the aspie identity

[OkRad]

I like being Aspie and like associating with other aspies. I will never date another NT again. When I have troubles, the people I've known who I figure are NTs tend to be rather straight line reasoning about it. Get help! Or Straighten Up! Or punch to the head is their fav. I believe they are dangerous to a fragile Aspie.

AND I think they are boring as heck. If you are in a room with 15 PhD NTs who are employed at NASA, they will sit there and talk about the consistency of baby poop (seriously happened) or food or a ball game. Conversely, if you are in a room with Aspies who have no degrees, maybe even a homeless Aspie, I believe you will NEVER lack for good conversation. "....... the thinker without a paradox is like a lover without feeling: a paltry mediocrity." -Soren Kierkeagaard.

Lucky are those who find a lover with a paradox!

 

[Judge]

To summarize the course of this thread, it seems worth repeating something posted many times here over the years: "If you've seen one Aspie, then you've seen one Aspie."

We may have a somewhat common neurology as a social minority, but as humans we're also still individuals first and foremost. No differently than our neurological counterparts.

 

[The Pandector]

Do autists know they are 'different' from the norm?

not always in my opinion.

Of course not always. I've read that 40% of autistic people have IQs below 70, with many down around 40. But I'm guessing that nowhere near 40% of the people on this forum are in either of those categories. While I'm certainly no expert, I wouldn't expect a person of severely limited intellectual resources to understand intelligence levels or social norms in the way that most of us here do. So I aim my comments at what I perceive to be the local norm.

It seems to me, @harrietjansson, that you are searching for a body of individual attributes that define the autistic condition. What then? Will you include everybody who scores 100% on your test, and exclude anyone falling short of that? Of course not. But you seem to reject any typification that has exceptions. Others walk this path, but I don't think I've ever seen them return with any fruit.

BTW -- I very consciously gather detail for one purpose: to attain a reliable understanding of the whole. It works. Sorry, Tony.

 

[harrietjansson]

Do autists know they are 'different' from the norm?


Of course not always. I've read that 40% of autistic people have IQs below 70, with many down around 40. But I'm guessing that nowhere near 40% of the people on this forum are in either of those categories. While I'm certainly no expert, I wouldn't expect a person of severely limited intellectual resources to understand intelligence levels or social norms in the way that most of us here do. So I aim my comments at what I perceive to be the local norm.

It seems to me, @harrietjansson, that you are searching for a body of individual attributes that define the autistic condition. What then? Will you include everybody who scores 100% on your test, and exclude anyone falling short of that? Of course not. But you seem to reject any typification that has exceptions. Others walk this path, but I don't think I've ever seen them return with any fruit.

BTW -- I very consciously gather detail for one purpose: to attain a reliable understanding of the whole. It works. Sorry, Tony.

I don't know if you understand me at all.
All I am saying is that the term "aspie" has in my case help me believe that I am a detailed-focused person and that I sucked at gestalt. It wasn't that simple. I often miss details. Attwood and Gray really did say that "aspies" are detailed-focused. I take lessons from a voice teacher and she often have to tell me the details I miss. How can I then be a detailed-oriented person? They have in my opinion (you are free to dissagree) simplified something. I sometimes focus on details if I find them but I can also the the whole picture at times.
Francesca Happé says that some autistic people see both the details and the gestalt at the same time.
This is not an easy topic at all. I am not a person who likes simplified explanations but other people like them it seems.

 

[Judge]

I often miss details. Attwood and Gray really did say that "aspies" are detailed-focused.

It's true. Some of us are, and some of us are not. Yet it may be worth pointing out the context of being or not being "detail oriented".

That one's focus may be so intense and narrow, that we miss other details in the process. I'm inclined to believe that happens too, and probably on a frequent basis.

 

[harrietjansson]

It's true. Some of us are, and some of us are not. Yet it may be worth pointing out the context of being or not being "detail oriented".

