Cosplayer with a wicked sense of sarcasm. Likes to read a lot and watch movies/tv.
Things you should know: I'm over 21, have a Bachelors degree, and sometimes I'll post adult themed images. If your going to be offended then thats your problem not...
Btw I was talking to Kiddo about social rules because we’re both autistic and it doesn’t come naturally to either of us but I have 25 years experience on them so I have some useful tips
And as proof of that: in that conversation I realised what neurotypicals mean when they say we “make everything about us”
When they’re talking and we interject “fun facts” or start talking about something related to what they’re saying we mean:
“I am showing interest in you and your interests by engaging with them and showing I’m listening by adding information”
From their perspective we are stomping over their turn to talk and making it our turn and therefore making it about us
Conversation example:
NT: my favourite animal is sharks
Autistic person: with some sharks species the shark pup that hatches first hunts the others and eats them while being incubated inside the mother
Autistic person perspective: I have shown interest in you by giving you information about a topic you have shown interest in
NT person’s perspective: wow they made my favourite animal a time for them to show off instead of letting me talk when it was my turn
It’s doesn’t matter if it’s “on topic” or “relevant to the person” if it’s when it’s their turn to be the focus of the conversation
Like I know there is a bit more to it but this is the first time in 39 years I have understood the accusation “you’re making this all about yourself”
OHHH. Ok? I think I get it?
NT important variables: When (whose turn is it), and How (intonation, etc) - Conversational metadata.
ND important variables: What (the literal text/information exchange), and Why (the purpose fulfilled) - The base conversation.
From one autistic to another: you can master this exchange with one easy tool.
Ask a follow-up question.
As stated, allistic conversations do put a lot of weight into whose turn it is to speak. So in the above example,
Person: my favorite animal is sharks
The best follow-up response is “what do you like about sharks?”
Your conversation partner will answer, and if they’re not a dickbag, then they will turn the conversation back to you, likely with a relevant question - “what’s your favorite animal?” At which point you are free to infodump just a little. Keep it within one or two sentences - unless of course the person finds the info interesting.
But then keep asking follow-up questions, or at least give your conversation partner a chance to follow-up on their statements. Don’t worry too much about the timing of questions, and if you’re even slightly anxious that you’re asking something too personal/rude, then tack on a “sorry, you don’t have to answer.” Allistic people just like to know that you’re listening to what they have to say about the topic.
This is good advice and largely what I told my kid to do
I’m still thrown though that even though I had picked up on the “you need to ask questions and limit your sharing” (even though I’m not great at it) but I was 39 before I realised why allistics went about things the way they did
i know this one, its not about the “turns”! Like this is a bit more of a “you used the wrong formula but got the correct answer situation” - the reason the NT in the original sharks example would assume the autistic person was showing off or making it abt themselves isnt because its not their turn to speak.
Its because the autistic person stating the information as a response directly after someone expresses a feeling like “i like sharks” reads to an allistic person like the autistic person assumed they dont know as much about sharks as them and is condescending to them. So it’s more:
Autistic perspective: “I like sharks!” -> “Wow! That’s so cool! In order to include your interest in this conversation, I will include fun facts related to your interests!”
Allistic perspective: “I like sharks!” -> “I am stating information about sharks without giving you an opportunity to say anything about your knowledge level or give your own shark fact(s) first, giving off the impression that I think I know more than you and am condescending to you by trying to educate you on a topic you enjoy.”
The thing is, asking a follow-up question like “what’s your favourite thing about sharks” DOES work in conversation, not because allistics run on dnd combat rules in conversation (they also ramble, and cut people off knowingly) but because it gives the allistic person a chance to demonstrate their familiarity w the subject first.
That way, they have an opportunity to show that they are also knowledgeable about the topic (sharks) and then the shark facts will be seen as an information exchange rather than condescension because both parties will be aware that the topic is “exchanging shark facts”.
(If the allistic doesn’t really know much about the topic, or says they only like sharks because they look cute etc. then it is ideal to say something like “thats cool! I did a bit of research into sharks a while back, do you want to hear some shark facts?” which serves the same kind of purpose in clarifying that u want to give shark facts for fun and not because you think they need to be educated.)
The question also gives the allistic the opportunity to say that they’d rather not discuss shark facts and instead move on to a different topic, which lets them feel like they have also retained a degree of control over the conversation rather than feeling like the autistic person is domineering or monologuing (it is a common misinterpretation of infodumping unfortunately).
Just generally its more about letting the allistic demonstrate both that they also want to hear facts and that they are also knowledgeable on a topic before infodumping so that they can understand that you view them as an equal and not an inferior on the topic, and so they will have a much harder time feeling slighted in response to an autistic person’s infodump.
