Your friend is at least partially misinforming you. It's fine to write k instead of ok in almost all situations. But either of them can be rude if the other person would expect more emotive words. For example here's when k is fine:
Them: Bring my pen when you come into the other room
You: k
And here's where k is not fine:
Them: Wanna go grab some drinks tonight at 8?
You: k
That's rude. They would want to hear you actually be interested in their invitation. Like saying "great" or "I'm in" or whatever.
...Ooooh. I think that's what she was trying to tell me actually and I just completely misunderstood. That second example is a type of situation I used it a lot in. I didn't realize people needed to know how interested I was. I thought they just needed a quick confirmation.
Yay, glad I could help! Yeah essentially if they're asking something that might have an emotional aspect to it then they want to hear more than just k.
Often people are looking for some sort of validation, even when it's not obvious.
If they say "I can't join you in the bar today, I have too much work to catch up on", "K." is not a good answer. Several aspects needs to be addressed, ideally:
That's too bad
Next time
Commentary on the state of work: Keep your head above water/your boss is such a jerk/we'll make up for it after your deadline on Thursday/whatever, depending on the situation and your relationship.
Basically, it's a way to show that you care about what they're telling you. It can be a bit exhausting at times.
This is really helpful. I didn't realize there were so many situations people were looking for validation. I just assumed when they said something like that it was just to quickly let me know and "K." was all they needed.
To expand on this, consider that others cannot know what you're thinking without you telling them.
You might feel "I'm looking forward to that and I think we will have fun together."
But if you don't tell someone that, they are left to guess for themselves. That uncertainty is very uncomfortable.
Neurotypicals learned to give and use clues to help navigate life and determine if they need to change their actions. But it's a complicated balance. Most people don't like being told "I'm not interested in that." They'd rather hear "no thank you, maybe some other time." But they'd also much rather hear "that sounds like fun!" than hearing "yeah sure".
It can be very difficult to imagine what it's like to have a different set of information than what you yourself know. Practice this skill! It will help you in lots of situations. Do your best to reduce uncertainty while considering how it might feel to hear the new information you're sharing for the first time.
Ah, I think the hangup for me wasn't so much not understanding that they had different info than me, but that they wanted the info I had. Moreover, that they might feel differently about things than I did, and they knew that, so I needed to make sure they knew how I felt.
When I see somebody just respond "K." or "Alright" to an invitation to do something, that always made me happy enough to know that they were gonna be there because I figured if they didn't want to, they'd have found an excuse to say no. I didn't suspect that others might not just assume somebody was happy to be there the way I did. It's helpful to know I need to clear up how I feel in some way for them to understand that I want to be there and enjoy their company.
People can agree to go to an event but have very different feelings about doing it. Some people will be extremely stoked about going, some will be happy about it, some will be like meh its better than sitting at home, some people won't want to go but decide to anyway because they want to be nice, some may really not want to go but decide to go anyway out of a sense of obligation. The particular words you reply with express your interest level to some degree. A plain "k" will be interpreted as a meh at best.
I see. I always just determined that by their reactions once they showed up, and figured all that mattered until then was whether they had any desire to at all, which was usually conveyed easily with single word responses. I didn't realize other people wanted to know your feelings beforehand.
Ideally people want to have a general sense of how you're feeling at all times. Not like in a disruptive way of always making announcements, but through things like the particular words you choose and facial expressions and body language etc.
I can definitely adjust my words to express how I'm feeling better more often. The facial expressions and body language though I'm probably incapable of unfortunately on account of me actually having two separate disorders that make me unable to show physical expressions of emotion. Way back in middle school I was put in a special class to teach me both of those and I couldn't even figure out how to trigger the muscles in my face to actually make any expressions, nor was I even capable of recognizing the body language I was supposed to be mimicking even when it was described to me.
