The Brick in the Conversation

[Darkkin]

Akin to having reasonable boundaries and a sense of fair play, does anyone else have a tendency to voice the uncomfortable truth everyone is thinking, but no one wants to say? e.g. cases of entitlement, unsolicited, judgemental advice, factual inaccuracies, observed patterns of behaviour, etc.

You say the thing and toss a brick into the middle of a conversation and manage to make it a hugely awkward situation, but those involve know it needed to be said. Once the ice is broken people aren't afraid to step up and say, 'Hey. I agree and think...'

As clunky as the segue can be, it is like ripping a band-aid off. Once the shock passes the conversation becomes way more honest and insightful. Stiff rumped logic has a way of blundering through obstacles.

Thoughts and/or observations?

 

[Atrapa Almas]

I can relate.

In my case most of those bricks became problems to my carreer. I was not understanding the politics of the company, and by tossing those very smart bricks with so nice truth I was making evident that I was not ready to take more responsability.

So I learned to keep those bricks for me and release them with the appropiate person in a 1-1 calmed conversation so they could do something with that info in case/when the political enviroment was/became the appropiate.

Somebody said: The truth will set you free. I tend to complete the phrase in my mind like this:

The truth will set you free of your current work.

Im still doing practices of the "Just close your mouth and keep doing your stuff" science. Much to learn.

 

[Callistemon]

@Darkkin, are you familiar with the UK drama series Doc Martin? One of the reasons many people find it so amusing is that Doc Martin is always saying what most of us would wish to point out in the situation, but few of us do. Granted, he's totally undiplomatic, and I don't advocate that, but it does create a good talking point around the BS we have been conditioned to accept culturally from others, and whether that is any less problematic than a blunt response pointing out the facts of the situation.

The Goldilocks zone, I think, is to be able to point out the facts in a diplomatic enough way so that the person(s) at the other end isn't being smacked in the face with the facts, but is being encouraged to take an honest look at themselves and their own behaviour and attitudes, and how they impact other people.

 

[Nervous Rex]

My wife does that, and I'm grateful for it. She will say what I'm thinking, but am afraid to say.

Me? I take a lot of time to carefully phrase everything oh-so-diplomatically. When it comes time to talk delicately to someone, my wife will ask me to do it.

 

[Darkkin]

One's brick needs to have an actual purpose. Tossing them at random...nope.

 

[StrayCat]

e.g. cases of entitlement, unsolicited, judgemental advice, factual inaccuracies, observed patterns of behaviour, etc.

Hmm, is this just standard social status fight? They made one of the listed mistakes and you try to take advantage of it by openly challenging them and gain some status in the eyes of your audience?

 

[Taylor Baker]

I do not understand the congruences of said context. Meaning it is an entirely separate topic...and has no bearing on the topic of said thread. In order for the brick to work it has to have some relevance to the topic being discussed.

Contextual congruences need to make sense within the flow of the conversation. Some tact as to the responsiveness of one's audience is needed.

You're right, my sincerest apologies.

I deleted that post.

Yes, get it straight from the horse's mouth. Rumors and misconceptions are like a dime a dozen. To get the truth from someone as to why something was happening that many only understand at the surface level is so liberating that it's not even funny. The problem, I believe, is that people believe this will shatter their shiny world. Many people will resort to blame to remain as close their precious worldview as possible, but once Toto reveals the man behind the curtain, suddenly it's all so different.

 

[Darkkin]

Is this just standard social status fight? They made one of the listed mistakes and you try to take advantage of it by openly challenging them and gain some status in the eyes of your audience?

That would indicate forethought and manipulation. Manipulation of one's peers that is alien to the nature of the majority autistics. Occurrence of sociopathy and psychopathy in the 2.8% of the autistic population (US) is 4.8% for sociopathy and 1% for psychopathy. Those numbers are akin to finding a unicorn.

Something bothers me, if it isn't right. I will say something. Do I consider, 'Hey, I'm going to gain respect from my peers for doing this thing.' Seriously, who does that? People as a whole are more inclined to do stupid and cruel things to gain acceptance than doing what is right.

I certainly don't keep a list of people's faults to lambast in front of others for social gain. That is just plain cruelty. Flat out cruelty and manipulation. Both major brick worthy faults. Behaviour like that is toxic.

