Aspies For Freedom

And, although I'm sure I should or may even know this, right now I don't, so.........what is an "SLP"?

Oh, and then when I just read the story AGAIN, I see the statement that Betty "still" really wants ice cream.  Ok, why the "still" word?  Doesn't "still" imply that Betty knows or has been informed of something that we aren't aware of? That sentence is an unfinished one to me.

Betty "still" really wants ice cream, even though ____________.  Even though "what"?  Even though she finds out "something" that we aren't aware of from what little data we have in the story itself?

I could (and often do) go on and on and on in my mind.  Language really confuses me (even moreso than I realized, I see.)  Others have always told me I "analyze" too much.  I don't know any other way of trying to understand it, though.  

Sorry if I'm rambling a bit...........

Now, on the other side of the coin, I CAN, even if I don't like to, make SOME assumptions and guesses about what someone might think or do IF I know or have enough personal information (over time) about that person, so I sometimes can "guess" what THOSE people might say or do.  But it's based on objective criteria and by examining past patterns of their behavior, not on anything subjective.

Interesting...........  And as far as attempting to examine another person's "feelings", that is a doozy!  There is next to no rationale or pattern to that!  Why try?  That's a trap to me.  Hence my heavy reliance on social "rules".

And besides that, I have trouble determining and finding words to a lot (but not all) of my own feelings to describe them accurately!  That is an overload to try to figure out what someone else is thinking or feeling at the same time.    (No wonder social interaction tires me out.)

Oh, and I just realized, being TOLD to put pretend that I AM Betty defeats the whole purpose of the "test", correct?  If I understand correctly, I'm supposed to already "know" I'm supposed to pretend to be Betty, right?  (Wow!)

I can't pretend to be "Betty", but I can pretend or "put" or substitute myself objectively in Betty's place, but beware the answer THEN!

(Ok......I need to shutup now, huh?  If I were still a child, would I be screaming right about now out of frustration? Or would I have withdrawn from overload or gone mute?  Or both?  Assuming I could even talk at the time this story had been presented to me.)

INTERESTING!!!!!

hmmmm............and here is how I have "matured" over the years.......get this!  (This seems like something of a "shame".)  I "intellectually" have learned that expressing my true thoughts is a "no no"...so.......

Over time, I first learned to "assume" (and this sounds bad, but isn't meant to be) that it is expected that conclusions are to be reached even WITHOUT enough information, so the equation for questions like the above became (in my mind and not verbalized.........had to learn that, too) is "ok, is Betty dumb or really smart?"  If she's dumb, she won't "think" and will just head to the Community Center.  If she's smart, she won't assume anything, since any passing of time at all can and often does change everything.

THEN, over my lifetime (after being told and accused of being "mean"), I changed that in my mind to:  "hmmmmmmm......People seem to want "expected" answers."  So, I learned over time, again by watching patterns, what the average expected answers to certain vague and more "rote" hypothetical questions are supposed to be, so I answer them that way, taking the calculated risk that that will be the "answer" the other person wants to hear.  Especially if I know I'm in a situation where I'll be "punished" in some way, or my feelings hurt in some way, if I don't answer in the expected manner.

I guess that's how I pass as normal?  I have simply learned how to "fake it".  Is that the right thing to be teaching an autistic?

EXACTLY, DogBrain!!!

Yeah, I can see that, also, which again causes us to make assumptions,........but the question to us skipped that and is still "Where does Betty go? [to get the ice cream?]  The whole doggone story is confusing, no matter how you turn it.  (I can pick out and get different interpretations and see it from different perspectives every time I read it.)

I also had the thought "Wait a minute!  Clark is a bit of a sleezeball, isn't he, for telling Johnny and not Betty himself that he had a change of plans?  Shouldn't he have at least 'considered' keeping HIS word to Betty about where he was going to meet her at, if he couldn't let her know or be certain that she would find out about his change of plans?  Relying or putting the responsiblity on Johnny to let Betty know was a bit of a cop out, if you ask me.  Heaven forbid Clark should miss even a minute of the 'beach party', to keep his mutual understanding with Betty."

Hence, it's a darn good thing, knowing the unpredictable nature of humans, that if I were Betty, I wouldn't "assume" anything!

Maybe that's what the "still" word is all about, Schnoing.  Betty still wants ice cream, even though she breaks her promise to Johnny!  Or wait, Betty says she'll meet up with Johnny later, so we still don't know where Betty goes, or how much time it might take her, to get ice cream.  Which does she do first?  Get ice cream or meet Johnny?  What the heck does "later" mean in this story?