The disorder is schizoaffective, but the inability to express emotions isn't usually a big feature of it. It comes with psychosis. Usually, antipsychotics are all it takes to trigger your brain to start expressing emotions again, but I can't take a high enough dose to do that without serious side effects, so I instead deal with minor psychosis symptoms, like having to remind myself constantly that no, the order of my songs when I hit shuffle is not a secret message telling me the future, and also the fact that I can't express any physical emotions unless they're very strong. It also shows in my tone of voice, which is a consistent, flat, unchanging tone that I try to vary randomly just so people don't tune out my voice.
That sounds hard. But it seems like you've got a good understanding of yourself, and that's huge! It's clear that you've put a ton of work into all this and have achieved real accomplishments. I give you a massive virtual high five!!!
To make things more confusing, responding to an invitation to drinks with "k!" might be ok, depending on who's asking and the context.
If it's your roommate asking, and they're doing it because there's a sporting event or because drinks are an established ritual, it'd be fine. If it's your boss, or a new (potential) friend or colleague, a possible romantic interest, or a close friend and it's not something they usually do or invite you out for, then those situations have a lot more weight, and expect a more fulsome and engaged reply.
Where does that headline phrasing come from? The study does not, and does not claim to, pinpoint anything for autism.
They use mice bred for hypersensitivity, and look at which parts of those mice's brains can be suppressed to reduce measured sensitivity to heated floors and electric shock.
They use "mice models of autism" to get an indication of where to maybe start looking on the slim chance it turns out to be similar in humans.
The mouse model may turn out to be a different kind of hypersensitivity altogether. Human brains may wire hypersensitivity very differently. The observed results may be that the mice's reactions are different instead of weaker. Etc...
It is valid science, but a long shot away from a long shot at being applicable for autism in humans.
C'mon now! Don't you get it? Instead of society making the effort to learn about and accommodate for the needs of autistic people, they're spending a ton of money on research, and the results of this study mean they might be able to FIX US!
This basically, as in my case, my sensory issues make it hard to do many fairly basic things, and causes lots of discomfort that otherwise wouldn't bother me if not for the sensitivity.
"Fixing" is very different from "reducing the issues for the person with the sensitivity, making life relatively easier to handle".
You left their party after a couple hours to relax. I'm guessing you were feeling a little overstimulated and needing a break, and your partner probably realized this as well and was willing to let you decompress.
Then you accepted an invitation to socialize with someone else, which to your partner probably seemed like you needed a break from them but not someone else. Of course, this is not a one-to-one situation, I'm sure swimming and a sunset is much more restful and relaxing than a birthday party, but from their perspective they probably wished you could have stayed but respected you needed a break. Now they're finding out that you didn't necessarily take a break from socializing, so it looks somewhat more like you needed a break from them.
Again, I know that isn't exactly what happened, and it isn't the message you meant to give with your actions, but that's my attempt to see things from their perspective based on what we've been told.
I think you've summarized it pretty well, and as far as I can judge it is exactly how my partner received it. I think I definitely needed a break from this specific birthday party, but also I needed a bit of time away from her. I am not sure however how to communicate it in an appropriate way though.
I can absolutely relate to what you're describing. Sometimes you need a break from a specific person, and it is not because you dislike them, you just really need a break. This is, from what I can tell, not a common neurotypical experience and so not something that neurotypical folks can relate to, and it's hard to put it into words as a way that sounds anything other than "I don't like being around you".
The closest I can come to putting it into words is that sometimes my mind behaves like a cat. One moment you're both enjoying each other's company, the next I'm totally full and need to go. It's not about any specific person, it can happen with anybody I'm around.
It's good that you're working to understand how to express your experience to others, it's difficult but worth the time to strengthen relationships. Hopefully your partner understands that it's not the easiest thing.
Got it, thank you! I deeply appreciate your feedback on it. I've been a bit anxious if I'm the only one who feels this way, but it's good to know that I'm not.
Don't get me wrong, I really love my partner and she is an amazing person. I love spending time with her. But I also notice that time alone just has a different quality. So thank you for sharing your experience - I will definitely keep it in mind and clarify to her that she hasn't done anything wrong at all, it is just my mind which sometimes needs a pause from the input of a specific person.