See something like that. Speak up because it is the right thing to do.

Find a manipulative autistic and they will have to have some of the best masking skills known to mankind. It isn't impossible, but statistics and neurotype make it extremely improbable because of the very nature of autism itself.

One of the defining traits of the neurotype is a strong sense of right and wrong. More specifically social injustices. And keep in mind that NOTHING is typical with autism. It is defined as a social and neurological DEFICIT. To define it as socially standard is fundamentally unsound.

The aforementioned is a brick in the conversation. Fundamental inaccuracy.

 

[StrayCat]

That would indicate forethought of manipulation.

I'm pretty sure people do it naturally and instinctively, not much forethought involved. This is how bullying works, people are more eager to "drop a brick" on someone weak than on someone strong.

I think analyzing specific case would be more interesting. How did you got away with dropping a brick on someone and why nobody else done it before you?

 

[Darkkin]

I'm pretty sure people do it naturally and instinctively, not much forethought involved. This is how bullying works, people are more eager to "drop a brick" on someone weak than on someone strong.

I think analyzing specific case would be more interesting. How did you got away with dropping a brick on someone and why nobody else done it before you?

This is what manipulation can look like. Discourse requires trust and a certain degree of respect. I've observed certain patterns that are bothersome.

So no, we are not discussing me because I am not a bully dropping bricks on those less privileged than me. That is cruelty. What kind of person brags about that sort of thing?

I have the double empathy paradox: I do anything that causes hurt or harm, even accidentally stepping on my dog's paw I'm swamped with guilt.

 

[Taylor Baker]

My intention earlier was to provide an example of a brick that needed to be tossed, and that brick was "you get what you give." My interpretation was that Darkkin was making an allegory to the elephant in the room, what TV Tropes would call "Some Anvils Need to be Dropped," that something critical was being wrongly ignored.

I'm terribly sorry for steering the discussion off-course.

 

[StrayCat]

So no, we are not discussing me because I am not a bully dropping bricks on those less privileged than me.

Hmm, why did you take that so personally? Where did I say you are a bully?

 

[Darkkin]

Hmm, why did you take that so personally? Where did I say you are a bully?

Read what you wrote and look at the context. Really look at it. Consider how you sound to the reader. More specifically, pronouns can and/do speak volumes in terms of context and the pronouns are not objective to the topic, but are instead focused on the individual. Keep in mind that readers have context from prior conversations and individuals draw their own conclusions.

Brick in the conversation: Pronouns can say a lot. They matter.

 

[Forest Cat]

Sometimes I like to throw a handgranade into a conversation, step back and see what happens.

 

[Darkkin]

Sometimes I like to throw a handgranade into a conversation, step back and see what happens.

Pin in or pin out...(ducks for cover just in case.)

 

[StrayCat]

Read what you wrote and look at the context. Really look at it. Consider how you sound to the reader.

I certainly begin to have some guesses how it sounded to you and those guesses are terrifying... I kind of hope you will give me some nicer ones.

 

[AprilR]

Unless i really like and trust the people around me i don't dare to do this. I don't like conflict in general.

 

[Darkkin]

Unless i really like and trust the people around me i don't dare to do this. I don't like conflict in general.

Ditto. I hate conflict and I pay attention to the context of people around me. If the vibe is off I will ghost, the atmosphere is not beneficial to anyone and the spoon cost can be huge if one isn't careful.

One benefit of the empathy paradox, is a fairly reliable read on others pretty quickly. You know who to heed, etc...

 

[AprilR]

Ditto. I hate conflict and I pay attention to the context of people around me. If the vibe is off I will ghost, the atmosphere is not beneficial to anyone and the spoon cost can be huge if one isn't careful.

Exactly. I always try to settle awkward and uncomfortable situations also, i start to feel uncomfortable myself when the vibe is off.

 

[Darkkin]

Exactly. I always try to settle awkward and uncomfortable situations also, i start to feel uncomfortable myself when the vibe is off.

One of the best conversation tools I know of I learned from doing critiques is keeping things objective, focused on the topic (hypothetical situation) and not on the individual.

Let the topic stand or fall on its own merit. Just as a book is not its author. To borrow from theatre, use the fourth wall to gain workable space for open discourse. Hypothetical situations are also great ways to illustrate perspectives and get others to consider your view point. It is neutral ground.