I don't think I care much for Betty or Clark, either one.  Johnny is probably ASD like us, cause he got caught in the middle.

In any event, it's a story that (maybe inadvertantly, ok, but still) can set up certain people for failure.  I hate these kinds of stories..........    I'll stick with my answer of "How should I know?" and let the NTs wonder how I came to that conclusion.

I live in a strange world..................

After this posting and the above story, I did look all this up a little bit farther and came across a so-called "simple" story about two girls, Sally and Ann (I think) in a room.  Sally has a marble and puts it in her basket.  Sally leaves the room, and Ann takes the marble and puts it in her box.  When Sally comes back into the room, where will she look for her marble?

First thought:  Ann TAKES Sally's marble without permission???  Isn't that stealing?  That's crummy!  [Ok, so now I'm already mad or upset before even continuing........]

Second thought:  Ok, once again, how should I know where Sally will look for her marble?  It depends............(and besides, I'm too ticked off over Ann taking what wasn't hers in the first place.)

Now, if the "tester" then explains to me somehow (good luck) to "pretend you are Sally", again defeating the whole purpose of the test anyway, I'd say "No way would I ever leave my stuff behind.  Not on purpose anyway."  And if I realized I had before I had re-entered the room, I would immediately wonder if Ann had taken it, so I "might" look in the box first.  50/50 chance.  Depends on my mood and how much I know or don't know about Ann.  So........again, I can't put myself in Sally's place and I don't know enough about the situation objectively, blah blah blah to calculate the "odds" or even provide an educated guess, so again, my HONEST answer is or would be "How should I know?"

And it isn't out of the picture (for me anyway) to remain extremely literal in interpretation when someone says "pretend you are Sally" for me to then point to ME looking for the marble in the box first.  You know why?  Because "I" saw Ann put it in the box.  (I might punch Ann, too.    Or at least scream about it.)

Any NTs (or even parents) listening out there?  Maybe certain children are not providing a "wrong" answer to these tests at all.

Oh, wait........I guess the purpose of the tests is to see if a child (or apparently even an adult, as we see now) would give an answer that indicates s/he is "autistic".   (Now that I've gotten all riled up, I suppose I can laugh at THAT.)  Catch 22!

Mick: Been there done that!  I think I posted in another thread how I, also, have to know the "why" behind anything before I'll do it, or can understand enough about it to do it.  And yep, when I was in middle school is when I also started refusing things.  (I never took these tests before, though.)

Dogbrain:  No...in my case, the conclusion is that the world is confusing to me, and this exercise shows me why.  I don't lay "blame" or make conclusions about the intent behind what other people (whom I don't understand) do or say, as that would be "unfair" in my mind.  Don't get me started on my sense of "fairness."  

Sangwyn:  No problem and truly, thank you for posting that!  That's just an example of how my particular goofy mind works.  And how even though it was THOUGHT I wasn't listening because I wasn't responding, didn't mean I wasn't only listening, but I was also constantly observing.  I wrote those questions down here, but in real life, I would not be verbalizing any of that at all.  It all stays in my mind.  

By the time these tests are given, my suspicion is that most children, no matter who they are, know basic manners by then, and it may be that due to the nature of autism itself is why they (and I) apply what "rules" we do know so rigidly, and do and think the way we (I) do.  And then again, I KNOW I am EXTREMELY literal.  Maybe even moreso than most.  I have no idea.

This is one of the few times EVER that I have actually explained how my mind is working all the while the look on my face appears "blank" and my responses are often "dull." (couldn't find another word to explain it.)  I have only EVER (and I'm 51 now, as I know I have repeated in other places here), told ONE other person (the "friend" who is avoiding me since I told her about autism) how my mind actually works.

So...........this was a great exercise for me.  Especially to see it "on paper" so to speak, because I'm visually oriented.  It has helped me somewhat (after all these years) to understand how/why it is that I AM thought to be so "odd" or different.  And helps me to understand just what "theory of mind" is supposed to be.  It really was causing me confusion.  I understand it now, I just don't agree with it.

No offense to anybody ever, but I do believe I'm glad to be the way I am.

Oh...Dogbrain.........I'd say that the conclusion (or at least one of them) is simply that it appears that "normal" people simply don't usually "practice what they preach". i.e. in this case, don't utilize the theory of "Theory of the Mind"; at least not correctly in most cases when interacting with an autistic. (?)

