Sometimes it’s so easy for me to know what topic to pick next from this list of Some Symptoms and Characteristics of Aspergers by the members of the “expert’s panel” made up of those on the neurotypical spectrum scale. Today two words seem to be shouting at me. They are: naïveness and hypocrisy.
Now I finally understand why there is such a hatred towards those who remain “innocent” and “child-like” in their adulthood. It also explains the feverish desire parents have for their children to become “wise” to the “world.” No wonder my parents assumed I could figure all this out on my own without anyone explaining it to me. This is a trait that neurotypicals commonly share because of how differently they process information. How contradicting the claim is that Aspergians are easily manipulated, but yet other periodical journals (on the topic of aspergers) say that Aspergians are perceived as being manipulative people. I even heard my semi-close-by neighbors make this remark about someone I got acquainted with in my Aspie circle of friends. Pardon me for feeling angry, but something like this should put the kettle on to boil.
Where do I begin? I’ll start with the statement, “Aspies are easily manipulated.” This is a rare statement that I can actually agree with, but I can only do so by saying it’s true ONLY when we’re left without the truth. We do not easily figure this one out because we do not think the same way. I’ll also agree with the statement that, “Aspergians can be perceived as being manipulative.” . . . however, that too begs for clarification. My blog is manipulative. Just about everything and everyone is manipulative, but the difference though is our methods and our motives. The general trend for Aspergians is to manipulate what others perceive by using facts and details (in a scientific way of analyzing things) — always trying to remain loyal to the truth. Many neurotypicals may be sincere (motive) in their desire to do the right things, but because of using methods that are hypocritical, vague, and subjective (relative vs. absolute) in the “mental health arena,” their methods of manipulation can easily become self-deceptive (along with confusing innocent Aspie children who sincerely want to understand the world in which they’re born into). This is why it’s highly dangerous to ignore the input that adults with Aspergers have to offer.
All human beings are born with the nature that can distort truth because we’re all naturally self-centered. The difference though between Aspergians and NTs is that Aspergians, by nature, gravitate towards that which is absolute (like notes on music sheets, mathematical patterns, consistent and logical rules, etc.). NTs, by nature, are attracted to things that permit some room for being subjective because of their different way of “reading” people and their “non-verbal language” they speak. The reason that the NT’s language dominates is simply because the majority of people are neurotypical. NTs have not realized or learned yet that we Aspergians have our own language and we too can “read” non-verbal signals within our own culture that NTs are mind-blind to, but since we’re a minority, what motive do they have to even be curious (unless maybe they have a loved one they want to understand better)?
Now for a specific example of naïveness and hypocrisy:
Here is a new concept that was very recently explained to me by an aspie friend of mine (who I appreciate dearly for his honesty). The “socially correct (socially acceptable)” behavior expected of people is for them to be allowed to act like they are giving others the benefit of doubt. In other words, it’s “polite” for us to treat others as if they’re innocent until proven guilty. When it comes to things like murder and the death penalty for murders (eye for eye, tooth for tooth — excellent justice system provided that motives and spirits remain in their proper place), then yes . . . that is a wonderful principle to live by. But, unfortunately this principle as gone haywire and gets carried to the wrong extreme.
If it was true that people really are innocent until proven guilty, then why is it that mostly everyone distrusts others in reality? Most people want their cake and eat it too. Whether they realize this or not, I don’t know. I suspect most are not even aware of this. Take for example my blog here along with my oddball uses for it. It took me awhile to see how much people are uncomfortable with using comments for corresponding with me instead of e-mails. I could only suspect things, but now that my suspicions were confirmed, I can speak with confidence that what I’m about to say is the truth and a fact.
I find this funny because it’s such a good example of self-deception. People trust that what they write in an e-mail or letter to another person will remain private way more than they trust that what they write in a comment that will be submitted to the blogger will be kept private (not published) upon request. They’re uncomfortable because here I am using what so many people use (comments), but what’s different is that I am also using comments as an alternative form of e-mailing. They’re judging by what they see and forgetting that there can be much that they don’t see. No one can see a comment that is submitted and only read by my eyes which then gets deleted. They automatically assume that what they write is at risk of possibly being seen by others . . . even though I give my word that I will not make it public, if that’s what they want.