That one's focus may be so intense and narrow, that we miss other details in the process. I'm inclined to believe that happens too, and probably on a frequent basis.

we're so different from eachother that I don't even belive in the aspie group.
I do believe in aspies talking with each other. This is very good. But we are extremely different.
I just hate being theory-focused but many asperger people just love it.

 

[Aspychata]

What agenda?

I don't wish to derail this post. Telling me who to date. Pushing me as potential mate material. A lot of us aren't the best at that. Lol

 

[Judge]

we're so different from eachother that I don't even belive in the aspie group.
I do believe in aspies talking with each other. This is very good. But we are extremely different.
I just hate being theory-focused but many asperger people just love it.

Good points. Perhaps to some extent, this reflects a basic human dynamic of people who are just seeking "to belong" to some- even any particular group just for the sake of a sense of identity.

A dynamic that carries some very dark overtones in terms of authoritarian mass movements. Where a need to belong may supersede a moral purpose. (Though in this case I don't see that particular consideration.)

 

[harrietjansson]

I started the thread because of one reason.
Many people have told me that it is important to "be yourself" and to accept your idiosyncrasy.
I am not even sure that what people refer to as an idiosyncrasy is anything else than something that could actually be dealt with. For myself I take lessons in diction and how to act. It works wonders. Then I get to blossom and be myself. Whether it will work for you I do not know but just "be yourself" can be something negative. This is why the "autism acceptance" can be problematic for me. Sometimes you just need training and not acceptance. With other issues I need more acceptance. You can go too far in both directions.
Many people on this forum have said that they cannot practice acting and diction and become more themselves. When I have mention acting to people with an ASD diagnosis have said that they don't like me mentioning acting. All they think of is "masking" rather than "blossoming and being yourself". They just want acceptance. This does not really work for me at all.
What do you think?

 

[Judge]

Sadly I think most of society is prone to identity within the context of a group rather than to emphasize their individuality. We see it expressed in a binary fashion on a political level, more now than ever before IMO. Where society at large doesn't seem to recognize non-ideological thinkers and just slots you into one camp or another.

Dynamics that are likely to spill into other groups, whether they reflect religion, ethnicity or other considerations, let alone neurological distinctions.

Be yourself? Truly? A noble concept, but good luck with that in this world.

 

[Aspychata]

yeah that's the bloody issue. I mean, the categories "aspie" and "NT" can make it difficult to see how we are individuals. It can give rise to stereotypes.

Attwood and Gray says in the aspies criteria and I comment:
"1. peer relationships characterized by absolute loyalty and impeccable dependability"
So "apsies" are always loyal? That would be a stereotype! How am I am such a loyal person?

"2. free of sexist, "age-ist", or culturalist biases; ability to regard others at "face value""
Any evidence for this?

"3. speaking one’s mind irrespective of social context or adherence to personal beliefs"
Any evidence? Is this true for "aspies" but not for "NTs"?

"4. ability to pursue personal theory or perspective despite conflicting evidence"
How is that even positive?

"5. seeking an audience or friends capable of: enthusiasm for unique interests and topics;"
Yeah but only focusing on interests can be problematic. Relationships need much more than that.

"6. consideration of details; spending time discussing a topic that may not be of primary interest"
I miss details a lot!

"7. listening without continual judgement or assumption"
I judge a lot! I thought that was what "aspies" did all the time.

"8. interested primarily in significant contributions to conversation; preferring to avoid ‘ritualistic small talk’ or socially trivial statements and superficial conversation."
I kinda like some small talk! Again we are talking about a steretype!

"9. seeking sincere, positive, genuine friends with an unassuming sense of humour"
I'm not sure this is even true. If you have difficulties reading people then how do you know that a friend is sincere, positive and genuine? Some "Aspies" can read people enough to seek the right friends but not all. This is nothing that is specific to ASD.