Oh!  I see something I said that MAY indicate to some people that I am making a "negative" conclusion about someone, or am "hinting" at something.  (Sorry, Dogbrain's statement has stayed with me, because it is somewhat confusing.)  I said previously, "And if I realized I had before I had re-entered the room, I would immediately wonder if Ann had taken it, so I "might" look in the box first."

No, no, no, don't assume anything about my reasons or intent behind that statement.  That is often what an NT does to me which is almost always incorrect.

As a child, many of the items that I wanted to "hang onto" for one reason or another (maybe obsessively) in my hands or something, and perhaps at the "wrong" times, were physically taken away from me.  Shoot, I didn't know why, but it would make me cry.  Sometimes when it was "time to put the toys up" and I wasn't ready, also would cause me to feel that something had been "taken" from me.  I also believe NOW that oftentimes, to avoid putting up with me screaming and/or crying, many items would be taken from me when I wasn't "looking", thinking that what I didn't directly see happen, I wasn't able to recognize that it HAD happened (again, incorrect.)  So, I learned that more often than not, things WERE taken away from me if I didn't either hang onto them tightly or keep them in sight.  To me, that behavior by another (even if it is a parent) often equates to "stealing".  (Now remember, I apply "rules" to things.......and if I don't know or am unaware of a "new" rule that is being applied by someone because it wasn't adequately explained to me, I'm going to reach for the "closest" definition in my mind............in this case Ann taking Sally's marble equates to "stealing."  Remember, I equate words and language with each other and attempt to find the "meaning" of the communication long before "conclusions" about the intent or "goodness or badness" of another person is ever thought about.)

Stealing, unemotionally, simply means:  to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, esp. secretly or by force.

And if you notice, I sort of "asked", albeit to myself in my mind, "isn't that stealing?"  And I was taught that stealing is a no-no.  "Share your toys.  Don't take toys from others, etc.  Do not take something from another person without permission, that is stealing.  Bad, Bad."

Remember to always take "traditional" across-the-board emotionally-applied reactions out of an autistics actions (at least this autistic's actions, at the very least during the tinme when they are obviously trying to cooperate.)  This is what NTs tend to do.  They reach an immediate conclusion, based emotionally laden, about why an autistic is reacting the way they do.

I first try my best to simply "understand" the situation I'm in AND the language itself, and try to get myself out of constant confusion.  (Not easy.)  It is fairly LONG afterward in most cases that reaching any solid conclusions happen for me.  And due to my philosophy of how time changes everything, well..............(I won't go on.)

And again, the rule and sense of fairness (and logic) tells me that it isn't productive to immediately come to negative conclusions about anyone or anything (which isn't the same thing as saying that I automatically "approve" of others behavior toward me or others, because I do not); PRECISELY because (as I can put it into words NOW after this exercise), I obviously don't have good "empathy" nor do I utilize "Theory of Mind" in a typical manner, if at all.

My boss said something interesting one time quite a while ago, which just came to mind.  When talking with someone about the two us and how we made such a good "team", he countered that with "Yep.....she looks at everything from an objective standpoint, and I come from a subjective standpoint."  So, in effect, we balance each other.  In law, that DOES work for a pretty good team.  Interesting to me that he noticed that.  I guess I had never realized that before.  

I NOW can utilize "subjectivity", but I'm not usually good at it at all, mainly due to the fact that when I put myself in another's place and apply how I would "think" or act, as is obvious, I'm most often incorrect myself.  I'm not certain how advisable it is for me do that, since I think so differently than most.

Sangwyn:  "There are a lot of words you (ASDAdult) focused on in the exercise that were arbitrarily chosen."  Arbitrary:  "capricious; unreasonable; unsupported"

mmmmmmmmm.......maybe "arbitrarily".  And ok..... ask yourself now "why" you see it that way, or why you assume that is what I was doing.  How/why did you reach that conclusion?  Maybe what I do/did here isn't unreasonable or unsupported at all (?)

Maybe it was just my attempt at trying to understand and apply "meaning" to certain words as used in the manner that they were within the overall context of the sentence/paragraph/story.  

Continue examining that assumed "arbitrary" action(s) of mine.  Especially given how an autistic thinks and what one of their main "problems" is.  Don't forget to factor that in.  Isn't one of them the fact that trying to understand language in and of itself is a constant chore?  So, is my examination of certain chosen words really "arbitrary" or is it supported simply due to the mere fact of me being autistic, and isn't arbitrary at all?

Oh, and no offense taken at all.  For what?  

Sometimes I hypothesize that my utilizing spoken language (or should I say that I "speak" at all and can communicate this) is savant.  (Sincerely.)