I think when my partner put it that way, I also was a bit "huh, wait a second - I don't really understand WHY it is romantically coded, but I get that it hurt you".
You're missing a critical step. If you call someone a partner, it means that you two are standing together, equal halves. So of course with everything you do, you need to ask yourself "how would I feel about doing this and how would my other half feel about me doing this?". It sounds like you skipped that second part.
Thank you - I think that's a good sentence to keep in mind. We already have figured out lots of strategies to work so that none of us gets hurt by the actions of our partner, but I didn't even suspect she might be hurt by it.
While your body may not still be developing, you're not done growing mentally/spiritually yet! Keep on keeping on, fellow audultie ✊
I got diagnosed just over a year ago in my 40s. I was diagnosed as a child, but they didnt tell me. I only realized it once I reviewed my childhood with my autism therapist. Anyway, this meme hits hard every time I have one of those revelations:
Oh man, when I meet an autistic person who shares a common interest....yes please give me that info dump. Not only am I interested but your enthusiasm is infectious, too.
In the department of Cher Napoleon established a vast forest of Oak. The purpose was to have materiel ready to built ships for his navy. This was a strategic resource, the same way steel, tungsten, etc. are today.
With the changes in shipbuilding, at least for naval vessels, the need was diminished for timber masts and planking.
The city of Montluçon had been a producer of cast iron for a long time. Canals are an ideal way to transport that long distances.
The oak forests shifted to being a source of charcoal both for the charcoal itself and for the production of cast iron. The 'pigs', ingots of cast iron, could later be wrought or further refined into steel.
Pretty much the tl;dr is that demand dropped off, because Oak was no longer needed for war and higher quality iron could be sourced more cheaply from the north and east, with better connections. It was thought that upgrading the canal was not cost effective, so it slowly died.
The canal itself had issues, it often suffered from insufficient (water) influx, and leaks. It was not terribly well waterproofed as the area is low in clay soil. It's quite lovely through many parts, though there are some dry areas. The Locks still exist, and many of the Lock Keepers houses are there. They were all built to the same plan from Oak and stone, with lovely Tomette (hexagonal terra cotta tile) floors in the kitchen.
There is of course more, where it links (it doesn't exist in a vacuum), the general depopulation of what the French call the 'Diagonal Void', and probably other important things that i will remember next week and think ' that's important, why didn't I write that down? Now they think I'm an idiot'.
That was an incredibly interesting read about a topic I never knew I'd find interesting. Thanks!
I just read the Wikipedia page on that diagonal. Also something I had never thought about before.
And don't assume I think you're an idiot for not adding more. I knew nothing before I read this and now I know a lot. If you do remember something (and remember this comment), feel free to reply. I love learning stuff
Thank you, it was very nice of you to say. I really am better at it in person, I tend to get off on a lot more tangents, which can be interesting or tedious depending on your point of view.
There are some stunning areas in the diagonal, if I was a digital nomad with n EU passport that's where I would base myself. Lots of beautiful old houses for little money, bit like Akiya in rural Japan.
God we'd be such fast friends in real life....if you could put up with my own tangents and rambling, anyway. I love having conversations that lead me to 10 tabs of Wikipedia
I had a long time partner who had her own things. It was pretty normal for us to talk during and after dinner, then retreat to our own worlds. She or I would ask what the other was doing sometimes, "nothing, just reading" meant you were 10 pages deep, and chasing all the citations.
I've never been diagnosed but I'm pretty sure I'm somewhere on the spectrum...it's a shame I can't just put "looking for an autistic partner" on a dating profile without looking like a wacko.
Because narrow gauge is always the odd man out. If you used narrow gauge (and there are many, the term encompasses quite a few different sizes) there was a reason. Could be something like tight turn radii, or as simple as bigger costs more.
Is this a thing? I feel like I often have to repeat my very clear and simple words and even then people remember them differently than I do? I thought I was just insane
Yeah, it is a thing, but beware also the times when you misremember both their words and your own. I, certainly, have been guilty...