"1. strong preference for detail over gestalt"
Weak central coherence theory is not something all experts agree on. It's not that simple.
Even if the theory was true how would this be only positive?
Tony Attwood - Author of The Complete Guide to Asperger's Syndrome

I would just like to say, you are proving number 4 is correct with this post. That is some of our identity. We question everything. My grandmother decided l should join the church at maybe 12. She intrduced me to the priest and said ask away. My brain immedately said how do you know god exists? Do you have any proof. I think the priest gave up on me.

My areas- l love repetition of certain things like cashiering and ridiculous amounts of repetitious ballet barre.

I can stare at computer files for hours looking for bad code, repetition and numbers and symbols.

Another thing, l can say totally say inappropriate things which now l censor my mouth. One day,our ballet friend dressed her daughter in feathers the exact color of Seasme Street big bird. Of course that's what l said. Oops,maybe that wasn't complementary.

Finally, l love to spin, maybe that is stimming. I think all workplaces should have chairs that spin so we can quickly figure out who is us. Lol

 

[harrietjansson]

Sadly I think most of society is prone to identity within the context of a group rather than to emphasize their individuality.

even "aspies" at times. This is why I have issues with the term "aspie". All I want is to be myself.

 

[Finder]

I am autistic as defined by the DSM-5. I use "Aspie" as shorthand.

Perhaps you are thinking about identity in the wrong way. It does not mean you have a personal connection with others with the same condition. Take any group, whether racial, ethnic, religious, etc, and you will not find people that are the same. They simple share a common variable, but have other characteristics that are different.

You could say that category is better term than identity. I am human, male, white, Western, American, autistic, really handsome ( ), and old. All those inform who I am. They allow me to understand myself and learn how I fit into the world.

I don't get along with Aspies any better than I get along with NTs. However, there are experiences I share with other Aspies that give a reference point. But just as there are variations in the NT population, liberal/conservative, logical/emotional, rational/intuitive, extraverted/introverted, etc, the same can be said for our group.

I come here not because I have a lot in common with the group, but because I can learn about my autism and get feedback from those with the disorder. Perhaps it is more likely we can have good relationships with other Aspies vs. NTs, but not always.

As far as the neurodiversity question, it is important. Understand the difference in our condition and learning how to navigate this world requires the comparison. Labels are good as it identifies and defines the issue in question. If you don't understand the problem, you cannot solve for it. But it does not define everything. The autism label helps me solve for the social and emotional issues I am facing. It has nothing to do with other things in my life. Autism is not all encompassing (that is why it is defined). But the this-not-that or us-vs-them dichotomy is a useful framework. However, when that leads to extreme views where it exclusionary, then you have made a categorical error.

I am happy to be autistic. But I am also more than autistic.

 

[Judge]

even "aspies" at times. This is why I have issues with the term "aspie". All I want is to be myself.

It's like a salmon trying to spawn upstream. Quite a struggle. Not against nature, but against the nature of man. That desire to belong to some group- any group. Which instantly puts you at odds with being yourself.

It's why I love shows like "Rollerball" or "The Prisoner". That emphasize the cult of individuality in dystopian societies that discourage individuality altogether. The truth being that we already exist in a dystopian society ourselves.

"I am not a number. I am a free man!" - Number Six

Or Jonathan E, the last man standing in "Rollerball". In a society that demands absolute teamwork in accordance with corporate doctrine. Where the efforts of any individual are socially and politically taboo. Oops.

Or for a far less complex explanation, just try to live completely off the grid where neither society or government can reach you. There's always going to be some one or some thing telling you who to identify with. That you cannot be yourself in any total or profound way.

 

[Aspychata]

I started the thread because of one reason.
Many people have told me th
at it is important to "be yourself" and to accept your idiosyncrasy.
I am not even sure that what people refer to as an idiosyncrasy is anything else than something that could actually be dealt with. For myself I take lessons in diction and how to act. It works wonders. Then I get to blossom and be myself. Whether it will work for you I do not know but just "be yourself" can be something negative. This is why the "autism acceptance" can be problematic for me. Sometimes you just need training and not acceptance. With other issues I need more acceptance. You can go too far in both directions.
Many people on this forum have said that they cannot practice acting and diction and become more themselves. When I have mention acting to people with an ASD diagnosis have said that they don't like me mentioning acting. All they think of is "masking" rather than "blossoming and being yourself". They just want acceptance. This does not really work for me at all.
What do you think?

