idiot" "imbecile" "retarded" and, now "disabled" offensive. The original intent of every word was to describe rather than restrict or oppress; it is just the nature of language that will morph each word's meaning into something undesirable and make us want to use something else.

Maybe it is because I am a lifelong student of linguistics, but I honestly feel if that is what language is going to do forever and ever, (ie, acquire undesirable stigmas even though they are not defined with those stigmas in mind) I'd rather not speed up the process by disapproving of people who decide to use the labels. If you'd rather not use the label - fine by me, but perhaps it is not really well-founded to impose it on others' threads? Oh I know, we will be redefining words forever and ever and ever anyway :)

Just had a new interpretation of the original topic.

As a female aspie with dx'd anxiety, I find myself constantly questioning every interpretation I make. This means I can "socially manipulate" better than usual. However, when it comes to my own AS I will often read descriptions of diagnostic symptoms and do the same with my own experience: meaning I will question my own experience "do I really do that?" in line or out of line with whatever description of symptoms I am reading.

I do that a LOT.

For example I now stim more than I did before my diagnosis. I stimmed before my diagnosis most classically by rocking, but now I do it in more situations than before. I am 100% sure this is partly conscious (whether because I am noticing it more or because I am subconsciously manipulating my behaviour).

I mean, I have always "experimented" with everything because I have always been so uncertain, including my behaviour. This is my functioning, really. Whether socialising, thinking, ways of walking, what I can do at home without getting told off etc, I have always (when I realise I have no idea what to do) tried doing something and then trying to see what the result was.

I am usually a very poor judge of my own actions so this does not result in much learning.

However I would certainly say my experimenting is a form of "manipulation." Incidentally, not to worry. My stimming (and whatever else I'm trying to avoid/not trying to avoid) has been decreasing, I hope to the point of where it was before.

You could say I substitute manipulation (or conscious effort) for all my various areas of difficulty!


_________________
- Liresse


mechanima
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2005
Age: 61
Gender: Female
Posts: 591

17 Mar 2009, 8:48 am

As far a I can tell, Aspies do not manipilate to compensate for anything at all...more the opposite...they manipulate BECAUSE THEY CAN...

Let me explain.

We have to analyse social situations to compensate for our inability to read them...but once having analysed them, we wind up ahead of most people in terms of the infomation required to manipulate them as well as being far harder to distract or manipulate with learned "knee jerk" reactions.

In an emergency and a good cause, I hope all of us would use that advantage fully, but sadly, AS does not come bundled with any special quantity or quality of moral fiber, and inevitably, some of us manipulate just because we can and it gets us our own way.

I even know one manipulative Aspie who uses AS as a kind of alibi by saying things like:
"I couldn't possibly be lying because I am an Aspie and Aspies can't lie" even if you catch him red handed...which is ridiculous, but you would be surprised how many NT know no better and fall for it (or pretend to).



ZEGH8578
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2009
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,532

17 Mar 2009, 12:04 pm

i have sometimes blatantly manipulated people, sometimes obviously, to test the rules and "physics" of manipulation. sometimes inspired by other attempts i have observed or heard about.

the "jedi mind trick" actually works sometimes :D

a good example is once i went into the restaurant that a dad of a friend of mine owned. my friend was working there, and in a unpolite and abrupt manner, i stroller right in and DEMANDED a full kebab-plate, and for free.

i got it.
to my surprise. :D

i like to test people, as long as i know they wont hit me.


_________________
''In the world I see - you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center.''


Bradleigh
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 May 2008
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,295
Location: Brisbane, Australia

17 Mar 2009, 12:07 pm

I sometimes like to try manipulation, I have spent my life observing others, so I can see how saying things can affect people, it gets a bit tricky when I know that they are being a bit cluey that I am messing with them, but its fun. I am a good guy, I don't advantage of people, in fact I have spent minutes holding doors open for other people and basicaly being a good guy. I mostly just play little pranks like hiding myself from being asked to choors, get others more attention, I once managed to manipulate some food or something and before accepting it I just started laughing, and explained I tricked them (if I didn't my brother would have blabbed and I would have lost trust). mostly I use manipulation just so my laziness is ignored, I look a bit selfless when I do something, and I guess confusing people of my real motive for fun. But I hate people that do manipulation in a damaging way, like stealing.


_________________
Blast Reality! Burst it into shreds! Vanishment... this world!