Jump to navigation

You are currently browsing all posts tagged with 'straightforward'

Euthanize Euphemisms

  • Posted on May 12, 2009

The only cure for dysphemisms is to euthanize euphemisms. Is our purpose in life found by avoiding anything which might be offensive?

“For a moment she [Lara] rediscovered the purpose of her life. She was here on earth to grasp the meaning of its wild enchantment and to call each thing by its right name, or, if this were not within her power, to give birth out of love for life to successors who would do it in her place.” — Boris Pasternak, Doctor Zhivago

An ability to call each thing by its right name probably isn’t possible for those trapped in the fear of being perceived as lacking in empathy. What’s wrong with people who can’t see that it’s possible to have empathy, while at the same time avoiding the use of euphemisms?

“To call each thing by its right name. By its right name.” — Christopher McCandless, Into the Wild

Children don’t usually have a problem with saying things the way they are; nor do they with hearing things the way they are. The only time it becomes one is when they’ve learned how to intentionally be malicious with their phrases. Once they’ve discovered how much fun it is, they can become motivated to perfect those skills.

Euphemisms may be created with good intentions, but since human nature is as political is it is, there is nothing to stop these polite phrases from becoming abused.

Ironically, since Aspies naturally take things literal until taught otherwise, it’s the Aspies who get labeled as lacking in empathy because of not being accustomed to inventing terms for the purpose of avoiding offending neurotypicals.

If there is one thing neurotypicals need to understand more than anything else about Aspies it’s that we do not get offended by being told something straightforward the way it actually is. Euphemisms, for the most part, can be offensive to an Aspie → especially when NTs catch on to what fun it is being able to insult an Aspie without his or her awareness. Just because someone gets older, doesn’t mean s/he becomes more mature.

Here’s something to think about:

America accommodates Mexicans (most of which probably arrived illegally) by increasingly incorporating the Spanish language into the US. Why is it that gets accepted, but accomodations are not allowed for Aspies? What happens instead is Aspies are forced to endure dysphemisms such as: disorder, disease, disability, etc.

Being an Aspie doesn’t mean being too stupid to catch on to what’s going on. I’d like to know why, after all these years that Aspergers has now been public knowledge, NTs have not embraced a euphemism to honor neurodiversity. Could it be because it’s true that NTs don’t want to honor neurodiversity?

Thank You

  • Posted on March 25, 2008

I sincerely appreciate all the encouragement my readers give! The more I get, the more I have to give back and will gladly do so.

It’s said we Aspergians have difficulty accepting compliments. If and/or when that might be true, most likely it’s because we have difficulty detecting what the complimenter is really up to. Why can’t the NT world accept and/or understand that Aspergians think differently?! It takes us Aspies time, work, effort, and experience to learn that a social game is even going on — let alone knowing what it is.¹ Regardless of all that, we can eventually ‘get it‘ but, . . . we probably don’t want to play. It’s energy draining, especially if it’s expected of us to keep up the act for a prolonged period of time.

Unless an Aspergian gets brainwashed at an early age and/or is forced into it, he most likely will give a compliment without any ulterior motive. The NT culture differs from an Aspergian one in that NTs thrive on wearing whatever virtual make-up can make them look more attractive. Because there are enough people abusing the use of compliments, it’s accepted as being natural. What’s really natural is what you hear little children (like toddlers) say.

Everyone likes to be liked. Problems however will come about when a clash exists between the way different people go about exchanging niceties. Most Aspergians have at least average intelligence and many go well beyond the average, so when we’re suspicious of a compliment and our suspicions turn out to be valid, we’re highly insulted. Hopefully there are enough people with brains around to realize we Aspies going to go in the other direction when such things happen. It goes against our nature to overlook something that isn’t functional. Flattery may work among NTs for them to get what they want, but it does so at the cost of creating dysfunctional relationships.

When and/or if we accept compliments with ease, then we will be accused of being naïve. We’re never going to be who we’re not. Think about this: As willing and able an NT may be to change his behavior by taking off his mask and keeping it off at all times, that is how willing and able an Aspergian is to put on a mask and wear it out in public.

¹Social role playing is illogical and destructive to individuals and society in the long run. Typical people grow up practicing this craft so automatically that they’re not even aware of how much they do it by the time they reach adulthood.

[Edit on April 12, 2008 — I greatly appreciate all the encouragement I've received. However, since I'm disabling commenting, I shall try and make do with all of the positive feedback I've received so far. Thank you everyone for your kind words.]

An Aspergian Admission

  • Posted on March 20, 2008

Very verbal, blunt — alleged characteristics of Aspergers.