I put my daughter in a performing arts high school, and yes, it really helped her. I feel it gave her more confidence and she did blossom. She was forced to get outside of herself. We are excellent at not coming out, just staying in the walls of our cubicle brains.

 

[Judge]

I put my daughter in a performing arts high school, and yes, it really helped her. I feel it gave her more confidence and she did blossom. She was forced to get outside of herself. We are excellent at not coming out, just staying in the walls of our cubicle brains.

In hindsight I wish I would have pushed myself as a teenager into things like drama and public speaking. Had I known I was on the spectrum at that time, I might have tried to take advantage of who and what I am. To excel at being someone else. The one way to mask your traits and behaviors, and possibly be well paid for it.

 

[Neonatal RRT]

What does "strong sense of self" refer to?

Basically, I am secure in who I am,...and this plays out in just about everything in my life, from my career, my marriage, my intelligence, how I spend my money, to every decision I make. I generally don't hesitate to do things once I've gotten the pertaining facts. I am not a worrier. I don't lie. I trust myself and my wife. I am not controlling. I don't try to be like anyone else but me. I am quite aware of my autism and will freely discuss it with most people who I think should know. I generally try to get out in front of their judgements about me by discussing autism very plainly to people (co-workers, students, etc.).

 

[harrietjansson]

I am autistic as defined by the DSM-5. I use "Aspie" as shorthand.

Perhaps you are thinking about identity in the wrong way. It does not mean you have a personal connection with others with the same condition. Take any group, whether racial, ethnic, religious, etc, and you will not find people that are the same. They simple share a common variable, but have other characteristics that are different.

You could say that category is better term than identity. I am human, male, white, Western, American, autistic, really handsome ( ), and old. All those inform who I am. They allow me to understand myself and learn how I fit into the world.

I don't get along with Aspies any better than I get along with NTs. However, there are experiences I share with other Aspies that give a reference point. But just as there are variations in the NT population, liberal/conservative, logical/emotional, rational/intuitive, extraverted/introverted, etc, the same can be said for our group.

I come here not because I have a lot in common with the group, but because I can learn about my autism and get feedback from those with the disorder. Perhaps it is more likely we can have good relationships with other Aspies vs. NTs, but not always.

As far as the neurodiversity question, it is important. Understand the difference in our condition and learning how to navigate this world requires the comparison. Labels are good as it identifies and defines the issue in question. If you don't understand the problem, you cannot solve for it. But it does not define everything. The autism label helps me solve for the social and emotional issues I am facing. It has nothing to do with other things in my life. Autism is not all encompassing (that is why it is defined). But the this-not-that or us-vs-them dichotomy is a useful framework. However, when that leads to extreme views where it exclusionary, then you have made a categorical error.

I am happy to be autistic. But I am also more than autistic.

I really like your way of thinking.
What I am about to say might not be that accepted by many people and accepted by others: ASD diagnoses are problematic. They don't mention all the symptoms they should (sexual issues or motor skills issue are often not mention that much) and they are vague or abstract (this is why many of us have the same diagnosis but are so different).

 

[Tom]

I seen many threads and discussions on this topic in general. My basic feeling is one's identity is owned by the individual, not someone else. The discussion is ok, and may be helpful in providing different perspectives one may not have considered, but at the end of the day I will call myself based on what I decide not on what any one else or group decides.

 

[Judge]

I'm not in lock-step with the DSM-V, however I do recognize it as a standard reference, much like the ICD-10. Something concrete at least to refer to, whether we agree with it in whole or in part. I'm not thrilled with the term "Caucasian" either, but when I use it, most if not all people understand what I mean. So ultimately for now I can live with terms like "Aspie".