At the same time, it may help to remember that people are often listening to, and I presume 'remembering' a sort of semantic meaning of what you said, not the words. Add to that a little mishearing, some assumption, and different expectations between you and them, and that can shift the meaning a lot from what you meant, while to them it seems they just approximately remembered.
Talk to your partner about what they consider romantic activities, because everyone has a different idea of what is or is not romantic. It can also depend on other bits of context. For example, going to a fancy dinner with one friend might be seen as romantic by your partner, but a fancy dinner with a sibling or group of friends might not be.
The timing could also be a bigger factor than the activity itself. Your partner might feel offended that you chose to leave the birthday celebration/activities for personal time to relax and unwind, only to then go and do something with a different friend. Even if that activity with the other friend wasn't seen as a romantic activity, your partner might have still been upset that they were perceived as a lower priority on their birthday, a day they might have expected to be more prioritized by them.
Even further, different people have different degrees of, for lack of a better term here, jealousy towards their partner in regards to activities. I'm not implying your partner is toxic or a jealous sort, but a lunch "date" with a friend is acceptable for some partners, but crosses the line for others.
Yes, makes sense. I think for my partner it was also really impactful that I did it on her birthday. For me, the logic was "okay, so I can't go back to her party, because many people; another person invited me to fun activity, where I can participate; so why not?"
I think this is something I'll try to learn that timing is really important to consider here. I think I only view the action itself, which I don't think is wrong - but it seems that the context that it happened on the birthday of my friend is really important here.
Thank you. Unfortunately, I have a lot of real blame to take over my prior behavior. I used a lot of aggression to get out of my cage. But much better now, surrounded by love, but there are those who will never forgive my past.
It's hard to forgive yourself when there are some who confront you every time you see them, although you've told the truth and apologized, demanding a new and better repentance.
I feel very exposed writing that. Sorry to overshare.
Apologizing to them is also enough to forgive yourself. Regardless if they won't accept the apology, you've grown enough to recognize past mistakes, and made reasonable attempts to amend them, there's no need to dwell on it any longer. It's okay to try and make the past right, and move forward with what You've learned and continue to grow as a person.
That's not oversharing. That's just adding detail.
It's okay to have made mistakes, and it's definitely okay for not being able to be perfect. No human is or can be. What's important is that you've chosen to be better going forward.
That advice about self forgiveness the other user gave you was excellent. I still need to work on that more, but I know from experience that it's an important thing to practice.
That's hard. Real hard. I can't say what atonement would look like, that's maybe therapist territory, but I can say that it's OK to protect yourself. You can't change the past and undo the hurt you did. I don't see anything wrong with avoiding people you have hurt after you apologize.
K can give the impression that you don’t care and don’t want to be bothered with it. The effort in your response is expected to be proportional to the effort it took to write the message to you.
If someone write a long personal message to you, and all you responds is K, then it gives the impression that you might not even read the message. Why even bother next time?
Proper grammar in informal settings is a difficult one, but this is my theory:
It might give the impression of mismatch in vibes. There’s a difference in informal speak and formal speak, and participants in a conversation are expected to be in the same wavelength. An extreme example, but it’s like when everybody is dressed casually at a social gathering, but you decide to show up in a three piece suit.
I'm constantly astounded that people on the spectrum assume that they're absolutely, 100% right, and that the problem is always everyone else. If I'm saying something, and no one around me is understanding what I'm saying, then the problem is clearly not everyone else. The very clear, and obvious problem is that I'm not communicating clearly -or- effectively.
More often than not, I find that I've omitted something that seems blindingly, patently obvious to me, but no one else was aware of because I entirely failed to communicate it.
This is a hallmark of being on the spectrum; people think that because they see things one way, everyone else must be able to see the same thing.
That one 'blindingly obvious' thing is key often for me too. Sometimes it's not only not obvious to other people but it's entirely wrong too.
Ironically, it's often the same thing the other way round: the neurotypical leaves off or implies some context that seems obvious to them and the people they normally communicate with.