TLDR: it’s not about conversation turns, it’s about the fact that allistics often misinterpret the reason for infodumping being “this person thinks im stupid and need educating” rather than a desire to connect over information, but establishing a mutual knowledge base & asking if they want to hear facts mitigates this as it clarifies to an allistic that you’re sharing information for fun rather than trying to educate them.
Basically, give the other person a prompt to see if THEY want to infodump before you infodump about their topic. They had a reason to bring it in. I’ve brought in topics before, had the other person respond by saying the thing I wanted to share, and felt crushed. The information was known by both parties, but my excitement had no way to be shared!
yeah and in addition: the ‘turns’ thing and the 'signalling you are not trying to assert yourself over them as an expert in Their topic’ thing are both tied to social dominance subtext.
horribly, the ways you should and should not perform social dominance behaviors are in fact tied to your perceived social status in context, as well as to the specific manners of the culture group you’re in at the moment. all the context. usually tracked subconsciously, with mental skillsets and mechanisms that are typically underdeveloped in autistic brains.
so not only does a 'normal’ amount of dominance-assuming behavior not exist, despite claims to the contrary, people who think they’re above you will do things like this to you and that they’ll be offended by having you mirror, and then be even more offended by the idea that they aren’t treating you like an equal.
which is why Pretty Autistic Dude with high verbal processing who has lucked into a high status role can go steamrolling over everybody and gain advantage from it, even if most people don’t like him for it. but basically everyone else who behaves the same way is fucked.
yes and: the social dominance subtext thing is something that we, coming out of a culture that likes to think it is egalitarian, tend to try to shove out of conscious awareness. that’s why people will sometimes be offended at the idea they’re not treating you like an equal, particularly if you’re interacting because you’re in an organization where at least in theory you have the same “rank”: they shouldn’t be treating you like an inferior [in theory] and probably don’t consciously realize that they’re doing so, especially if they have internally labeled you with an inferior social role based on anything related to a marginalizing status (including: gender, age, race, ethnicity, orientation, etc). Consciously drawing attention to behaviors that indicate that they are treating you like a lower-ranked person, again especially if any marginalizing factor is involved, is likely to trigger a state called “moral dissonance” where you’re effectively forcing them to notice that their actions are not in line with their consciously held values.
this is a thing that sucks hard ass to experience, and most people really hate it and will immediately cast around to find a reason that no actually they’re not doing that thing at ALL. This is where the defensive offended behavior comes from: it’s an activated attempt to justify to both you and, importantly, themself that they definitely haven’t been acting outside their conscious moral values. Because most people’s internal assessment of social hierarchies is internal and implicit, they might or might not be aware of how they’re thinking about you, and they might exclaim in frustration that they’re not treating you like an inferior at all.
and: here’s the kicker–they might be right. Social hierarchical posturing in humans is extremely contextual and usually cloaked in enough plausible deniability to not read as a direct insult, especially in a social context that values egalitarianism. It is also pretty much always present, whether or not the people in the group want it to be. There is no such thing as a human culture devoid of social hierarchical maneuvering. Nor is there any such thing as a human person who does not sometimes participate in this kind of interaction. It’s not always antagonistic or bad, either: sometimes people will do things like posture in order to be reassured that they are still valued and respected by the group, and it is very possible and common for humans to make ploys for high status using affiliative tactics like: complimenting others, facilitating connections between other people, offering to teach other people, doing favors, etc. Most of our language for talking about this stuff is couched in a really antagonistic context, where interactions and hierarchies are framed as zero-sum conflicts, but that’s not necessarily true.
Basically, human social maneuvering is often unconscious and usually hidden, especially in groups that value egalitarian interactions. Because it’s all stuff that is happening under the surface, and because people are also often distracted and not paying attention, it’s also totally possible for people to perceive shit as social posturing that isn’t intended that way at all. Happens all the time. Humans are messy! Perception is messy! People aren’t straightforward to interpret and sometimes there are a lot of mistakes!
but this is why “mansplaining” is a thing: men are much more likely to internally assume that they are higher on a social hierarchy than women, which means that they get more talking time. Sometimes an excited autistic infodumping reads to other people as fitting this pattern, even if the behavior has a different root cause. Figuring out how to navigate this as a human being is always going to be hard, and you’re never going to pull it off with success 100% of the time because, well, no one does that either.
this isn’t allistic/neurotypical vs autistic/neurodivergent
We’re smearing concepts into each other. Look up Deborah Tannen and “cooperative overlapper” vs “turn taker”.
There are cultures where 100% allistic/neurotypical people engage in cooperative overlapping. There are plenty of autistics/neurodivergents really on turn-taking to know when to talk.