I know I can be very verbal (more likely in writing than audibly), but I’m never blunt. However, I can be candid. Here’s the problem: If I try to express myself in a brief manner (like most others do online), I will most likely be perceived as being rude because my straightforwardness will be misinterpreted as bluntness. If I try to avoid being frank, then I end up being incessantly verbose. If that’s not frustrating enough, add to that trying to figure out if something said will be perceived as being blunt or as being forthright.

What’s the difference between being blunt versus being candid? Being blunt is insensitive because the motive is selfish and uncaring (usually because of pride and/or arrogance). Being candid is sensitive because the motive is to be kind and caring (thanks to humility¹).

The antonym of candid is indirect. ‘Indirect’ is also the antonym of blunt. So then does this mean that being indirect is polite? Or is being indirect rude? Society tells its members that being indirect is what is socially correct. Here is the question:

If someone cannot get the hint, who is the rude person: the one who can’t figure out the answer or the one who is being indirect?

Unless I’m mistaken, the impression I get from most people is that they are so terrified of being perceived as rude if they’re directly honest, that they’d rather be indirect or not say anything at all. This then leaves the other person having to work long (as in maybe years or even decades) and hard to ‘get it’ because others are more concerned about their own image.

Disingenuous — not candid or sincere, especially in feigning ignorance; this is socially popular. Ingenuous — innocent, candid, lacking craft or subtlety, natural; this is socially unpopular.

Rephrased question from above:

Is it now considered rude in today’s society to expect someone to be candid to a person who is ingenuous?

I’m going to be candid now, so please don’t twist this as being blunt: I believe people do not like a person who displays an ingenuously child-like simplicity, because that makes someone who is disingenuous uncomfortably guilty . . . especially in situations like being at a party. Being disingenuous has become socially acceptable behavior because enough of a majority of people have desensitized their consciences so that today’s moral standards have decayed sufficiently for it to now be tolerated.

Just because more and more people are heading in the wrong direction does this then mean that those who refuse to follow the crowd jumping off the bridge need to get “cured” to spare the rest from humiliation?

¹Humility is not thinking less of yourself; it is thinking of yourself less.

Manipulate This!

  • Posted on March 18, 2008

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.

What you see is what you get.

  • Posted on March 16, 2008

So, I hear that we Aspergians have difficulty hiding true emotions such as anger and sadness? Why pray tell the use of the word difficulty? Could it be more the case of NTs having difficulty being true to self? . . . difficulty at being honest about what one’s feels? Forget that argument, because the answer has everything to do with the game that’s being played.

Maybe the better question to ask is, “Do children have difficulty hiding true emotions such as anger and sadness?” Dropping it down to children now seems to present a different focus. People don’t expect kids to hide anger or sadness. They can accept children displaying their emotions. Why then must this change when one becomes an adult? Why is it expected of adults to hide what they really feel? Most don’t do a good job of it anyhow. Take politicians for example. If ever there were portraits of trick-or-treaters in action, they’d be it!

I’m not saying that emotions should be allowed full reign of expression. Aspies are well able to express emotion and still keep a lid on its limits. There are enough excellent Aspergian actors who exemplify wonderful abilities at hiding true emotions when the occasion calls for it. No — it’s more like Aspergians value being real and true to self.

In the movie (here is a 2 minute trailer) and the book titled, “Housekeeping,” the busy-body ladies of the community (most likely neurotypicals) complained to Aunt Sylvie about her niece Ruthie being sad¹. Lucille, Ruthie’s sister, decided to go her own way with her own friends. This left Ruthie feeling rejected and abandoned, but yet Ruthie was expected to hide her true emotion of sadness?! Thank God Sylvie had the guts to inform these busy-body doe-doe heads that Ruthie was supposed to be feeling sad! You’d think that news flash would have been appreciated, but no! Instead such honesty caused more trouble. Yes, it’s only a novel. However, the way that things happen in that story to the characters could very well be real.

What kind of craziness is expected? We’re supposed to be what others want us to be? I guess then that would make Jesus to be an Aspergian too since he didn’t seem to fit the typical conformist mold either in many ways. The mental health profession is like a fire. It’s okay if it’s kept under control and where it belongs. But when they’re allowed to make the statements they do to describe Aspergians the way want, then that fire left the fireplace and only God knows what those sparks will destroy!

¹The last time I watched this movie or read the book was before knowing about Asperger’s Syndrome, so what I’m about to say is relying on memory. Judging from how differently Sylvie and Ruthie think from the typical people of the community, there seems to be quite of bit of Aspergian traits among those two characters. A guy at the video store commented years back, when I rented the film, that the main character, Sylvie, was a schizophrenic person. Funny how so many so-called ‘professionals’ have misdiagnosed countless numbers of Aspergians as being schizophrenic!

Top


Creative Commons License
© 2008 - 2010 Sheila Schoonmaker