The other main thing, from neurodivergent to neurotypical, is (not) implying emotional meaning. (And vice versa, not picking up on it.) You say something and mean it logically, but hidden in your words is emotional meaning - sometimes it's real but you wouldn't even know it yourself; sometimes it's not real just you said things in a way that someone else would if they meant that extra emotion. Communication is about emotion as much as facts, and the listener rightly tries to pick up on emotions, but misunderstands.
As I said in another comment, one of the defining characteristics of the autism spectrum is a blunted sense of empathy. As you say, that blunted empathy can mean that the autistic person doesn't hear the emotional content, reacts to it inappropriately, or is not able to effectively communicate emotional content themselves.
Come to think of it, if people on the spectrum aren't communicating emotional content, or are doing it very poorly, that might explain part of why some autistic people think they're communicating precisely with carefully chosen words, but their intent and meaning is still being misunderstood.
I think probably all people dismiss what is obvious to them as not needing to be said, and for good reason: why overburden a conversation with obvious truths. Though given that we're all just apes with a superiority complex, we're probably entirely wrong about what's obvious or true 🙈
Reminds me of that xkcd comic with two experts talking about how people not in their field would only know what they consider basic but people usually don't know that either
It's a little more complicated with autism though, because one of the hallmarks of autism is blunted empathy (and no, I'm not saying that we're all sociopaths-lite).
An example I heard from a psychologist--and I'm going to try not to butcher this--is that if you show an autistic child a cookie tin and ask them what they think is in the tin, they'll say cookies. Then you show them what's in the tin, and it's actually toy cars. But if, after showing them toy cars in a cookie tin, you ask them what another person is going to think is in the cookie tin, the autistic child is likely to say "toy cars".
Obvs. most people on the spectrum get better about this as they get older and learn from experience, but I strongly suspect that this sort of thing is what's going on when autistic people 'explain' things. My guess is that this difficulty with affective and cognitive empathy is also what leads to people on the spectrum over-explaining things; since they're not able to make an accurate guess about what other people know or can infer, they give too much information about a thing.
My SO frequently includes me in conversations that they've already started in their head, and I have to remind them that I have zero context for what they just said.
Yup. It’s saying “I’m acknowledging that I heard what you said, but only giving the bare minimum effort in responding.” It could also potentially sound sarcastic and/or condescending, depending on the tone.
Working in IT, I have learned that a lot of meetings are by people who gain "respect and notoriety" by having large meetings. It doesn't matter who shows up, it's the number, that makes them seem popular. "Get the engineers in here, this is serious business!" You begin to learn which PMs do this, and can respond (or not) accordingly. If they ping you "where are you?" you can say, "I am in an [client] audit call. I cannot leave this call while the audit is taking place." Or whatever your industry equivalent is. YMMV, some toxic environments I have been in, this was not possible.
I remember one PM was frozen in indecision. I had to tell him, "I can fix the problem, or having a meeting about it. Pick one."
"Well, both--"
"No. I can fix the problem, or having a meeting about it. Pick one or the other."
"I need you in this meeting!"
"When we explain to the customer that the fix was delayed by an hour, I can use YOUR name, as having a meeting about it instead of fixing it, correct?"
"The meeting is to be about fixing it!"
"No. I can fix the problem, or having a meeting about it. Pick one or the other."
"... we can have the meeting in your office, then."
This is why every project should have at least one of those rare engineers who can actually concisely explain a problem and solution in layman's terms to the PM. Asking the PM to just trust your solution on faith is a bigger ask than you realize.
This is also why you shouldn't have PMs who have zero technical knowledge of what the actual project they're managing is. PMs need to be smart enough to understand the basic idea of what the engineers are telling them. A really good PM will spend time learning at least the basics of the field their engineers work in.
Working in IT, I have learned that a lot of meetings are by people who gain “respect and notoriety” by having large meetings. It doesn’t matter who shows up, it’s the number, that makes them seem popular. “Get the engineers in here, this is serious business!”
Narcissists always climb to the top positions...by stepping on people to get there.
Autism
Top
This magazine is not receiving updates (last activity 0 day(s) ago).