What does this mean? It means that people really do not want to trust others. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with that! I don’t trust people either, but I do realize there are different levels of trust involved with different pieces of information. I wouldn’t put my social security number under my blog title, but I don’t mind using my name. Why? Just look at all the names in the phone book and those that are used for business by self-employed people. Do you see people’s social security numbers plastered everywhere the same way? No. Enough said on that.
The hypocrisy about trust is that most people feel insulted and are personally offended if they’re made to feel like they’re not being trusted, especially if it’s by someone who is their friend. People want others to trust them but they don’t want to trust other people. That’s a fact and that’s okay too. But what’s not okay though is to allow this double-standard by permitting behavior that requires others to have to constantly try to figure out what the other person is really saying. Why don’t people just say things the way that they are? I don’t mean in an arrogant fashion like a thin person telling someone else he’s fat. I mean like being straightforward with what you really think and/or feel.
I have a way higher respect for a person who will be straight with me by telling me that he’s uncomfortable about trusting me with certain things (like maybe not wanting to write to me by submitting comments on my blog instead of sending an e-mail) than I do for someone who pretends that they are giving me the benefit of doubt. People hope I will allow them to deceive me into believing that they trust me to be a person of integrity (innocent until proven guilty) but in reality they do not want to give me the benefit of doubt and do not want to trust me as being a person of my word. If this is not an example of hypocrisy (of wanting your cake and to eat it too), then someone please explain how it’s not because I can’t see it being any other way.
The reason I’ve spent so many years of my life being naïve and manipulated was because those around me did not care about me enough to be honest and explain to me how society really works. The worst lie I repeatedly heard throughout my life was, “People will be good to you, if you’re good to them.” In a small way, that’s true. Generally speaking though, if you’re genuine, sincere, and real; you can be easily manipulated into trusting others because you think they think like you do. Heck, rare is the person I can think of who has not expected me to think like they think. People are still out to try to change me to be like them. News flash — that’s never going to happen, because I do not WANT to be like how I see other people being. I’d rather die first than to conform to what society claims is the correct way to be. My allegiance is to God . . . not the world. [Romans 12:2, "And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God."]
How did I finally end the ease at which people were able to manipulate me? By learning that just because I think the way I do and believe what I do, there are others who don’t even come close to how I’m accustomed to being. I’d equate it with being like getting flung off native soil and thrown into a world that’s totally foreign without any translator around to explain what’s going on. All the learning that happens when communications are down has to come from trial and error, like a blind person fumbling around alone in a new and strange land where others only care about what makes themselves comfortable without thinking about what makes the other person uncomfortable and/or what the long-term consequences of their selfishness and/or ignorance will cost to society.
For me to conform to this world would mean that I have to pretend I’m thinking more highly of others than they might be in reality. I’ve already lived with giving people the benefit of the doubt as to their innocence and good intentions. I’ve had my fill of “Let’s get together for coffee,” and/or all the “It’s nice to have made your acquaintance,” theatrics. I’m not at all ashamed to be so bold as to put people on the spot by making them give me specific facts to back their words up by treating me like a “professional” by having them make an appointment with me. I do such things with the utmost caution to not act in a arrogant manner, but rather in an the same tone as one does when they call to make a dentist appointment. After all, how quick do you think some dentist will take you seriously about your wanting to get together with him if you don’t commit yourself to a particular day, time, and place to meet?
If someone mistakenly thinks that for an adult to act in such a way as to call the other person’s bluff is arrogant, then they need to explain to me why it is that, when children push for an answer from a parent for details and specifics if they’re told they’re going to go somewhere and do something fun, such behavior is expected. If it’s a shame to mislead a child, then why does it stop being a shame to mislead an adult? If you’re tempted to answer, “I don’t want to hurt the person’s feelings,” then that’s a cop out selfish people take. You hurt other people way more by being misleading than you can by trying to help them understand by confessing the truth.
If I can say to someone that I don’t feel comfortable being around him and then explain nicely to him why that’s so, then at least it provides the opportunity for both the other person and me to possibly work out some kind of solution that might help to make both myself and the other person learn something (that maybe otherwise would not be known) by being candid and caring. If that doesn’t happen (which most likely it would not given the way people are), then nothing is any worse than it was. The alternative however does provide opportunities for things to progress in a destructive manner over the long haul.
